Recent content by ZeGato

"Populous, meaning having many inhabitants, is always an adjective. Populace is a noun referring to a population or the general public. So we might say, for example, that a populous city has a large populace. " https://grammarist.com/spelling/populace-populous/

I don't need any source to state that it's theoretically possible to make a physical system that is better than the human brain on performing its functions. I think it's shortsighted to say that it's improbable that the human brain will never be surpassed by AI.

A ML algorithm with advanced language processing capabilities could learn about diabetes from existing literature and find out the confounder variables that would need to be accounted for. Artificial intelligence can theoretically be superior to the human brain in everything, and I'm pretty sure...

Withaferin A, a compound present in the Ashwagandha herb, was shown to reduce tumor size in different cancers on mice, as well as preventing metastasis. Research of this compound has gained momentum in recent years, and there are now dozens of studies on its anti-cancer properties. It seems to...

1. Many studies were done on the subject, and yes, there is a positive relationship between the two. This https://pumpkinperson.com/2016/02/11/the-incredible-correlation-between-iq-income/ is very informative on this, and it uses this study as the source, among others that it links. 2. That...

What exactly is "familial intelligence"? Couldn't families be changing and people choosing lower IQ partners? With the Norwegian welfare system there's virtually no chance of ending up homeless or without food anymore, and choosing a partner from "good families" to guarantee survival isn't...

Xiaomi should be the best in terms of quality/price nowadays.

But hypothetically, and I hope it doesn't happen, what if you don't live for as long as you think you're going to? Or what if, for whatever reason, you don't become rich? If having children is your goal, delaying it so much seems like a huge risk.

No, and there were some I particularly hated.

I've used Datacamp before and it's pretty basic. It's ok for an introduction, but realize that you'll need to do projects or other courses to get a solid knowledge of what you're studying. Both Coursera and EDX have more comprehensive courses if that's what you're looking for.

There are other empirical studies available after all: this one was done on patients from Quebec who underwent cardiac medical imaging, with a median age of 63 years and a mean follow-up of 5 years. The hazard ratio of all cancer incidence was estimated to be 1.03 per 10mSv (95% confidence...

Yes, the risk changes based on age and sex, but a study on the mortality of A-bomb survivors show that the increased relative risk of cancer is constant throughout life. This empirical study shows that the LNT model, that is used to estimate those odds, underestimated the all cancer risk by a...

The lifetime risk would be small only if assuming that the 24% higher incidence goes to 0 after the first 10 years (average follow-up period in this study, and lower in similar studies). The problem is that the studies from the nuclear bombings show that the relative risk stays higher and...

My concern is that, at most, they have the "1 in 1000" figure in their mind, but that seems to be a serious underestimation of the real risk by 1 or 2 orders of magnitude. The BEIR model derived from the nuclear blastings also seems to be severely flawed in measuring the risk in these type of...

The issue is that the figure is estimated from the number of cancers in young people, to at most early 40s (the oldest members in the cohort). At those ages, the baseline cancer risk is pretty low, and so the excess number of cancers will also be very low. Just as an example: a 20% higher...