geneticsmike7.bsky.social
193 posts
97 followers
265 following
Discussion Master
comment in response to
post
2/ for transcriptional maintenance. It is very important for specific genes in specific contexts, however, as well as dynamics such as cell differentiation or cell state changes
comment in response to
post
1/ We should distinguish enhancers from other chromatin organization features, like CTCF structural loops. The evidence for critical roles of the former, including long-range interactions (to an extent) has not diminished; the latter, however, has done a 180 from ca. 2015 and is mostly dispensable
comment in response to
post
I would say that it’s an anatomical and physiological design for a specific mating strategy.
comment in response to
post
Well I’m talking about sex, not gender identity. Klinefelter is not XX and XY in the same person, it’s XXY in every cell, and these people are of male sex.
comment in response to
post
What do you mean? Phenotypes are caused by genotypes. The Y chromosome is required for the male developmental program.
Extra X’s typically aren’t active, just like in XX females.
comment in response to
post
They are XXY and develop as males.
comment in response to
post
Wow, congrats!!!
comment in response to
post
Indeed, and critical to acknowledge that gender identity is an entirely different phenomenon than sex, despite being related.
comment in response to
post
There are no sexes other than male and female. There are intersex individuals who are in between, but these are not separate sexes, they are developmental disorders, sometimes resulting in infertility, sometimes not. A third sex would have a non-male, non-female reproductive anatomy and gamete.
comment in response to
post
Another important question is: if there are, are they actually desirable positions in the current environment?
comment in response to
post
But intersex is not a third sex, it’s a disorder of sexual development. So there are only 2 sexes. But also, aren’t Klinefelter Syndrome individuals male?
comment in response to
post
But there is no evidence I'm aware of showing reductions in infection or severe disease in previously infected+vaccinated individuals (which almost everyone is) who are <65 and relatively healthy, except for perhaps ~1 month. And these studies never control for previous antigen exposure.
comment in response to
post
Yep, vaccine hesitancy actually peaked BEFORE Covid vaccines were available, proving that the issue was highly politicized before any vaccine policies were implemented.
comment in response to
post
I do think there is no evidence to suggest that additional Covid vaccines are a net health benefit to most relatively healthy, <65yo individuals, and that is very much relevant for proper public health decisions. This has been true for 2-3 yrs now.
comment in response to
post
Well, they haven't reduced symptomatic infection by any reasonable amount since 2021, so I'm very skeptical of any notable reduction in transmission, particularly 1-2 months post-vaccination.
comment in response to
post
Medicine? Biological and biomedical science? Law? Other technical fields like chemistry and physics?
comment in response to
post
I feel exactly the same way
comment in response to
post
Thanks for these updates. Any news or thoughts on the cases on appeal after injunctions from Angel Kelley and I believe a NY judge on the more general NIH IDC issues?
comment in response to
post
Yes, he is ignorant of how biomedical research and funding works, which is not unexpected given that he focuses on economics of healthcare. Prasad is also ignorant of these things.
comment in response to
post
Congrats!!!
comment in response to
post
He forgot to switch out his Sith lightsaber too….
comment in response to
post
These arguments themselves are what make us the worst people 🤣
comment in response to
post
Omg
comment in response to
post
One of the symptoms of tribalism
comment in response to
post
100%
comment in response to
post
Are universities not very dependent on government funding?
comment in response to
post
Isn’t that what the article is about? I don’t see how the framing is inaccurate.
comment in response to
post
Biden is listed at 6’2”, Obama at 6’1”. Trump may have been 6’3” at some point but seems more like 6’ to 6’1” now
comment in response to
post
Is this case going to have oral arguments or will the judge just decide based on written arguments? Sorry I have no law expertise.
comment in response to
post
Oh I think Liu is more than deserving, I think he’s done perhaps more than anyone in the world to advance gene editing to the clinic. I was just saying that it’s strange that Zhang (and Church) as well have been left out by these prizes, as they did the first true genome editing with CRISPR.
comment in response to
post
Interesting that Feng Zhang has not received either of two gene editing Breakthrough Prizes 🤔🤔🤔
comment in response to
post
No, endowments are made up of earmarked donations that must be spent the way the donor wanted. They can spend interest and profits from investments I believe.
comment in response to
post
Is the disparity in being pulled over, or receiving a ticket controlling for rates of being pulled over?
comment in response to
post
Very excited to read this, loved the 2022 paper!
comment in response to
post
I'm agnostic about this, as I have never been in the amyloid field and am too young to know the history. Seems like there are supporters and detractors of this description. Truth seems to always be somewhere in the middle of what two sides say.
comment in response to
post
Working on my application!
comment in response to
post
Hear hear. And while Battacharya is not as bad, he’s very clearly not very smart about how biomedicine works in general.
comment in response to
post
Given the complete lack of regard for law, I don’t see why US citizens can’t be targeted next. We voted to go back to 1775, hope everyone’s happy.
comment in response to
post
IME = IMO
comment in response to
post
My guess is this probably plays a big part. People generally don’t care so much about inequality if they haven’t suffered from it themselves. And IME when ppl do care in an altruistic way, it’s more often women who do so
comment in response to
post
It was either unconscious or conscious with immediate erasing of the memory, or perhaps an indirect result of conscious processes from some time ago, but that seems to qualify as without intent as well
comment in response to
post
Well, I know that any time I’ve carefully paid attention to my thoughts, they seem to arise without my involvement. I’ve also tried to purposely think certain thoughts as well, and this doesn’t seem to work. Some image or words appear as I’m trying to “choose” what to think about.
comment in response to
post
Interestingly, these types don’t like taxes either. It’s basically an anti-government ideology, started in the late 70’s/early 80’s by conservative think tanks and made popular by Reagan
comment in response to
post
How would one observe a thought that “they” originated? Or what is the evidence that any thoughts are like this? I think anyone who has carefully observed their thoughts come to the conclusion that they appear spontaneously.
comment in response to
post
My thoughts seem entirely out of my control as well. I think this is a common observation among people who meditate.
comment in response to
post
I’d like to hear you debate Sam Harris on this. Hopefully the difference isn’t just definitional.
comment in response to
post
Yep, not a light topic!
comment in response to
post
Oh cool, that was the alternative option. I’ll have to read the book to get the details 🙂
comment in response to
post
So you define we as the sum of all brain processes, both conscious and sub-conscious?
comment in response to
post
Yeah it’s tough to define, but I guess I think about it like this: I decided to eat ice cream even though I knew I would regret and wished I could have chosen not to. If we have free will, then I could have chosen not to, but if we don’t, I couldn’t have.