Yeah, I agree that the HIV protease is an aspartyl protease (uses two residues of aspartate to chop up proteins) and not a serine one (uses one residue of serine to do the same) but this new compound, as I understand the article, is in fact a SERINE proteases inhibitor that happens to slow down the spread of HIV (and other organisms) - which also isn't entirely new.
I would be very interested to hear their arguments. Last time I looked it wasn't trivial to distinguish science from pseudoscience...
Yes, I am a scientist...
and sometimes the new findings win the majority over and we have a paradigm change and sometimes they are just ignored. See T.S. Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions.
P.S. I am a scientist.
Your epistemology of science appears to be a little too simple. The anomaly of Mercury's perihelion was known since the beginning of the 19th century but it had no effect on newtonian mechanics whatsoever until Einstein presented a rival theory. Also, all theories require supplementation by the ceteris paribus clause (i.e. everything else is the same). This means that a contradictory observation may ALWAYS be explained as failure of the ceteris paribus clause rather than failure of the theory. And so on and so forth, it's actually worth reading something on epistemology and scientific method (Popper, Lakatos, Kuhn...), you may be surprised by how science actually works.
I'm not sure if you're serious but if yes, than you have no idea about how this kind of science works. What exactly would you be looking for in the study? Saying that `more things should be wrong' is a little vague. Also, where would you get a large enough control group (age, sex etc. matched) if EVERYONE drinks these drinks. One more point, since nobody has observed any ill effects of benzoic acid the effects, if any, will be very subtle, i.e. you will need a massive sample to see anything... Not so trivial anymore, is it. (Leaving out the issue that facts cannot prove or disprove a proposition, see Popper, Lakatos, etc)
actually, Wikipedia says USA = 3,755,241 miles2 (maybe forgot to convert km to miles?)
in comparison Canada = 3,511,023 mi
it is a silly argument altogether using just the area as pointed out voluminously above but anyway...
well, most anticancer treatments (chemotherapy and radiation) cause cancer. I agree that *known* side effects of DCA don't sound that bad but it's been given to a few tens, maybe hundreds of patients (congenital lactic acidosis is rather rare). Who knows what would happen when it is given to many thousands people.
Not only is this story a dupe but having read the paper in Cancer Cell I'm nowhere near that optimistic. Yes, they show death of cancer cells both in vitro and in vivo but the proposed mechanism of action (re-activation of mitochondrial metabolism leading to increased free radical production and apoptosis) is debatable to say the least. Moreover, even though DCA is registered for treatment of congenital lactate acidosis, it has quite a few unpleasant side effects so it's definitely not a silver bullet. The paper is not clear on how they came to interpretations they present as some of the data could easily be interpreted in other ways. Although the concept of targeting mitochondria to treat cancer is very interesting, as usual, beware of breakthroughs in medical sciences - they often aren't.
jan
yeah, 'cheap' fragrances are full of synthetic stuff nowadays but Calone was synthetic from the start (although I truly wonder for what purpose Pfizer developed it in the first place...)
I am still not quite convinced as far as human voice or piano sound is concerned - take e.g. Bernarda Fink or Andras Schiff - the differences in tone colour are rather subtle and for me, that's what makes their music-making amazing.
The different importance of balance between you and me might be the difference between a music consumer and a professional music-maker. Fair enough.
yes, I do believe a well made recording of a piece that includes solo voices singing at the same time as a massive choir and oversized orchestra will sound better than what you'll hear probably anywhere in a concert hall (I am not a sound engineer so there may be one or two places at any concert hall where this may not be true). This has nothing to do with clean sound but rather balance of different forces.
(you may argue that a good conductor with a good orchestra should be able to achieve the same at a concert but I have yet to hear that happen...)
I am quite intrigued by this: my friend, a professional violin player, says the same thing but if the recording is technically bad, noisy or compressed how can you hear all the details of masterfull technique or all the shades of expression in a singer's voice? Isn't that (at least in part) what genius music-making is about?
Also, listening to live music is quite often worse than listening to a well-made recording - take pieces like Beethoven's Missa Solemnis or Mahler's 8th symphony - you'd have to be pretty lucky to hear it live as well balanced as it comes on a good recording.
Would be interested what professional musicians thing of this.
the people at the top have plenty of both...but I agree that they can get whatever they want no matter what the US say, such restrictions won't hurt them.
Slashdot Mirror
speak for yourself, I prefer the participium if I am on the receiving side....
i think the previous post meant they need to be pressurised in space, since normally there's no air there.
both phosphorus and gold are toxic...
Modern equal tempering was not even developed until about 70 years after J.S. Bach's death. In his Well-tempered Clavier he made use of 'well tempering', which was an older technology. He didn't develop that one either though. http://www.jimloy.com/physics/scale.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well_temperament
astral cell?
Wow! Must be good...
you use less than 50 mg...
