> They isolated two chemical compounds — Y27632 and apocynin — and tested both on skin cells, with positive results. “Application of these drugs to full-thickness skin wounds significantly promoted wound repair,” the study said.
For example: it's amazing to me how many facial products such as face masks contain collagen.
Do people think that your body just takes collagen from your epidermis and adds it to your skin?
That doesn't mean that eating muscles makes you muscular though obvs (any more than eating mussels makes you mussel-ar)
Yea that's what I meant by literal, as in you aren't a pig if you eat pigs, you aren't muscular if you eat muscle. You are made up of the building blocks of the thing you ate, but that does not make you the thing itself.
Maybe literal wasn't the right word? Anyways, doesn't really matter.
Hydroxyproline is conditionally essential, particularly in older and injured populations, and collagen is a rich source of it. Research has demonstrated that collagen supplementation reduces arthritis symptoms and increases collagen synthesis. That being said, unless you're getting 15+g of collagen (the amount used in one study I recall) in your bone broth it probably isn't doing much.
Protein up to a point improves protein synthesis, and it also has the nice side effect that it is inefficiently stored as fat, both from a thermodynamic and hormonal standpoint. So a random high protein diet is more likely to get someone "ripped" than a random low protein diet.
The number of these commercials that claim something is good for you because it has some random, natural oil in it, is staggering. There's plenty of natural acids that will melt you into a pile of goo. i wouldn't want to put those on my face.
This assumes the enzymes are functioning correctly and have the capacity to synthesize more collagen.
These mechanisms are well understood and elucidated in good biochemistry and nutrition textbooks.
As for your exasperation at the lack of women in tech, most men I know would like it if this wasn't the case. I've personally given the nod to women candidates during hiring a couple of times when they were competitively qualified. Unfortunately there's a bit of a chicken and egg problem here - a lot of women are turned off by the masculine culture of tech, and changing a culture to accommodate a very small minority is a hard sell (a fair number of guys in tech wouldn't know how to act at any rate). I suspect women need to establish a bigger beachhead before they're going to be able to make any significant inroads in tech culture, and unfortunately that involves sucking it up in the meantime. Complaining from the sidelines isn't going to accomplish much.
Even if stereotypes acted as a survival mechanism in the past by providing a quick and dirty filter to judge threats through naive correlation and pattern matching, I don't believe they remain useful in the modern world. Modern stereotypes tend to be politically and culturally derived, rather than being the result of natural selection pressure, and so don't actually affect human survival so much as effect the survival of regressive human ideologies.
Well. That's one of the more overtly bigoted comments I've seen here in a while.
It wouldn't change my mind. The assumption one would assume you would expect to be drawn from "the race that is responsible for 90% of the homicides in that city" to "all else being equal, members of that race are likely to be homicidal," is not at all reasonable, or even mathematically justifiable. Anyone approaching you in a dark alley at night could be a threat, and still, on average, most likely isn't, regardless of race.
If this is the best you can do to justify stereotyping as reasonable then I stand by my comment.
Given that scenario, "taking a walk alone down a dark alley in a city at night where a rough looking person in a hoody is approaching you from the opposite direction with their hands in their pockets" the race of the person should not, realistically, play a significant factor in determining the level of threat they present, as compared to the other factors. The bigoted assumption drawn from the made up statistic that the person is a member of "the race that is responsible for 90% of the homicides in that city" is that members of that race, categorically, are significantly more violent than members of other races. Otherwise, it and the statistic wouldn't be worth mentioning.
However, if this were a reasonable assumption to make about members of a race, then the other factors should not be relevant. "Taking a walk down Main Street on a Sunday afternoon when a finely dressed gentleman who happens to be a member of the race that is responsible for 90% of the homicides in that city" would be a far more dangerous scenario to find oneself in than a "rough looking person in a hoody approaching you from the opposite direction with their hands in their pockets who happens to be your own race, in a darkly lit alley."
Within the contrived scenario presented, the stereotype is irrelevant. Outside that scenario, it's absurd.
And.. no one is talking about seeing everyone as an equal threat, or no one as a threat, that's a weird non-sequitur you're projecting onto my comment. Likewise, not being paranoid about certain races will not inevitably get you killed and prevent you from breeding.
