11–20 of 118 posts
FTA: > For human subjects he would replace the sciatic nerve with a chemical cocktail known to stimulate neural growth. Anyone know what this "chemical cocktail" is they're referring to?
While I am glad that there was minimal harm done here, I am perplexed as to why a Neurosurgeon would risk their decades of training and career for such a high-risk low reward surgery. This could have been a terrible ending.
We should be weary about tampering with things we do not completely comprehend.
FTA: > For human subjects he would replace the sciatic nerve with a chemical cocktail known to stimulate neural growth. Anyone know what this "chemical cocktail" is they're referring to?
Gotta be Lion’s Mane, or something with it. edit: haters will downvote me but look it up for yourself and upvote if you agree
I would avoid commenting on the people down-voting you, that typically just makes it worse.
[1] - https://www.neomed-clinic.com/the-best-nerve-growth-factor-s...
> His early fears of having damaged Kennedy for life turned out to be unfounded; the language loss that left his patient briefly locked in was just a symptom of postoperative brain swelling. While I am glad that there was minimal harm done here, I am perplexed as to why a Neurosurgeon would risk their decades of training and career for such a high-risk low reward surgery. This could have been a terrible ending. We sh…
> His early fears of having damaged Kennedy for life turned out to be unfounded; the language loss that left his patient briefly locked in was just a symptom of postoperative brain swelling. While I am glad that there was minimal harm done here, I am perplexed as to why a Neurosurgeon would risk their decades of training and career for such a high-risk low reward surgery. This could have been a terrible ending. We sh…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Doesn't this violate the rule about "original research", or is that more of a meme and the actual policy more nuanced
There are mods who would delete that in a heartbeat if they saw it.
If I wrote wikipedia entry about picking coconuts, it would be immediately deleted because personal experience isn't a citable source. I need to tell some other fool about what I do, have him publish it in an article, and only then am I worthy of sharing my knowledge on wikipedia.
I've seen absolute hogwash in wikipedia articles about my field (not really picking coconuts lol) but I can't correct them because I can't find an article where someone else has written about the topic.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are mods who would delete that in a heartbeat if they saw it.
Which is why Wikipedia is so western-centric. I could be the world expert in my field, say... coconut picking. I haven't published any papers about picking coconuts, and neither is it a subject that the newspapers want to write about. If I wrote wikipedia entry about picking coconuts, it would be immediately deleted because personal experience isn't a citable source. I need to tell some other fool about what I do, ha…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are mods who would delete that in a heartbeat if they saw it.
Which is why Wikipedia is so western-centric. I could be the world expert in my field, say... coconut picking. I haven't published any papers about picking coconuts, and neither is it a subject that the newspapers want to write about. If I wrote wikipedia entry about picking coconuts, it would be immediately deleted because personal experience isn't a citable source. I need to tell some other fool about what I do, ha…
Wikipedia prioritizes verifiability over completeness. Are there downsides to that trade-off? Absolutely. But i would rather that over trusting random people on the internet to know what they are talking about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are mods who would delete that in a heartbeat if they saw it.
Which is why Wikipedia is so western-centric. I could be the world expert in my field, say... coconut picking. I haven't published any papers about picking coconuts, and neither is it a subject that the newspapers want to write about. If I wrote wikipedia entry about picking coconuts, it would be immediately deleted because personal experience isn't a citable source. I need to tell some other fool about what I do, ha…
Wikipedia's job isn't to push forward the frontiers of knowledge. It's to summarize the stuff you can look up elsewhere.