Fibrin "binds to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein," forming clots that "drive systemic thromboinflammation and neuropathology," and it happens "independently of active infection."
Simplified breakdown of the paper below!
1/many
This paper has SEVERAL MAJOR FINDINGS, spanning multiple major aspects of COVID pathology!
IMO, this paper is a MAJOR BREAKTHROUGH, as the authors "establish fibrin as a key driver of inflammation and neuropathology in SARS-CoV-2 infection."
2/
Here is the entire thread summarizing the paper “Fibrin drivers thromboinflammation and neuropathology in COVID-19,” on one page: readwise.io/reader/shared/…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I don't know how to say this gently, but if you think that it's even POSSIBLE for the climate to *improve* in your lifetime… uhh…
Okay, let's say humans and factories and power plants suddenly blinked out of existence today
First, temperatures would immediately increase…
1/
And no, this isn't one of those obnoxious climate-denial talking points misreading the data. Know why things suddenly seemed to get worse around 2023? Industry reduced a pollutant that is harmful to humans but masks the effects of greenhouse gases by reflecting light
2/
If we were just to reduce aerosol emissions without reducing CO2 and methane emissions (which is basically what is actually happening), it will "unmask" 2ºC warming. If we cut everything, we'll keep it down to JUST unmasking 0.4ºC warming from reduced aerosols.
Nope. Wrong. You are objectively and *verifiably* incorrect.
From the declaration: "I declare COVID-19 over as a global health emergency. However, that does not mean COVID-19 is over as a global health threat."
1/many
I just want to emphasize again: The WHO director said "The worst thing any country could do now is to use this news as a reason to let down its guard, to dismantle the systems it has built, or to send the message to its people that COVID-19 is nothing to worry about."
2/
So why did they declare an end to something that's a global threat?
To understand that, you need to understand the function of the WHO: *coordination of responses to global public health needs.*
It's not some arbiter of fact or declarer of scientific truths.
Let’s talk about systemic risk from negligent public health: Catastrophe doesn’t require population-wide illness.
The worst case isn’t sickness. Worst case is infrastructure collapse due to overstressed resources.
You know power plants need stable power to operate?
1/many
If there is a widespread disruption in the service area of, e.g., a nuclear power plant, it shuts down for safety. Massive blackouts like in 2003 or in Spain this year are caused by safety systems!
If too much trips out at once, it has a ripple effect across the grid 2/
In 2003, it took 2 days to fully restore most power. The infrastructure is 20 years older than it was back then and higher demand creates risk of cascading failure.
As of 2003, recommendations from blackouts in 1965, 1977, 1982, 1996, and 1998 had not been implemented. 3/
If Florida drops vaccine mandates, society is probably officially over. I really, really, really don’t think most people get that herd immunity is the only thing keeping measles from ripping through the population, and a measles infection wipes out all pre-existing immunity
1/3
Measles specifically infects the cells that are responsible for “remembering” which pathogens your body has encountered before. So they ALL get wiped out, and all you’re left with is cells that remember your measles infection and nothing else.
2/3
Every infection, vaccination, and other pathogenic exposure you’ve ever had? Your body no longer knows how to detect them after a measles infection. The only immunity you’ll be left with is immunity to measles. That’s it. Open season for every other pathogen encountered.
3/3
Can I say something? I have a BA in psych, a BPhil in linguistics, and went to grad school for cognitive psych. My research, including an undergrad fellowship, was on the cognitive relationship between written and spoken language…
Audiobooks are NO DIFFERENT than reading print.
In the last hour, there have been a dozen replies from people nitpicking the first tweet
The topic of discussion is "do audiobooks 'count' as reading?," and the answer is "Audiobooks are NO DIFFERENT than reading print."
Maybe read the thread before arguing with it? lmfao
And for all those people with indignant responses who want to nitpick every detail, the fact that so many people hold THIS exact view—that audiobooks are somehow “cheating”—is the ENTIRE point. It leads to people who would benefit from audiobooks depriving themselves the medium
That's not to say that it's impossible to use solid-state media for long-term storage. It's just that anything with durability guarantees gets prohibitively expensive quickly. Spinning hard drives—as well as DVDs and Blu-ray discs!—are your friend.
2/
- The way data is stored in solid-state media makes it much more susceptible to bit rot than other media.
- In a spinning hard drive, the moving parts are the most common point of failure.
- When you burn a DVD, that shit is fairly permanent.
3/