volvoxvsmarla

I've been to an Arctic Monkeys concert where a dude behind me broke his leg and kept moshpitting (don't ask me why there was a brutal moshpit at an Arctic Monkeys concert) for another hour before he was finally taken care of by paramedics.

I tried to find a publication that would at least show a heatmap (but maybe that's why these articles are pushed now, maybe the new paper will come.out soon?) of relative gene expression changes. I haven't found any papers by Love mentioning anything other than radiation measurement (which is also an important field of study and is in no way less of an impressive work). "Altered immune systems" is very, very vague, and specific parts of the genome being modified reads like "oncogenes have mutated", which wouldn't be a surprise or shocker.

I want to be clear that I couldn't find the paper that the article seems to talk about (I couldn't find any that would mention genetics), that Covid and the war in Ukraine (mandatory Fuck Putin) have obviously slowed down research, and that any kind of doubt I have is absolutely not about the group of scientists doing important and valuable work - just the article's presentation is very empty and saying little to nothing.

"They got a lot of radiation exposure" "genes that are connected with cancer mutated", "Wolves don't get cancer" is not too shocking of a finding and almost to be expected. The devil must be in the details. I'm just disappointed in the article.

Somehow this article is non-existent. It just tells you that a team of researchers put collars on the wolves to measure the radiation levels they are exposed to. They found they are pretty high. 6 times the allowed maximum level for humans. But so far they only want to look into how this affects their cancer rates, and how they protect themselves against cancer. There is nothing yet to assume they have developed a resistance, let alone a biological, cellular or genetic mechanism. So... I mean I guess, but so far it is just plans to look into something.

We had that in my local park. There was a huge field that everyone walked through because it was much quicker than going around. So they finally made a sidewalk there (not with tarmac though, more like gravel and sand mix). Just a couple of weeks later there was a new path just parallel to this one. My guess is the problem was that the field was a bit hole shaped (sorry I don't know a better term in English) and this, as well just the nature of the sidewalk, led to it accumulating water puddles, and also it just turned into sandy/stoney mud when it rained. For bikes it was also just more comfortable to ride over the grass than over gravel. But it still felt like an asshole move.

I clicked on the hyperlink with great anticipation to find a link to the Wikipedia page for Poe's Law, the Dunning-Kruger effect, the history of the flat earth conspiracy, or an article about it. Didn't expect what I got but I can't say I was disappointed.

Honestly this should be the norm everywhere.

I mean, I wouldn't recommend an over the counter retinol to a 10 year old, but you're right.

I remember using so many drug store teenager products to get rid of pimples, nothing worked, I went to the dermatologist, he prescribed simply 2g of salicylic acid in 100g ethanol, it worked. Like, pimple free within 2 weeks. Then I ran out of the bottle. Was too lazy to get a new one. When I finally went again, boom. Everything gone again.

I mean, this was basically when the internet was just becoming a thing. But I highly regret that it took me so long to get into skincare. And I also regret the laziness about going to the dermatologist (especially since a visit is free in Germany). How I wished that I had gotten into skincare before my wedding, I had to choose a dress that covered up all of my back because I thought I would never get rid of the pimples there. It was a wonderful dress, but had I gotten into skincare just one year earlier, I could have felt more freedom.

And I think a lot of people regret not looking out for their skin earlier. As you mentioned, SPF. How often did we skip this as teens.

"As young as 10" probably implies that most children we are talking about in this article are teenagers. And it is so much preferable to get a good skincare routine if you have specific concerns than to just overdose on drugstore crap that has no effect. Can you overdo it? Sure. Are there products that aren't too good for such a young age? Some. Should they check with a derm first? Recommendable. But all in all this seems like a healthier trend than using lip fillers, botox, or anything else. Mostly because, especially if we are talking anti aging here, most aging occurs from actual damage. And I would guess that if you get into that stuff, no matter whom you follow, sooner or later the kids end up realising that they should use a good SPF, avoid harsh treatments, be gentle, avoid sun. And I don't see something wrong with that.

I guess so. I had to convince myself that gummi bears are in great pain and the only thing that helps them is to be chewed on, like a massage kinda thing. That's the only way I can eat gummi bears. I am in my 30s man.

As a kid I couldn't eat that. I still have problems with this. I tried buying dino nuggets a while back and my spouse had to eat them in the end. Which is especially absurd considering that the animal shape throws me off of eating an actual animal. But I've worked my way through to be able to eat gummibears and sometimes even chocolate santas, but I have to eat them immediately and not let their headless carcass lie around. (Bunnies are worse.)

Yeah same. I would love to avoid so much pain and suffering I went through, so much wasted time and bad decisions, but I would not risk it if I didn't end up with my spouse and child. So, blue pill all the way. Also, 10 mil would actually solve 95% of all our problems to be honest.

That's true, we need fossil fuels for so many things besides transportation. At the same time, we are simply running out of fossil fuels. Even if we ignore the impact on the environment completely, there will be a point in the not too distant future when there will simply be nothing left to pump.

So what I am wondering is, even if one thinks man made climate change is a hoax or something similar, shouldn't the first and foremost thing everyone agrees on be to still spare those scarce resources? For things we really ("really") need to make from oil?

The first thing that comes to mind (maybe since I work in the lab) is medical equipment. You don't really want to have to wash and reuse things like catheters, do you? I am not sure if bioplastics (i.e., still plastics, but made from plants) would be an alternative here once we run out but I sincerely hope so.

Prices will go up, in any case, and it will be a painful transistion. But now we are at a somewhat luxurious point where we can still make this transistion somewhat controlled and "smoothly". If we continue to treat oil as a never ending resource and then do a surprised pikachu face once there is nothing left this will be much much worse, won't they?