Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday June 03 2017, @09:50AM   Printer-friendly
from the instructions-are-not-just-for-OTHER-people dept.

http://www.livescience.com/59353-tattoo-flesh-eating-bacteria.html

A 31-year-old man died after he went swimming in the Gulf of Mexico and his tattoo became infected with flesh-eating bacteria that live in ocean water, according to a new report.

The man had recently gotten a tattoo on his right calf. Despite the common advice to avoid swimming for a few weeks after getting a new tattoo, the man went for a swim in the ocean just five days after he received the tattoo, according to the report, published [DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2017-220199] [DX] May 27 in the journal BMJ Case Reports.

A few days later, he developed a fever and chills, and his skin became red over his tattoo and on other parts of his legs. Soon after the man arrived at the hospital, the red, painful lesions on his legs turned purple, and he developed large blisters filled with fluid.

Also at CNN:

To make matters worse, the man had chronic liver disease from drinking six 12-ounce beers a day.

Jesus is my life.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by SomeGuy on Saturday June 03 2017, @01:31PM (17 children)

    by SomeGuy (5632) on Saturday June 03 2017, @01:31PM (#519843)

    What is the obsession with tattoos anyway?

    Using the human body for art? Fine, but when I see a tattoo it instinctively registers as "damage", like a bruise or a wound: "This person is unhealthy, stay way from them". Art? Not so much.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Saturday June 03 2017, @02:01PM (11 children)

    by Grishnakh (2831) on Saturday June 03 2017, @02:01PM (#519854)

    It sure seems to be a giant new fad these days. I can't imagine why anyone would want one though. Art is fine, but art that I hang on my wall can be just as easily removed if I get tired of it or my tastes change; that's not so easy with tattoos. The interesting thing is that the current tattoo craze seems to cut across ages and socioeconomic groups, though it seems more concentrated among the lower classes even though they're the ones who really shouldn't have extra money for splurges like that.

    • (Score: 3, Insightful) by fraxinus-tree on Saturday June 03 2017, @02:10PM

      by fraxinus-tree (5590) on Saturday June 03 2017, @02:10PM (#519856)

      Stupid things are always concentrated among the lower classes. That's (mostly) why these people are lower classes, after all.

    • (Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @03:29PM (2 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @03:29PM (#519880)

      Tattoos are about self expression and about group identity.
      Neither of which you are particularly good at understanding, so its no surprise you can't imagine why anyone would want one.
      Stick to misunderstanding twitter.

      • (Score: 2) by art guerrilla on Saturday June 03 2017, @08:44PM (1 child)

        by art guerrilla (3082) on Saturday June 03 2017, @08:44PM (#519979)

        here, riddle me this, super-tolerant one:
        have you EVER looked at another nekkid ape -no matter how 'pretty' or 'ugly'- where you said, 'you know, they would look a lot better with a tattoo...' ? ? ?
        i know i never have...
        conversely, i have NEVER looked at a tattoo on a person and said, 'yep, that tattoo really makes them look a lot better; i should do something way cool like that, too...'
        never...
        'look at me! look at me!' is all the present 'civilization' can present as its highest aspiration...
        *snort*

        • (Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Sunday June 04 2017, @04:41AM

          by SanityCheck (5190) on Sunday June 04 2017, @04:41AM (#520098)

          I have said something along the lines of "You know her back is actually not fat; if she tatooed a more beautiful woman on it, she would look much better."

    • (Score: 4, Interesting) by AthanasiusKircher on Saturday June 03 2017, @04:50PM (6 children)

      by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Saturday June 03 2017, @04:50PM (#519902) Journal

      While I share your befuddlement about why so many people would want tattoos, it's hardly a new fad [wikipedia.org], at least among humans in general.

      If anything, it seems Judeo-Christian culture has been one of few exceptions of societies in human history that discourage tattooing, likely based on the Leviticus Bible verse that prohibits it. (The ancient Jewish codes were obsessed with all sorts of "purity," so it's easy to extrapolate that to purity of the skin.) For a couple millennia, Christian cultures have thus tended to view tattooing as a "pagan" practice. The only other cultures that seem to have discouraged tattooing historically are ones where tattoos were primarily used to "brand" slaves or prisoners, etc. Otherwise, I don't think it's a stretch to say they've actually been the norm in most human cultures through history.

