Feds Spending Your Tax $$ On Researching A Bee Sting To the Penis! NICE!! (sarc.)

This has got to be a joke, right? Unfortunately, it is NOT! No wonder we in America are in such an economic crisis! If the federal government cannot find anything better to do with our tax dollars, than fund a ridiculous research study like this well we are headed to hell, period......Truly a pathetic
excuse and waste of our money.....

So the study begins when this researcher wants to determine the most painful place on the human body to receive a bee sting.

By Stephen Dinan - The Washington Times - Tuesday, May 10, 2016 Taxpayers paid for one scientist to have a bee sting his penis and paid other researchers to figure out that cheerleaders look more attractive in a group than individually, according to a painful new survey of wasteful spending released Tuesday by Sen. Jeff Flake. At a time when the Obama administration is pleading for more money to fight the Zika virus, repair water pipes in Flint, Michigan, and combat the growing opioid epidemic, the ridiculous research projects suggest there’s plenty of room to save money already in the budget, Mr. Flake said.

Not only this study but many additional money wasting studies!!

Unnecessary projects included the $50,000 for researchers who studied femininity and masculinity in members of Congress. The National Science Foundation paid the University of California, Los Angeles to conclude that Republican women are feminine and Democratic women are not.

Okay, is that the best they could come up with?? To top it off, the Scientist is awarded the Nobel Prize.....

Pax

www.washingtontimes.com...enis/?page=all" target="_blank" class="postlink">the washington times

a reply to: paxnatus

Exactly how does one get a bee sting in the penis? Doing a little skinny dipping? That hurts just thinking about it.
I wonder how much of this is use it or lose it funding prior to the end of the fiscal year, so they dust off some old grant proposals from the shelf and fund them.

Taxpayers paid for one scientist to have a bee sting his penis

Th'at's just soooo wrong.

So wrong.

So wrong.

So wrong.

a reply to: paxnatus

Maybe it's a sinister plan for future torture of detainees!

a reply to: paxnatus
And some people want bigger government.....SMH.

a reply to: peter_kandra

Exactly how does one get a bee sting in the penis?

Stick in a hole it doesn't belong namely a bee hive.

Of course if a person did that they deserve the Darwin Award.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: paxnatus

Maybe it's a sinister plan for future torture of detainees!

Nawww, size matters ;-) I wonder what this mix of women:men were on the approvals committee. Maybe it was funded (or requested) in part by big pharma, like Pfizer? As an aside, researchers in the past found that bee venom was very helpful in the management of arthritis if I remember correctly.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: peter_kandra
a reply to: paxnatus

Exactly how does one get a bee sting in the penis? Doing a little skinny dipping? That hurts just thinking about it.
I wonder how much of this is use it or lose it funding prior to the end of the fiscal year, so they dust off some old grant proposals from the shelf and fund them.

Or giving a little pickle tickle in a hive hole.

a reply to: paxnatus

Washington Times is rarely factual.
Just sayin'

ETA: Apparently this was a study on pain index of bee stings, granted funding for the research by the student's university out of the government grant the school receives.

"Hi, Honey....I'm Home!"

...Lonely, Beekeepers everywhere will be relieved.

a reply to: paxnatus

Can you define science that is wasteful versus beneficial? You can't know how beneficial a study is until it is completed and the results compiled. Of all the topics and things people complaining about government wasting money on, science is probably the dumbest. Just because you don't find the information useful doesn't mean that it can't be useful. Nothing dumber than calling increasing the human knowledgebase a waste of money.

I mean you are complaining about $50,000 spent on a study while the government is dumping BILLIONS into wars, death, destruction, and other stuff that we find questionable. Get your priorities straight...

PS: Your link doesn't work.

a reply to: Krazysh0t

I mean you are complaining about $50,000 spent on a study while the government is dumping BILLIONS into wars, death, destruction, and other stuff that we find questionable. Get your priorities straight.

Which is a nickle compare to the dime it spends on social programs, and OTHER social engineering CRAP.

You seriously can't sit there, and support taxing ANYONE when the state WILFULLY blows that money on stuff like in the op and OTHER well known crap like studying Chinese hookers getting drunk.

Why did the U.S. government spend 2.6 million dollars to train Chinese prostitutes to drink responsibly?

www.zerohedge.com...

Same reason we are paying for a 'scientist' to sting his snip.

Hey, this is very important work that will greatly benefit not only America, but the entire world! (/endsarcasm)

Also shout out to the scientist who let a bee sting his penis.

Hmm... that does seem a little odd ... taken out of context.

Oh well, valuable information about bee stings and penises, I guess.

Sometimes science advances in great steps ... sometimes in smaller units.

What about the billions of $$ used to underwrite mega-churches, Christian Schools, Universities, etc?

What about the funds that Fundie State governors illegally scam from the Fed for private (usually Christian) Schools?

Could this be an instance of selective outrage?

a reply to: Gryphon66

What about the billions of $$ used to underwrite mega-churches, Christian Schools, Universities, etc?

If ya want to go down this road FINE.

What about the billions that 'free' GMO food costs us that make JPM and Mosanto billions each year.

Step right up and get your free EBT cards and GMO food.

Then lets talk about the ACA that GUARANTEED BILLIONS to hospitals, and big pharma.

Don't forget medicare, and medicaid did that too.

And let's not forget the TRILLION in student loan debt that GUARANTEED colleges, and Universities some more 'free' cash.

ALL of it government waste,FRAUD, and abuse.

I digress whine about 'churches'.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Could this be an instance of selective outrage?

Yes. Yes it is.

All I can really say is "thank god they're not spending it on more wars, or funneling it to corporations."

A bit of an odd thing to waste money on at present time, but it could be worse.

a reply to: neo96

OH YOU ARE SOOOO RIGHT , SO RIGHT, SO RIGHT!!

a reply to: neo96

GMO food = not bad, but Monsanto = bad.

The ACA is somewhat of a failure, but that's not because "healthcare=bad", it's because "Corporations owning the government=bad."

Churches are also a massive problem.

a reply to: neo96

Seems a better alternative to the trillions lost in clean up and burial for tens of thousands that starve to death.

a reply to: neo96

I'm not surprised that you would take an opportunity to bash scientific advancement and social programs as a waste of government money. Though your aversion to knowledge and intelligence has clearly blinded you from seeing how true that statement even is (beware of a link on Zerohedge that links to thetruthwins.com).

Politifact

The grant "was not awarded for that purpose," John Bowersox told us via e-mail back in November 2010. "Rather, the researchers will use the grant to develop, implement and evaluate an alcohol use and HIV risk reduction intervention program among female sex workers in China. This is in line with previous studies showing that social norms and institutional policy in commercial sex venues greatly influence alcohol use and sexual behavior among the sex workers in those venues. Studies such as these are needed to translate and adapt interventions that have proven to be effective in the U.S. to other settings and to learn from other conditions and cultures to inform our understanding of the causes, consequences and differences in HIV-related risks, morbidity and mortality in diverse populations. Preventing HIV infection is NIH’s highest priority for HIV-related research. We need to explore a range of research avenues in vulnerable populations around the world to learn the best ways to control the transmission of HIV."

Bowersox noted that the grant went through the NIH's two-tier review process, "which includes a scientific and technical review as well as consideration by an Advisory Council that includes public representatives. The Council makes recommendations based on alignment of the grant application with the research priorities of the NIH."

It's nice that you are for dumping more and more money into death and destruction while reducing money towards increasing knowledge and helping others.