SOME popular herbal medicines can be dangerous, even lethal, contrary to the perception that they are a safe alternative to conventional medicine, a University of Adelaide researcher has warned.

Naturopaths agree that there are dangers in herbal medicines for people who self-diagnose and then ''treat'' themselves with off-the-shelf products. However, they say the industry is generally well regulated.

Forensic pathologist Roger Byard reviewed the risks attached to herbal medicines in last month's edition of the Journal of Forensic Sciences.

He said herbal products had been found to contain potentially lethal levels of arsenic, mercury or lead. Even if not contaminated, some herbs posed health risks such as liver failure, haemorrhage or heart failure.

Many common herbs could cause severe side effects when used with conventional medicine, such as negating the effect of blood-thinning agent warfarin or making epileptic seizures more frequent.

Twitter is not killing journalism, journalists are killing journalism

This rather cheap play on that ugly bromide "guns don't kill people" is indirectly prompted by the constant uproar in  popular media over the horrors of Twitter. The latest tempest was started when George Packer in the New Yorker wailed, " Twitter is crack for media addicts. It scares me, not because I'm morally superior to it, but because I don't think I could handle it."

Apparently there's a roaring interest in a model for the advertising agency of the future. My aim for this post is to address some of the ideas put forth by others, weigh the usefulness of today's agency objectively, and make a bit of a prediction myself. There's little fun in making bold predictions about the future without a debate - so dig in and offer up a point of view in the comments, if you please.

Iran has cut links with the British Museum over its failure to lend the Islamic Republic an ancient Persian treasure, according to Iranian media.

Iran's Cultural Heritage Organisation said in October it had set a two-month deadline for the British Museum to allow the public display in Iran of the so-called Cyrus Cylinder, linked to the Persian ruler's 6th century BC conquest of Babylon.

But Hamid Baqaie, the head of Iran's state Cultural Heritage Organisation, said the museum failed to meet the deadline.

"The Cultural Heritage Organisation has cut all its relations and co-operation with the British Museum," he said on Saturday.

A

In Germany, the study says, 21 per cent of those analyzed have OpenOffice or one of its derivatives installed, whereas about 72 per cent have Microsoft Office, 2.7 per cent have WordPerfect, and 1.4 have Apple iWork.

That compares to the UK where 9 per cent have OpenOffice users, 80 per cent MS Office, 0.7 per cent WordPerfect, and 2.6 per cent Apple iWork.

After a nailbiting few minutes when the Apple Store (online) went down earlier today, and a few people prayed that either Apple would release new MacBooks and/or MacBook Pros and/or prices in the UK for the iPad, it came back instead with Aperture 3.

In other words, no price yet for the iPad. But don't go away - there is a story here. Besides the app for professional photographers who want to spruce up their photos. ("With more than 200 new features and enhancements, Aperture 3 is the perfect choice if you're ready to take your photography to the next level." OK, that's nice.)

Let's head over to the US store and see how it's priced. Ooh, looky, $199 for the full version, or $99 for the upgrade.

And in the UK? The price of the full version is £169, or for the upgrade it's £79. Though of course those are the "international English" versions.

How does that work, exactly? What is it about the "international English" versions that mean that they have to cost extra?

Over the weekend I received a rare honour, a press release directed at me with the full intellectual might of the British Homeopathic Association behind it.

The statement came after I wrote a piece for the Guardian which was published under the title "Homeopathic association misrepresented evidence to MPs". Since they've taken such a personal interest in my work, I feel obliged to respond.

Before I go through their response, it's important to briefly recap the claims I made in that piece. I've highlighted in bold those claims that are simply not addressed at all in the BHA's response.

Sociologists have developed elaborate theories of who spreads gossip and news -- who tells whom, who matters most in social networks -- but they've had less success measuring what kind of information travels fastest. Do people prefer to spread good news or bad news? Would we rather scandalize or enlighten? Which stories do social creatures want to share, and why?