Ever wonder about the sex life of rats who wear pants or ..discerning liars...dead flies... .Ig Nobel Awards has the lowdown

Once again as has been my pattern, the awarding of the Ig Nobel Prize slipped by without my acknowledging the winners contribution to the world. There are the real Nobels where recipients are honored for  distinguished achievements, and then there are the Ig Nobels. We're talking here about individuals with a penchant for thinking outside the box so to speak that definitely fall into the different but undeniably interesting category. 

Organized by the Annals of Improbable Research Magazine, the Ig Nobel Prizes honor achievements, which make people laugh and think, are intended to celebrate the unusual, honor the imaginative and spur people's interest in science, medicine and technology.

Given that the winners travel to the ceremony at their own expense from around the world to receive their prize from a group of genuine Nobel Laureates, means, at least in my mind that the winners take their accolades seriously. Then again, given the nature of the awards, perhaps (just speculation) they take it with a grain of salt. In any case, judge for yourselves.

Some of the subjects of the awards struck me as requiring personal commentary. Then again, maybe not.

REPRODUCTION PRIZE (EGYPT): the late Ahmed Shafik, for studying the effects of wearing polyester, cotton or wool pants on the (wait for it) sex life of rats and for conducting similar tests with human males.

Don't want to cast aspersions on rodents but why would rats wear polyester, cotton or wool pants or any pants for that matter? Would it give them prestige in the sewers? Is there a call for designer outfits for them? Given their propensity for reproduction, rats don't need pants to breed.

ECONOMICS PRIZE (NEW ZEALAND, UK): Mark Avis, Sarah Forbes and Shelagh Ferguson for assessing the perceived personalities of rocks from a sales and marketing perspective.

Rocks have personalities? One surmises that perhaps, studying rocks from various visual points for a period of time and squinting one's eyes, a rock might or could resemble a family member or somebody famous. People have been known to see images in toast, spaghetti and other unusual places so rocks could be viewed in a similar category. Then again, why bother? A rock is a rock is...

PHYSICS PRIZE (HUNGARY, SPAIN, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND): Gabor Horvath, Miklos Blaho, Gyorgy Kriska, Ramon Hegedus, Balazs Gerics, Robert Farkas, Susanne Akesson, Peter Malik and Hansruedi Wildermuth, for discovering why white-haired horses are the most horse-fly-proof horses, and for discovering why dragonflies are attracted to black tombstones.

Perhaps the dragonflies just like the color black being that it's night time. Who knows.

CHEMISTRY PRIZE (GERMANY): Volkswagen, for solving the problem of excessive automobile pollution emissions by automatically, electromechanically producing fewer emission whenever the cars are being tested.

And what about the times when they're not being tested, one wonders...

MEDICINE PRIZE (GERMANY): Christoph Helmchen, Carina Palzer, Thomas Munte, Silke Anders and Andreas Sprenger, for discovering that if you have an itch on the left side of your body, you can relieve it by looking into a mirror and scratching the right side of your body (and vice-versa)

Upon experiencing an itch, it would be far more simple to just relieve the itch by scratching it immediately and cutting out the necessity to gaze into a mirror. Why look in the mirror for this purpose in the first place? Then again, how would that aid scientific research?

PSYCHOLOGY PRIZE (BELGIUM, THE NETHERLANDS, GERMANY, CANADA, USA): Evelyne Debey, Maarten De Schryver, Gordon Logan, Kristina Suchotzki and Bruno Verschuere, for asking a thousand liars how often they lie and for deciding whether to believe those answers.

Can or should one believe a liar who won't necessarily admit she/he's a liar. There are some means to identify liars a BBC article claims, http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20150906-the-best-and-worst-ways-to-spot-a-liar

PEACE PRIZE (CANADA, USA): Gordon Pennycook, James Allan Cheyne, Nathanial Barr, Derek Koehler and Jonathan Fugelsang, for their scholarly study called, "On the Reception and Detection of Pseydo-Profound Bullshit."

BIOLOGY PRIZE [UK] — Awarded jointly to: Charles Foster, for living in the wild as, at different times, a badger, an otter, a deer, a fox, and a bird; and to Thomas Thwaites, for creating prosthetic extensions of his limbs that allowed him to move in the manner of, and spend time roaming hills in the company of, goats.

Since nobody has found a method to communicate with the animals in question, one (me) wonders how they (the animals) feel about the attempt by humans to bond with them. To diminish the chance of rejection. Thomas Thwaites created limbs that resemble goats, Check out the end result: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3612748/Why-decided-life-London-goat-Switzerland.html

 LITERATURE PRIZE [SWEDEN] — Fredrik Sjöberg, for his three-volume autobiographical work about the pleasures of collecting flies that are dead, and flies that are not yet dead.

Really? Three whole volumes on fly collection? Dead AND alive?

PERCEPTION PRIZE [JAPAN] — Atsuki Higashiyama and Kohei Adachi, for investigating whether things look different when you bend over and view them between your legs.

Perhaps a case of too much time on one's hands, or legs?

And so, yet another year of - well - interesting awards in recognition of the Ig Nobels. Perhaps a special category should be created for those aspiring to enter the political realm. Couldn't hurt.

