AmidFuror

I hate this study, and I’m not going to forget it anytime soon.

The nature vs nurture debate was settled long ago. It’s always a mix. Humans have a lot of control over how they behave, but there are definitely inherent predispositions in everyone. They just don’t group nicely along racial lines like bigots believe.

Some people have to struggle a lot harder to behave “correctly” (which depends on societal definitions). Beyond this, there are many different capabilities and preferences. Different people have different natural talents. A ton of that can be altered with learning and training, but some people will improve much faster and will reach higher goals.

The two (main) genders also have a lot of differences as a collective whole. None of that excuses prejudices and limiting people because of the group they are identified with. Any given person can be far outside the norm of their group in terms of what they can do well or do poorly. There are also a lot of perceived differences grounded in social norms that have nothing to do with biological reality. That doesn’t mean there aren’t others that are demonstrable but irrelevant to individual judgments.

The number of people who dwell in the fediverse and think that any two people can accomplish the same thing by putting in the same number of hours astonishes me. It’s definitely influenced by their politics and how they want reality to be.

So, if you are in the very early stages of dementia, it may start causing you to fall asleep unintentionally. Got it.

Considering this is posted in science, doesn’t it seem like some key information is missing from the article?

Is there anything suggesting that there os a public health issue of people in developed nations not getting enough magnesium, copper, and potassium? The vegetables have less, but is that resulting in a problem?

Good news if this can be tested and adopted. mRNA vaccines are going to improve the world if we eventually let them.

Some Luddite will be here soon to differentiate between LLMs (one form of AI) and the ML methods used to help optimize the formulation.

While it’s possible such a thing will be discovered, the list of cancer-causing infectious agents in the article was very limited. A few bugs cause a large number of cancer cases each.

About 25% of babies choose miscarriage.

In a corporate lab we would use bunsen burners just to ignite the alcohol on a glass spreader before spreading transformed bacteria. I was never a fan of the wire loops, but those would work too since they can cool quickly.

I have never heard a claim that the flame itself sterilized the broader area.

I also used the burner to make the spreaders by melting glass rods to have a triangle-shaped head. Those were fun times.

Edit: We also used to flame the head and necks of a flask before putting a sterile pipette inside. I guess that was to kill bugs lingering on the outside surfaces near the opening.

What about babies who didn’t choose it? Better or worse outcomes?

Pizza, chicken nuggets, hot dogs, peanut butter.

I can’t think of the fifth food, but I guess it’s the healthy one.

They need to legalize those bird pitches ASAP!

Che or bust!

Eh. It was either that or have another liberal Democrat in charge and seeing EPA authority maintained or strengthened. We might have seen National Parks expanded too. But they wouldn’t have promoted Trotskyism, so no good.

If it were Gueverra Gas “for the people,” I’m pretty sure quite a few here would laud it and dismiss any economic arguments as the last gasps of late stage capitalism.

The way I read it, the commenter does not believe moderation prevents harm. Hence the “wisdom” in quotes. But they’re for the freedom to self-“abuse.”

The gist is that science funding is under attack by Trump. The tie-in to GLP-1 peptides is that scientific research funded by the government more than 30 years ago led to the discovery of such compounds. It’s the usual story of the eventual utility of basic research being a good reason to fund it. This is the particular story the writer chose to highlight.

A headline stating they are costing the earth thousands of dollars each would be much more underwhelming. The top 10% consists of 830,000,000 people.

We find annual damages owed by the global 10 percent to be $1.7–$5.7 trillion, equivalent to $2.3k–$7.5k per person (in 2017 US dollars).

It was valid speculation for someone who hadn’t read the article. There’s no reason to doubt the sincerity, as journals are pretty awful.

They were ejected for protesting the upcoming speaker. I don’t agree with it, but it wasn’t for criticizing Trump.

Presumably one of the scientists is Dennis Quaid.