Yeah, I agree that the HIV protease is an aspartyl protease (uses two residues of aspartate to chop up proteins) and not a serine one (uses one residue of serine to do the same) but this new compound, as I understand the article, is in fact a SERINE proteases inhibitor that happens to slow down the spread of HIV (and other organisms) - which also isn't entirely new.
I would be very interested to hear their arguments. Last time I looked it wasn't trivial to distinguish science from pseudoscience... Yes, I am a scientist...
and sometimes the new findings win the majority over and we have a paradigm change and sometimes they are just ignored. See T.S. Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions. P.S. I am a scientist.
Just look at the map...
PubMed doesn't seem to have any papers on this, at least by this Piper guy... I'll wait for a peer reviewed publication.
Your epistemology of science appears to be a little too simple. The anomaly of Mercury's perihelion was known since the beginning of the 19th century but it had no effect on newtonian mechanics whatsoever until Einstein presented a rival theory. Also, all theories require supplementation by the ceteris paribus clause (i.e. everything else is the same). This means that a contradictory observation may ALWAYS be explained as failure of the ceteris paribus clause rather than failure of the theory. And so on and so forth, it's actually worth reading something on epistemology and scientific method (Popper, Lakatos, Kuhn...), you may be surprised by how science actually works.
I'm not sure if you're serious but if yes, than you have no idea about how this kind of science works. What exactly would you be looking for in the study? Saying that `more things should be wrong' is a little vague. Also, where would you get a large enough control group (age, sex etc. matched) if EVERYONE drinks these drinks. One more point, since nobody has observed any ill effects of benzoic acid the effects, if any, will be very subtle, i.e. you will need a massive sample to see anything... Not so trivial anymore, is it. (Leaving out the issue that facts cannot prove or disprove a proposition, see Popper, Lakatos, etc)
actually, Wikipedia says USA = 3,755,241 miles2 (maybe forgot to convert km to miles?) in comparison Canada = 3,511,023 mi it is a silly argument altogether using just the area as pointed out voluminously above but anyway...
well, most anticancer treatments (chemotherapy and radiation) cause cancer. I agree that *known* side effects of DCA don't sound that bad but it's been given to a few tens, maybe hundreds of patients (congenital lactic acidosis is rather rare). Who knows what would happen when it is given to many thousands people.
Not only is this story a dupe but having read the paper in Cancer Cell I'm nowhere near that optimistic. Yes, they show death of cancer cells both in vitro and in vivo but the proposed mechanism of action (re-activation of mitochondrial metabolism leading to increased free radical production and apoptosis) is debatable to say the least. Moreover, even though DCA is registered for treatment of congenital lactate acidosis, it has quite a few unpleasant side effects so it's definitely not a silver bullet. The paper is not clear on how they came to interpretations they present as some of the data could easily be interpreted in other ways. Although the concept of targeting mitochondria to treat cancer is very interesting, as usual, beware of breakthroughs in medical sciences - they often aren't. jan
yeah, 'cheap' fragrances are full of synthetic stuff nowadays but Calone was synthetic from the start (although I truly wonder for what purpose Pfizer developed it in the first place...)
One 'marine' scent has been around for a while and is heavily used in common fragrances - Calone http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calone
I know this is splitting hairs WRT to TFA but glycine is the only amino acid that does not have L and D forms as having two hydrogens on its alpha carbon it is not asymmetric, see e.g. http://dl.clackamas.cc.or.us/ch106-05/optical.htm or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optical_isomerism. Also, if IGGs was meant to mean IgGs, i.e. a subtype of antibodies I very much doubt they can recognise such a small molecule as glycine (unless it works as a hapten http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hapten
very interesting, thanks for the comments!
I am still not quite convinced as far as human voice or piano sound is concerned - take e.g. Bernarda Fink or Andras Schiff - the differences in tone colour are rather subtle and for me, that's what makes their music-making amazing.
The different importance of balance between you and me might be the difference between a music consumer and a professional music-maker. Fair enough.yes, I do believe a well made recording of a piece that includes solo voices singing at the same time as a massive choir and oversized orchestra will sound better than what you'll hear probably anywhere in a concert hall (I am not a sound engineer so there may be one or two places at any concert hall where this may not be true). This has nothing to do with clean sound but rather balance of different forces.
(you may argue that a good conductor with a good orchestra should be able to achieve the same at a concert but I have yet to hear that happen...)I am quite intrigued by this: my friend, a professional violin player, says the same thing but if the recording is technically bad, noisy or compressed how can you hear all the details of masterfull technique or all the shades of expression in a singer's voice? Isn't that (at least in part) what genius music-making is about?
Also, listening to live music is quite often worse than listening to a well-made recording - take pieces like Beethoven's Missa Solemnis or Mahler's 8th symphony - you'd have to be pretty lucky to hear it live as well balanced as it comes on a good recording.
Would be interested what professional musicians thing of this.
the people at the top have plenty of both...but I agree that they can get whatever they want no matter what the US say, such restrictions won't hurt them.
erm... it's not 25, it's 12 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurozone in the Eurozone plus Montenegro.