      As Western culture becomes less Christianized, it's not surprising at all that tattooing is seeing a resurgence.

      • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday June 05 2017, @02:10PM (5 children)

        by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday June 05 2017, @02:10PM (#520744)

        It seems to be a new fad among the general population. Most of the other places where it's been popular throughout history are with sailors, military, and criminals. In Japan, for instance, it's mainly seen among the Yakuza (see your article), which is organized crime. As for Christianity, I see plenty of tattoos among Christians these days, so they're taking it about as seriously as they do the verses about not eating pork and not wearing clothes of different fibers (and any Christian who knows anything about their religion will tell you that stuff doesn't apply to them anyway because Jesus said so, though somehow the verse about tithing is an exception, which I'll never figure out). So no, I don't think it has anything to do with religion at all; if anything, the lower classes (who get tattoos far more often) are much more Christian than the more well-off liberals.

        • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday June 05 2017, @04:09PM (4 children)

          by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Monday June 05 2017, @04:09PM (#520816) Journal

          Let me rephrase: I didn't mean to imply that MOST people were directly thinking, "Oh, I won't get tattoos because my Bible tells me so." I meant that Western culture generally viewed tattoos as bad HISTORICALLY because of the Christian prohibition. And so we've inherited that perspective, without necessarily paying attention to the specific Bible verse about it.

          In centuries past, though, EDUCATED Christian leaders (priests, ministers, etc.) had a greater role in society and could likely persuade leaders to shut down local tattoo parlors or convince congregants of their evil. But the kind of lower class Christianity you cite now, based on 19th-century bible-thumper fundamentalism and camp-meeting revivalism, isn't based on intellectualism or detailed reading of the scriptures. Paradoxically, as you note, most such "biblical literalists" cherry pick only the parts of scripture that they care about, instead of the more systematic theology that was common with the organized churches in prior centuries. That's how you get the bizarre idiocy where Christians quote Leviticus to condemn homosexuality, but ignore the different fiber stuff, etc. because Jesus said it was a "New Covenant." Except they ignore parts of the "New Covenant" too, most notably Paul's extended rant on women being required to wear head coverings... but that's a story for another time.

          Anyhow, what I was trying to say is that Jewish and then Christian culture likely installed a taboo against tattoos in Western society which has stuck around for a long time. But without the reinforcement of the theological Christianized argument, there's less of a reason to hold steadfast to that taboo nowadays.

          And yes, you are correct that many countries have associated tattoos with certain classes, etc. historically. But that link also contains plenty of examples where tattooing was revered for religious, ceremonial, etc. reasons. There does seem to be a broad trend that more "civilized" countries (which I'd define as having more advanced political structures) tend to get rid of tattooing. But as you note, even in such countries there are certain classes that seem to employ them.

          • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Monday June 05 2017, @05:53PM (3 children)

            by Grishnakh (2831) on Monday June 05 2017, @05:53PM (#520867)

            I really think you're reaching here. You don't need organized religion to convince people not to get covered in tattoos. I'm not religious at all and I don't do it, for the same reason I don't have my tongue cut in half or other bizarre body-modifications: there's no good reason for it, and it's just inviting problems, and honestly, I like my body the way it looks now (well, there's a few little things I'd fix, but tattoos aren't going to help here; I want to fix flaws, not introduce new ones). And I don't think I'm unique; just look at east-Asian cultures which are explicitly non-Christian, and there you don't see most people getting tattoos.

            But as you note, even in such countries there are certain classes that seem to employ them.

            Sure, the criminal classes, the people who are already anti-social and work against the normal way society operates. Honestly, I can't think of any other societies where tattoos have had any popularity among mainstream citizens. I've certainly never seen any Indian people with them (and don't bring up Henna either; that's body art that's completely temporary and goes away in a few days).

            • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday June 06 2017, @01:32AM (2 children)

              by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Tuesday June 06 2017, @01:32AM (#521101) Journal

              Honestly, I can't think of any other societies where tattoos have had any popularity among mainstream citizens.