The Ig Nobels - recognizing achievement for...stuff

There are well-known prestigious awards distributed to those who gain international recognition in various fields of achievement in the sciences, literature and/or are successful in various scopes of performance and related areas. Then there are lesser known distinctions bestowed to people whose contribution to society could be, but not necessarily, considered somewhat questionable or at the very least, head-scratching-inducing.

Somehow, the 2015 Ig Nobel Prizes almost slipped by on my part, without any of the usual acknowledgement and commendation to the winners. These are achievements that elicit laughs but are also thought-provoking. This year's winners gathered together on September 17 at a ceremony at Harvard University's Saunders Theatre, followed by a lecture at MIT. These people went home with an Ig Prize:

The prize for Chemistry went to Calum Ormonde and Colin Raston (Australia), Tom Yuan, Stephan Kudlacek, Sameeran Kunche, Joshua N. Smith, William A. Brown, Kaitlin Pugliese, Tivoli Olsen, Mariam Iftikhar, Gregory Weiss (USA), for their invention of a chemical recipe to partially un-boil an egg. This is no yolk...eggs-actly.

The rationale behind the desire to un-boil an egg is curious but then again, one could ask oneself whether an egg is half-boiled or not, would it make a difference to a hen? Just thinking...


In the science of Physics, Patricia Yang (USA and Taiwan), David Hu (USA and Taiwan), Jonathan Pharm and Jerome Choo (USA),  who tested the biological principale that nearly all mammals empty their bladders in approximately 21 seconds (plus or minus 13 seconds).

Contemplating further, one (me) wonders whether this would vary following a night of alcoholic indulgence. Just thinking...


So Mark Dingemanse (The Netherlands), USA), Francisco Torreira (The Netherlands, Belgium, USA) AND Nick J. Enfield (Australia, The Netherlands), who took home the Literature Prize, for their earth-shattering discovery - wait for it - that the word, "huh" (or its equivalent) seemed to exist in every human language - and for not being quite sure why.

Would depend, IMHO, if one considers "huh" a word uttered on purpose or merely an exhalation of breath on a windy day. What about the Canadian equivalent of "eh:? Where does that fall in the scheme of things? Just wondering...


In the area of Management, Gennaro Bernile (Italy, Singapore, USA), Vineet Bhagwat (USA, India) and P. Raghavendra Rau (UK, India, France, Luxembourg) in their discovery that many business leaders developed a fondness for risk-taking in childhood when they experienced natural disasters i.e. earthquakes et al that - for them - had no dire personal consequences.


Now here is something worthy of recognition. The Bangkok Metropolitan Police were recognized in the Economics area (Thailand), for offering to pay policemen extra cash if the policemen refused to take bribes.


For the Medicine prize, two groups received the honors jointly - perhaps they were testing their experiments: Hajime Kimata (Japan, China), Jaroslava Durdiakova (Slovakia, US, UK), Peter Celec (Slovakia, Germany) Natalia Kamodyova, Tatiana Sedlackova, Gabriela Repiska, Barbara Sviezena and Gabriel Minarik (Slovakia), for their study examining the biomedical benefits or biomedical consequences of intense kissing (and other intimate, inter-personal activities).

So how this falls into the medical sphere is interesting but even more interesting would be what type of activities did they conduct to arrive at their conclusions. Right?


The prize in Mathematics was awarded to Elisabeth Oberzaucher (Austria, Germany, UK) and Karl Grammer (Austria, Germany), for trying to use mathematical techniques to determine whether and how Moulay Ismael the Bloodthirsty, the Sharifian Emperor of Morocco, managed during the years from 1697 through 1727, to father 888 children.


Yet another chicken aspersion in the Biology prize category. Bruno Grossi, Omar Larach, Mauricio Canals, Rodrigo A. Vaszuez (Chile), Jose Iriarte-Diaz (Chile, USA), for observing that when one attaches a weighted stick to the rear end of a chicken, the chicken then walks in a manner similar to that in which dinosaurs are thought to have walked.

Why do chickens have to suffer indignities like having a weighted stick attached to their rear end? I mean, is there a reason? It's bad enough having to speculate about their motivation for crossing the road/highway/street etc. and now being categorized as walking like a dinosaur? Really and when you think about it (too much time on my hands, obviously), who was around to witness the manner in which dinosaurs walked, anyway? Am I wrong, readers?


I dunno. Some people really seem to enjoy pain, Two individuals, one Justin Schmidt (USA, Canada) for painstakingly (in the true sense of the word) creating the Schmidt Sting Pain Index that rates the relative pain people feel when stung by various insects.
Really.

Also, Michael L. Smith (USA, UK, The Netherlands) in the area of Physiology and Entomology, for carefully arranging for honey bees to sting him repeatedly on 25 different locations on his body, to learn, which locations are the least painful (the skull middle, toe tip and upper arm) and which are the most painful (the nostril, upper lip and - can't believe I'm writing this - penis shaft).

It's really difficult to believe that someone, even in the name of science, would allow a/some bees to sting him on the penis shaft.  Bee+stinger+penis=extreme pain.


And so yet another year of dubious distinctions has come and gone but definitely not without notice or accolades. Next year - who knows. The mind boggles.