Anecdotally, this article seems to match with what I am witnessing regarding browsing habits. I am planning a big trip with others and everything is being found via social media apps; destination ideas, experiences, cafes, accommodation, etc.
Many staff in different roles, 3+ shifts a day, 365 days a year is a lot of labour costs. Replacing even a fraction of labour is likely $100K a year of potential investment. More so in expensive labour countries.
Off topic because I am skeptical of the claims in the first place. As a general principle: the licensing exam is not the benchmark AI should be evaluated against to then go about calling itself a doctor.
I'm from a different country but these exams are the minimum standard to demonstrate a doctor is safe prior to interacting with patients. To be really explicit, the core competency being assessed is identifying potentially serious situations and answering the same way every time: "I WOULD CALL FOR HELP" +/- principles of basic care.
The benchmark for doctors actually making decisions about patient care are the assessments to become fully qualified consultants in a each specialty.
Again, to be really explicit don't confuse a test for "doctor won't immediately kill someone and commence reasonable first steps" with an actual "doctor with years of experience and subspecialty training who regularly makes decisions about patient care".
I found the origin of ECT quite interesting: depressed people with epilepsy had dramatic improvement in their symptoms following a seizure. They also discovered that the type and location of the seizures had varying levels of effect.
There is some evidence that "aerobic exercise" itself produces an equivalent baseline energy deficit without the performance downside.
This guy[0] studies total average energy expenditure over time and demonstrates that an athlete undertaking intense regular exercise uses marginally more energy over time than someone sitting on a couch all day. The hypothesis being that the athlete is conserving energy by down-regulating baseline metabolic and inflammatory processes when at rest.
Disappointing news for "exercise causes dramatic weight loss" but encouraging news for "exercise is anti-cancer" (a correlation demonstrated many times I believe).
I worry this comment is overly dismissive of criticisms and overly optimistic about potential positives. On medicine topics I think it is important to try remain objective.
1. On DXM being an NMDA antagonist:
At high concentration DXM is an NMDA antagonist and AXS-05 does dramatically increases DXM concentration [0] (slide 6). It is not clear to me why we should "ignore anyone" who makes this comparison?
2. On AXS-05 having a wide array of receptor targets:
Almost all psychoactive drugs have some affinity for many receptors (just wikipedia any anti-psychotic e.g. [1]). Are any of the targets mentioned clinically significant at therapeutic concentrations?
The article said Dolby prefers to charge on the playback side. Does anyone know if Apple pays Dolby anything? iPhones produce a lot of content so it makes sense for Dolby to provide Apple with free licensing if it popularises the formats.
Targeting doesn’t have to occur at the cell surface does it?
Perhaps something like introducing tumour suppressor genes to every cell. They’ll have no effect on healthy cells yet detect “badness” in cancerous cells and terminate them.
Neo: “Are you trying to tell me that I can alter DNA?”
Morpheus: “no Neo, I’m trying to tell you that when you’re ready you won’t have to”
Altering the DNA is unnecessary if you can control the expression of genes or add additional genetic material later in the DNA->RNA->protein process. mRNA vaccines are already a great example of this. Another example might be the cystic fibrosis therapy Trikafta.
The easiest way to lie is with statistics. It’s also true that:
News Corp earns 40% of total Australian television revenues — combining free-to-air television advertising and subscriptions — almost double that of second- place holder Nine.
News Corp owns a 59% share of the metropolitan and national print media markets by readership.
News Corp has 23% of total radio market by revenue.
There is a well established link between oestrogen and increased blood coagulability. Whilst it is possible females are more affected by the vaccine I suspect one factor is that their baseline coagulation risk increases their likelihood of thrombus due “reaction induced coagulability” compared to males.
I posted this in a few cancer threads with good response: the seminal work on cancer is actually a really quite approachable and short free paper - “Hallmarks of Cancer” by Hanahan and Weinberg.
For anyone wishing to understand the fundamental features and survivorship bias that all cancer cells go through I highly recommend it.