What I am claiming is that the stereotype you're trying to justify here as a valid survival mechanism is not.
When the details of the situation you are in start to fit the common parameters of stories you hear that's when you need to be on high alert.
For instance, I doubt most people will think twice if they pass a woman in an alley, no matter how she's dressed. Females mugging and killing people just isn't a thing you hear about all that often. So you take your chances.
Likewise a man of any race wearing a suit is probably not going to be perceived as any kind of threat either.
Could these people be threats? Of course, but statistically it is unlikely.
Likewise, if you are somewhere where a member of a race has never killed anybody, you probably would feel at ease around those people. Or maybe it's an area where crime is low in general all around, then perhaps you walk in peace and freely ignore everyone as a threat.
It has nothing to do with being a bigot or a racist, it's all about being aware of past patterns that have led to people's deaths and avoiding them.
You mention race because it's a lot easier to categorize based on race than based on a hundred different clothing and body language parameters, but it's those complex non-racial, non-ethnic things that really make your decision for you about whether someone is likely to be a threat.
Many more blacks or hispanics, on the street in an inner city or bad neighborhood, may exhibit nerve-inducing fashion sense or body language, but you're still not nervous about their race, you're nervous about those other things, and the location (alley? possibly late at night?), and forming a post-hoc explanation based on race because it's cognitively simpler.
> “Application of these drugs to full-thickness skin wounds significantly promoted wound repair,” the study said.
I guess scars might be a thing of the past in a generation or two as well.
Search for Apocynin first...
"Apocynin was first described by Oswald Schmiedeberg, a German pharmacologist, in 1883 and was first isolated by Horace Finnemore, in 1908, from the root of Canadian hemp (Apocynum cannabinum). At the time, this plant was already used for its known effectiveness against edema and heart problems."
"Apocynum cannabinum (dogbane, amy root, hemp dogbane, prairie dogbane, Indian hemp, rheumatism root, or wild cotton) is a perennial herbaceous plant that grows throughout much of North America - in the southern half of Canada and throughout the United States. It is a poisonous plant: Apocynum means "poisonous to dogs". All parts of the plant are poisonous and can cause cardiac arrest if ingested."
"Apocynum cannabinum was much employed by various Native American tribes who used it to treat a wide variety of complaints including rheumatism, coughs, pox, whooping cough, asthma, internal parasites, diarrhoea and also to increase milk flow in lactating mothers. The root has been used as a tonic, cardiotonic, diaphoretic, diuretic, emetic (induces vomitting) and expectorant. It is harvested in the autumn and dried for later use. The fresh root is the most active part medicinally."
And it seems to be one of the medicinal plants that the north American locals have known about long before Europeans rocked up.
Then if I search for Y27632, I get stuff like;
"Y27632 is a cell-permeable small molecule Rho-associated kinase (ROCK) inhibitor1. Y27632 has been found to prevent apoptosis as well as enhance the survival and cloning efficiency of dissociated human embryonic stem (ES) cells without affecting their self-renewal properties or pluripotency2. This molecule has also been shown to enhance survival during the transplantation of ES cell-derived neural precursors3. Y27632 in combination with Pifithrin-u significantly improves cell recovery after cryopreservation"
Does anybody here know what the similarities are likely to be between those two compounds and if Apocynum has already being used dermatalogically? Given the history it seems very unlikey that it wouldnt have already been made into a topical skin cream by someone before now. I'm also guessing that the people who make Y27632 are going to be cranking up production right about now and giggling a lot.
"We selected candidate chemicals that potentially increased the stem cell property [Apocynin] or reduced production of reactive oxygen species [Y-27632]"
Are you a biologist by the way?
edit - and I have just gone down a rabbithole while I should be wiring LEDs. Am gonna stop now and go back later to find out what all the words mean.
The trend of technology is the rich get something first and over time access trickles down to everyone.
- Sunday afternoon thought of George Washington, sipping on a glass of wine in a certain alternate universe one Sunday afternoon.
Because a lot of companies make electric cars. In China, for example, there are a couple hundred electric car companies.
The Chinese will buy electric cars by the tens of millions and everything will change. It doesn’t matter if Tesla is still expensive.
Tesla is a premium brand. There are other more affordable EV’s being sold in China.
We’re way past initial innovation.
The largest car market in the world is migrating to EV’s.