Recent comments in /f/science

Pawtamex t1_j8h81q5 wrote

We are hard-wired to flight responses, just as all organisms, at least hypothetically. So, finding this pathway in the brain is another piece to the puzzle. I would not be surprised if they also find the same pathway in brains of unrelated animals like fish and birds.

On this note, the videos that are circulating on dogs howling and birds flying and being noisy just before the earthquakes in Turkey and Siria, it is probably a similar response to fear.

1

Party_Egg_8529 t1_j8h7lxi wrote

My 14mo old does not care about TV at all. His 3yr old brother only watches train videos or trains restoration videos. He doesn’t seem to like animated cartoons. He went through a cars1,2,3 phase but it’s over now. My mom said I’ve been watching TV since 2 month old. I don’t know how because my 14mo can’t sit still more than 5 mins at a time. He’s always up to something.

1

DuePomegranate t1_j8h5ul1 wrote

You actually assemble a bunch of extracts from all kinds of different plants (or moulds, or sponges, or insects or whatever), and then you license or offer it to any scientist/pharma who wants to screen your library for activity against whatever disease or enzyme they are interested in. That's how research in natural products is done.

2

neurodiverseotter t1_j8h5m27 wrote

No, in translation: we put CBD on specific prostate cancer cells in a Petri dish and it had certain effects on cancer proliferative effects which could give some hints about a possible anticarcinogenic effect of CBD which needs to be researched further. This doesn't say about wether or not it will do so in a living organism.

4

scotty_dont t1_j8h5bf5 wrote

The other answer here is just bad. From experience (and I have quite a lot) the 20% quoted in the article does not seem inflated. Attrition is much higher, and women are not well represented in management (particularly senior management), but that is a problem broadly in tech.

Women in ML are not unicorns; I work with them every day.

2

neurodiverseotter t1_j8h59sv wrote

They are an very important part of the process of development of treatments and for the understanding of how certain cells or substance-cell interactions work. However what an in vitro study does not and will never do is to give proof of something working in a living organism. And a lot of comments here seem to assume this study proves the efficacy of CBD in the treatment of cancer which is plain wrong. Asking yourself "is this an in vitro or an in vivo study?" will make you less likely to come to a wrong conclusion about the significance of this particular study.

1

Antumbra_Ferox t1_j8h4jjx wrote

I read the article so you lot wouldn't have to. It's about a gene that makes some people metabolise caffeine three times slower than others which can cause problems at high levels of caffeine consumption. Not about coffee being harmful to kidneys in and of itself.

Personal hypothesis: I imagine 3 cups a day with an ~18 hour half-life would mean their bodies never get a break.

116

readitlmao t1_j8h3f1a wrote

You start to lose gains pretty fast. https://www.msif.org/news/2018/06/15/brain-volume-changes-may-be-key-indicator-for-ms-progression/?lang=en/embed/

Peak performance of the brain is at 20 years old overall. With peak blood flow/metabolism, peak white matter volume and peak fluid intelligence ability. The ability to solve problems in an environment with no learned information.

1

555nick t1_j8h2imu wrote

0