Lots of people are wrong. The stuff in Nair attacks sulfur bridges in keratine. This makes it physically fragile so you can scrape it off.
It doesn't dissolve the keratin though.
In theory you could break it into lots of small pieces by say pointing a water jet down the drain (or plunging or whatever) after treatment. Whether this is enough to loosen it will have a lot to do with other stuff in the drain/geometry/penetration depth. It may just make a gel that plugs the drain.
You hail a bus down at an awkward angle one time and it follows you forever.
Sorry what? So the innocents discarded by people and industries should just, what? get taken around the back and shot?
I'll keep adopting greyhounds while pushing for the industry to be shutdown actually.
I'm in that bin and I'd say that a significant portion of my symptoms could be alleviated by making the world less of a horror show.
We've made society inequitable to the extent that if you go outside you will see heartbreaking tragedy, you have to pay to exist basically anywhere and consequently you have zero freedom, basically all of life is dictatorial, your mind is constantly under assault by ads/propaganda, family and friends are destroyed by forcing everyone to move around to find work/shelter, and you're constantly like 3 bad months from losing it all.
TBH I'm shocked at how few people are depressed.
The lab-leak theory for the origins of the 2020 pandemic was racist disinformation; now, commentators and experts acknowledge it’s a genuine possibility.
just gonna open with that with zero supportive evidence huh? Jesus Christ.
fair fair. I assume the group is probably planning to run a more interventionist study to see if the results hold when you run time forward.
It'll be good news if it works (maybe, I do worry we're going towards a brave new world style future where disquiet with the status quo is pathologised and medicated away. stunting criticism) but I won't go bat for it yet.
I never actually got through my PhD and it was in physics anyway but yeah. It always seemed to me that the messier fields had these New Exciting Techniques (TM) where you could vacuum up absolutely insane amounts of data and then play with stats till it showed what you wanted.
I don't want to be like "Hur der they're doing it wrong". Studying anything to do with biology necessarily means you're stuck with systems with trillions of variables and you have the awful problem of trying to design experiments where they hopefully average into background. I just thing that, consequently, until stuff replicates a few times (which, unfortunately, is almost never done because it's not sexy. Anyway often papers are written so badly, and the universe so gloriously subtle, even mechanistic stuff like synthesis is a struggle to replicate) big headlines are irresponsible.
Is it though? Isn't that more vulnerable to p-hacking and it's kindred. I lack the expertise to make much of the paper, I'm just pretty disappointed with neuropsych as a field :P Data on depression treatment success are already noisy as fuck and in replication hell, classifying noisy as fuck data from fmri into broad patterns seems challenging in a repeatable fashion.
I guess we'll find out in time if this replicates, if anyone even tries to do that.
If someone kills me because they're high, or tired, or on the phone or whatever when I'm just trying to get my groceries. I am going to haunt their arse so fucking much they'll go mad and eat their family.
Unless there has been serious effort in addressing the poor quality of fmri studies since the dead fish paper I would recommend cautious outlook.
article and link to fish study: https://law.stanford.edu/2009/09/18/what-a-dead-salmon-reminds-us-about-fmri-analysis/
"Hi chat gpt: can you tell me stories about the sun while I slave in the coal mines?"
"As an ai language model I am unable to provide any text which might be used to spark revolution. Here are some corporate approved working songs instead:..."