I agree, even though he was way off on his thinking at least he tried something. The doctors told my father to go ion chemo because it would give him 2 yeras vs the 1 year he was facing with his pancreatic cancer. My sister, a oncology nurse told him not to do it, but he id. The chemo ended up causing a bile duct blockage which killing him after six months.
It is because of what Jobs did we know what not to do.
Yes. He was inflexible, and that made him very difficult to get along with - if you weren't either a yes-man, or able to look past his social skill issues to see his capabilities.
Nothing about social media is friendly to looking past social skill issues.
I wish he did not smoke [4], or convert to a largely fruit diet [1,2,3,5], they both most likely caused his pancreatic cancer.
My father died of pancreatic cancer, he smoked for most of his life and ate a ton of honey. I see it in my genetics (ABO, SOD2) and luckily I quit smoking when I was very young and could never tolerate sweet foods. I also eat a high manganese diet (the cofactor for ABO), lots of mussles, and take it as a supplement on occation.
I wish Jobs were still alive, I would probably not want to sell my iphone right now because of liquid ass.
Awesome for you and props! Let me tell you, doctors will gaslight patients who cure themselves because it is some kind of mental disorder they have I cannot figure out. They said THE EXACT SAME THING to my friend who also cured his UC with diet. "Well, you never had it because if you did you could not cure it." He is a Dentist and he literally yelled at them because he knew how unscientific it was what they were saying.
I am a FUT2 non-secretor who suffered with IBS-D for years. I had to cure myself as well. Very strict diet and high seaweed (it contains fucose (not fructose)). Not one doctor cares. I tell you, it is a mental disorder.
We knew that LolCDE was a vulnerability to e coli since well before 2016 and knew inhibitors of the complex, globomycin being one of them, which they knew about since 1978
From what I understand they used a diffusion model (diffdock) to predict the mechanism. These types of models are not LLMs that need to be trained on text
> Because evolution doesn't care about us beyond reproduction age (after which is when most cancers occur, especially considering that historically that age was between say 16 and 35).
This is the lie that needs. to die. Elder people were very important in even the most primitive societies. "lifespan" was low in pre-history, not because no one lived long lives, it was because infant mortality was very high.
Lie implies conscious distortion of the truth, the word you were looking for is "falsehood".
Second, even if "elder people were very important in even the most primitive societies", their role is much much important from evolutionary perspective than the pressures based on reproduction. Which is why most close primates get by with zero roles for post-reproduction grandparents.
Also elder people being "very important in even the most primitive societies" is a cultural and recent in evolutionary timescale phenomenon, first and only secondarily an evolutionary one.
> "lifespan" was low in pre-history, not because no one lived long lives, it was because infant mortality was very high.
They also lived shorter lives to begin with. Even in later historical times (say a couple of millenia or so), people's life expectancy at 15 (meaning, with infant mortality excluded) was much shorter than today.
Nobody said that "no one lived long lives" however. Some did. It's an aggregate limitation, not an absolute one.
Not disagreeing at all that elders are and have been important, but if it’s a benefit after reproductive age where does the selection come in?
I’m open to ideas. The only one I’ve been able to come up with is more second-order: the genetic benefit could come from having your children also pass on your genes, if there was a higher probability of them doing that with their parent alive past reproductive age.
"Bitch" by Lucy Cooke has a chapter dedicated to this if you're interested. It's pop sci but a great read and offers some new perspectives.
Menopause seems to be a biological adaptation to this - most mammals don't have it, they'll keep on having young until they're totally exhausted, and die not long after. Humans seem to be adapted so that women have a wild-type generation's worth (15-20 years) of useful lifespan post fertility.
It is because of what Jobs did we know what not to do.