modestmc
Joined 6 years ago
Karma
37
Submissions
12
Member since
Sep 2
Recent submissions
Comment · 3 years ago
Comment · 3 years ago
Your joke was good, alas my sense of humor is a little rusty.
Hopefully my delivery there sounded good on your end, I have no helpful advice but best of luck!
Comment · 3 years ago
Other than disagreeing with your take on relationships with medical practitioners, this is an excellent, well written comment. There are support groups for the family of cancer patients specifically because health is intertwined with how people live.
Creating some kind of regular time to process this long journey, however that works best into the day to day, may help set the stage for the next act.
Comment · 3 years ago
I have nothing but the highest respect for you in how you went about this and sharing your success with others. Long term, sleep apnea interferes with the glymphatic function; I’ve heard rumors this then correlates to various dementias. Sleep function really deserves more money thrown at it.
Here’s something fun. Do you wonder what biologically was really going on here? Personalized medicine is a when, not an if. There are wild things just around the corner like this: https://youtu.be/_YOEq7mHsw4
May the odds continue to be in your favor, thanks for sharing.
Comment · 3 years ago
Update: as a result of another comment, I stumbled into this:
https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/ijms/ijms-23-09112/article...
My quick take on their experimental results is in the other comment, but in short it appears there will indeed be a trough of disillusionment somewhere down the line.
Comment · 3 years ago
My apologies, the membrane. I went and dug more into this to brush up on the exact specifics and the exact conclusion of the research was that less than 5% of the intensity of the light reached the nuclear envelope, thus avoiding DNA damage. This is the original study: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/1341520/
However, while I was trying to find the specifics on the DNA damage, I found this: https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/ijms/ijms-23-09112/article...
My only grief with this article is the conclusion they draw from the yH2AX staining. I can see several possible reasons for observing the higher proportion of cells with it.
Other than that, the paper raises a boatload of serious points and definitely observes negatively impacted cellular function. I still think FarUVC has incredible potential but just like cellphone towers the exact specifics to interact with it safely need serious further study.
Comment · 3 years ago
The author said he updated the article, so if the link changed then maybe; however, I can tell you somebody definitely reposted it last night and it got almost 100 points. Too funny.
I assume you tried punching in keywords like “fake NPM package hack” or something like that?
Comment · 3 years ago
Far-UVC (~205-222 nm) light can’t penetrate cell walls and thus does not risk DNA damage.
However, our skin heavily depends on friendly bacteria to do useful things. One concern that I have yet to see research testing is the impact of extended Far-UVC exposure on these microbial populations.
Comment · 3 years ago
Nice to see this on HN, this is a big deal. I did research in 2021 to generate Far-UVC using nonlinear plasmonics.
The holy grail for this technology is a Far-UVC Diode. The guy who won the Nobel Prize for the blue LED (IIRC) is working with other physicists at UCSB to try and create said diode: https://www.news.ucsb.edu/2020/019949/uv-lights-way
If you want to learn more about Far-UVC itself (safety, etc), David Brenner is the real MVP: http://www.columbia.edu/~djb3/
Comment · 3 years ago
I know far too well how you feel, happy you found what you’ve been missing.
Out of curiosity, what did you remember about the link that you tried searching for? Do you remember when you last saw it?
[insert semicoherent hopium about ChatGPT as a magical panacea here]
Comment · 6 years ago
I'm just gonna leave this here
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2010/03/alzheimers-as...
I’ve had emails get filtered on occasion before, but last week I got my first actual clue when a message I sent bounced back weirdly because (apparently) of an SPF soft fail. Been avoiding digging into SMTP for a long time and it seems the bill is due.
Anyways, I’d be happy to forward the original email I sent on (from [email protected]), and I’d be very grateful for an out of band peer willing to tolerate me replaying emails. Thanks!