              Now you're the one who is reaching, since any history of tattooing has plenty of examples of historical cultures that frequently used them. Setting aside the pervasive Polynesian practice from which the word "tattoo" itself is derived, the Picts in northern Britain were apparently so named (from Latin "picti" or "painted ones") by the Romans for their tattoos. In fact, the name of Britain is often taken to be derived from Greek "prettanoi," which meant "tattooed." Archeological finds around the word have turned up tattooed bodies and depictions of tattooed bodies with surprising frequency.

              It's one thing to say my previous posts might be overestimating (which I agree could be true). It's a completely different thing to make it out like tattoos have only EVER been for criminals and slaves. By the way, "bizarre body modifications" have also been common in many traditional cultures around the world too.

              • (Score: 2) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday June 06 2017, @01:35AM

                by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Tuesday June 06 2017, @01:35AM (#521102) Journal

                Oh, and by the way, the reason sailors are commonly associated with tattoos is because centuries ago European sailors encountered such pervasive practices in other cultures (particularly in Polynesia) that they appropriated the practice for themselves.

              • (Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:32AM

                by Grishnakh (2831) on Tuesday June 06 2017, @03:32AM (#521146)

                There have been thousands of different cultures (if not far more) around the world over the last 10ky or so, so of course you're going to find all kinds of oddities if you look hard enough and over a long enough timespan. Just because some ancient culture did something 3000 years ago doesn't mean it's widespread or pervasive among human cultures, and certainly not among relatively modern cultures.

                Over the 20th century, in what percentage of the global population was tattooing a commonplace and accepted practice? I don't think it was very much.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @08:10PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @08:10PM (#519963)

    Then there is this Japanese movie you should never see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pillow_Book_(film) [wikipedia.org]

  • (Score: 2) by FatPhil on Saturday June 03 2017, @08:31PM (2 children)

    by FatPhil (863) <pc-soylentNO@SPAMasdf.fi> on Saturday June 03 2017, @08:31PM (#519974) Homepage
    I'll see your tattoos, and raise you pierced ears. (and noses, belly buttons, bell ends, etc. etc.)

    (Then again, what is smoking apart from slow insidious respiritory and cardiovascular damage?)

    Live and let live, I say. I'm so square, I'm cubic, and think the world would be terribly boring if everyone expressed themselves visually the same way that I do. Flip-side - seeing stuff that I wore 30 years ago, and still wear now, come back into fashion again is worrying.
    --
    Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 04 2017, @09:19AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday June 04 2017, @09:19AM (#520155)

      Hear, hear. Speaking as another hypercube, I agree that without diversity life would be boring.

      • (Score: 2) by art guerrilla on Wednesday June 07 2017, @07:00PM

        by art guerrilla (3082) on Wednesday June 07 2017, @07:00PM (#522132)

        to make a point clear that seems too often overlooked when people are simply itching to get on their high horse:
        (AND NOT that this applies to you, original a non cow poster, simply parasitizing off your post since you allude to it in an indirect way...)
        that i 'disapprove' of some custom, practice, clothing, body mod, etc, DOES NOT mean i want to 'outlaw' it, or say NO ONE of any class, intelligence, or taste would do X, or make X illegal to obtain...
        BUT, i will and do take advantage of my limited free speech rights where i can say -for example- tattoos (wingtip shoes, tuxedos, pantyhose, etc, whatever) are stoopid, yucky and i think you are a ninny for engaging in that behavior/dress/mode... doesn't mean i want to beat you up, gather a crowd to stone you, run to legislators to outlaw said activity/behavior; SIMPLY means MY OPINION is that X is stooopid... that is all... is that allowable these days ? ? ?
        .
        that some have to make out a disapproval of someone else and/or their lifestyle choices as if that person then wants to lynch them immediately, is disturbing that these people can not make such simple distinctions...
        they equate 'disapproval' with 'genocide'...
        i have little patience for such people...

  • (Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @11:06PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday June 03 2017, @11:06PM (#520007)

    https://stownpodcast.org/ [stownpodcast.org]