Club Zimby69

[Kiki]

Hey wait, what?

What are you trying to say here, Ahmad?

 

[goldb]

Bad Ahmad

 

[Kiki]

 

[goldb]

Is snickers your favourite chocolate bar?

 

[Kiki]

Is snickers your favourite chocolate bar?

ofc. why? you want to buy me some?

 

[z.5]

It is one of the best chocolate bars around - certainly for the price

 

[goldb]

ofc. why? you want to buy me some?

You coming to pick it up?

 

[Kiki]

You coming to pick it up?

no, you send them to me

 

[z.5]

Are you two seriously going to use my thread to flirt?

Not that I'm averse to such behaviour, I just have two requests:

Firstly, you two make it clear what you are up to - I think clarity is important in these kind of things

Secondly, and more importantly, I'd appreciate it if you two upped the ante and made it a properly filthy read - If you're going to flirt, then flirt hard!
At least throw in a little inuendo.

... the only thing that this talk of chocolate is doing is making me hungry.
I'm neither uncomfortable nor interested in what might happen later on (and that really is a crying shame).

 

[Kiki]

Mr Zim is jealous!? But wait, who is he jealous of?

poor him, feeling hungry right now eat?

 

[Kiki]

Sticky, but pleased

 

[z.5]

Sticky, but pleased

My favourite way to be

 

[SirSamuel016]

My favourite way to be

Best way to be

 

[xi0]

I think I remember you working with rodents, so I was wondering what your opinion on this was? Sounds pretty fucking frightening.

 

[z.5]

I think I remember you working with rodents, so I was wondering what your opinion on this was? Sounds pretty fucking frightening.

I'm not sure which part is particularly frightening to you.

Lab animals are not healthy animals - nor are they necessarily particularly representative of their wild brethren (in fact, it's worse than that - one lab's mice might be unrelated, to a large enough extent, to another lab's mice, in a way that makes comparing similar experiments highly difficult - or even impossible [even if 'the same type of mice']).

It's one of the many reasons why we aim to use multiple species (not just mice/rats, but both [and preferably multiple other species also] to form a conclusion - and it further highlights why other laboratories need to replicate results (something which, unfortunately, academia does not encourage [even if it pretends to do so]).

It does seem rather unfair to me to pin it all on JAX though - as this kinda problem occurs any time you selectively inbreed mice for scientific experimentation.
Also, I get that it's not his aim in the interview, but he fails to mention how difficult it is working with (or drawing any substantive conclusions) from 'wild' animals (those caught specifically from the wild, for a particular experiment).

If your question was related to his death by cancer/old-age, then firstly it isn't my field and secondly he didn't really put forward much for me to discuss.

 

[xi0]

I'm not sure which part is particularly frightening to you.

Lab animals are not healthy animals - nor are they necessarily particularly representative of their wild brethren (in fact, it's worse than that - one lab's mice might be unrelated, to a large enough extent, to another lab's mice, in a way that makes comparing similar experiments highly difficult - or even impossible [even if 'the same type of mice']).

It's one of the many reasons why we aim to use multiple species (not just mice/rats, but both [and preferably multiple other species also] to form a conclusion - and it further highlights why other laboratories need to replicate results (something which, unfortunately, academia does not encourage [even if it pretends to do so]).

It does seem rather unfair to me to pin it all on JAX though - as this kinda problem occurs any time you selectively inbreed mice for scientific experimentation.
Also, I get that it's not his aim in the interview, but he fails to mention how difficult it is working with (or drawing any substantive conclusions) from 'wild' animals (those caught specifically from the wild, for a particular experiment).

If your question was related to his death by cancer/old-age, then firstly it isn't my field and secondly he didn't really put forward much for me to discuss.

It just stood out to me that results from studies using these mice could possibly be called into question and what the potential ramifications could be. I know that's not how science is supposed to work necessarily, but that doesn't really account for laziness or ineptitude.

 

[z.5]

I know that's not how science is supposed to work necessarily, but that doesn't really account for laziness or ineptitude.

I'm not sure that 'laziness' or 'ineptitude' are really the correct words, though.

It isn't that researchers who used mice from JAX labs were lazy, or inept.
Nor, really, that JAX labs have been - if the argument is to be made that they should alter their breeding protocols, then the question comes as to how they should go about this.

One big reason why they are bred in this way is to encourage reproducibility between (and within) groups - and to say that this is a huge issue, that is currently affecting (and has been for a long time previously) science, is a massive understatement.
The fact that the telomere lengths have apparently been boosted by this process is an unfortunate consequence of this.

It isn't like scientists aren't talking about this kinda stuff, however - nor about differences in telomere lengths between different mouse strains - nor between 'wild' and JAX mice specifically (here's a short paper from 2000 that touches on this kinda thing [there are many, many others, but this one is free so you can skim if you want]).

Now, I haven't listened to the particular podcast that he is referring to (I will try to find time today). It's possible that he's bringing up something new, rather than trying to be overly conspiratorial, but I'm not sure how he'd rather laboratory animals were bred.

If his issues are with common rodent models, in particular, then he really is not alone in his criticisms (he is certainly not the sole hero standing up to the oppressive regime, or whatever [yeah, he didn't say this - but the way he was talking made me think that he wished people saw him in this way]) - though, I'm not sure that the hill he decides to plant his flag on [with that particular laboratory strain] is their biggest issue.


Ok, listened to some of the interview with his brother - and that [little bit] was more than enough for me.

That guy [Eric Weinstein] seems to take a super reductionist view on the relationship between aging and cancer. He has latched onto one idea (that of the relationship between telomeric length and apoptosis), from a paper published around 18 years ago [I assume he is discussing this - he talks about his brother's thesis (from 2009)], and run with it - as if there is a huge conspiracy with scientists actively ignoring the research, as it causes them issues - it's incredibly alarmist.

Now that isn't to say that there isn't something to that paper, or the ideas presented within it (the links between telomere length and cancer are pretty well established), it's just they aren't the be-all and end-all - I really worry that the man's motives in this interview with Joe Rogan.

 

[z.5]

Seems to work for me