Why have eagle populations rebounded since eliminating DDT? Perhaps itâ(TM)s lefty cunts.

Yes. I still get NIST alerts: it was the wind, campus was closed as a result. Iâ(TM)ve also seen the clock (well, its late-aughts version) in person, and was told that they âoesteerâ time, which is what I think this 4 microsecond difference stems from: the steering wasnâ(TM)t happen so there was drift from the gold standard reference

GLP-1 agonist didn't stop progression of AD in patients who were already on the disease course. I haven't read the protocol (if they enrolled in the EU it's out there somewhere), but I'd bet that the inclusion criteria included something about amyloid positivity, either in the blood, CSF, or from PET imaging.

What does that mean? It means that GLP-1 agonists may still prevent AD from being as likely to occur through indirect mechansims (i.e., obesity is tied to AD, less likelihood of developing AD if healthy weight), but probably can't slow it down once it's started, e.g., amyloid is laid out and tau is starting to pile up along that trailblaze from the amyloid.

Congrats, you've read an actual intelligent comment from someone with relevant knowledge and experience.

I disagree, and I am smarter than you. My IQ puts me in 1/1000 territory, I have a PhD in physics, patents, papers, prizes, and an appearance on Jeopardy. Now go fuck off.

Why? We are working to find therapies, and maybe some day preventative cures.

737 is designed for roll up stairs. Thatâ(TM)s how old it is and why it is so low slung. This is also why the 737 maxes have crashed: lots of mitigation and design choices to accommodate an ancient platform. Hopefully they are starting from the ground up instead of variations on a very tired theme.

Creationism really pisses me off. What a crock of shit. No one can logically believe any of it. But you can't cherry pick science, choosing to believe in only theories that can align with your worldview. Science DGAF about your feelings.

man, you all donâ(TM)t know what the fuck you are talking about. PhD in physics, a decade in clinical trials, 30+ years of science experience starting in NASA labs. But sure, OK, thereâ(TM)s a conspiracy in physics and big pharma is keeping you from baking soda cancer cures. You are fucking idiots.

Now tell that to the c suite and startups hellbent on forcing AI down our throats.

I mean sure, the average layperson is gonna fuck it up. But what about professionals, e.g., a PhD scientist?

I use LLM-based models for lit searches (typically, these are dedicated tools for lit searches, but I have tried it on ChatGPT). I don't use the summaries, but I do use the lists of papers it comes up with and generally go through them in whatever ranking it spits out.

Works pretty well, saves a ton of time in *starting* lit searches. Still have to do the reading. The AI sucks at interpreting papers, wouldn't ever trust it as it stands now.

Anyone else on an iPhone?

No. People without cognitive decline may not yet have experienced it. Amyloid is also involved (as is tau) in other neurodegenerative diseases. To dismiss it so blithely is a testament to how much you donâ(TM)t know.

What a bunch of unscientific gobbledygook. Get the fuck out of here with that weakass bullshit hearsay. Show me fucking literature that matters, with pubs in high impact factor journals by reputable authors with tons of citations and references of the same. Build on the shoulder of the giants who came before instead of being a rando layperson dumbass who thinks that they alone can solve all of the complex medical problems of the world alone through their own unique sheer genius.

Hi! Um... no. Definitely not. Sorry. Highly unlikely to be at all relevant, or even true.People get amyloid even without parasites. Or without showing cognitive decline! It is more complex than pretty much anyone in these comments is indicating.

Hi, scientist overseeing clinical trials involving AD! I wouldn't say the jury is still out on the importance of amyloid as a biomarker in assessing AD progression and response to treatment. Patients using the now FDA-approved anti-amyloids had statistically significant reduction in rate of decline as compared to placebo, assessed by cognitive tests. They also had reduction in amyloid load, as assessed via amyloid PET.

The previous 20 years may have failed. That doesn't mean today's drug pipeline is also going to fail.