> On Fri, 12 Jun 2009 08:17:39 -0700
> Miles Jackson <cqmv at pdx.edu> wrote:
>
> > My point is that it's a
> > fundamental error to juxapose biological factors and the environment and
> > then ask if X is caused by the former or the latter.
>
> Large quantities of arsenic will kill you. Is this environmentally
> determined? Or determined by some complicated intersection of biological
> and social factors? In what society has it ever not been true? In what
> future society might it not be true?
What is distinctively human, as opposed to mammalian (and beyond) about arsenic poisoning? I thought we were discussing things distinctive to human beings, if we're not then this whole thread makes no sense (and now I see that the spine/liver comments refer to indistinctly human stuff, too)