Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | rzmmm's commentslogin

> In 2013, meanwhile, researchers in the Netherlands subjected 17 healthy adults to temperatures of 15-16C (59-60.8F) for six hours a day.

It seems that that these articles often discuss cold plunges, cold showers etc. but the rigorous research is often conducted simply via rooms with reduced temperature combined with light clothing.


I remember reading about this. A key piece of information which should perhaps be in the title of the video is that the "fix" is transient.

There's an update video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoczYXJeMY4

Apparently the fix lasted ~18 months


Could the same fix be applied again?

I know almost nothing about bio, hopefully someone more knowledgeable can answer. But I had the same thought -- one treatment for 18 months of relief sounds great! even people that _are_ lactose tolerant often lose tolerance as they age, so it seems like this could have wide appeal. Do it ~30 times and you could be lactose-tolerant your whole life.

But wait, if you lose tolerance then there must be some other mechanism involved because your genes stay the same as you age.

He covers it in the video -- the cells lining your intestine are replaced as you age. Unless you get the lactose-tolerant gene into your stem cells, the newly-generated intestine lining will have your 'original' genetics, lacking the lactose tolerant gene. That said, it does sound like it's fading gradually for him, not a sudden drop off.

I was replying to this part of your comment:

"even people that _are_ lactose tolerant often lose tolerance as they age, so it seems like this could have wide appeal."

My point is that people who are lactose tolerant as a child will have the same genes when they are older. So gene editing should have no effect, unless the mechanism is more complicated somehow.


Oh I see, that makes sense. Ya, I'm not sure how it works, maybe it has something to do with changing gene expression as we age? Ie, not the genes themselves changing, but the way that they are used / neglected? And then if that's the case, what would that mean for people that had taken this treatment? Perhaps they would see the age-related drop off, or perhaps it's different for some reason.

To me it's interesting that some type 1 diabetics prefer to manage the disease with a carbohydrate-restricted diet, but some type 1 diabetics prefer to use completely opposite strategy and choose to eat a low-fat diet instead. Here is an article written by a type 1 diabetic with a non-diabetic blood glucose levels on a low-fat diet:

https://www.masteringdiabetes.org/type-1-diabetes-diet/

I'm not sure what explains the discrepancy. The medical guidelines seem to recommend the same diet for type 1 diabetics as anyone else.


This is good advice for pre-diabetics and type 2 diabetics but in type 1 diabetes exercise after meal often makes things worse. It makes insulin dosing less predictable.

That sounds more sensible. I was thinking maybe the error caused DKA due to pumps suspending all insulin overnight or something.

In type 1 diabetes lack of insulin can lead to a condition called diabetic ketoacidosis which is deadly. In type 2 diabetes it's not usually possible.

Another Option::unwrap incident perchance?


One approach is to create views for the required data and then just select the columns which are needed. The joins will be pruned by the query planner if they are not needed, so there is no need for conditional joins.


> The joins will be pruned by the query planner if they are not needed, so there is no need for conditional joins.

I always wondered about this. How reliable is that in your experience? Thank you in advance.


Depends on the underlying database, and you'd have to test your query to have any level of certainty.

That being said, query planning is generally where Oracle/MSSQl outshine MySQL/Postgres, especially for pruning unnecessary joins. BigQuery is great at it IME.


Yeah this definitely makes sense, and is good database API design as well.


This sounds like a faulty CGM which is very common. With these values normal A1C, <5.7% doesn't sound plausible.


Periodic finger prick tests during peaks and valleys confirmed it. A1C is a long term average and will not pick up issues that have developed in the past 4-6 weeks.


If I'm looking at this right it's around 413 uses in a month in this particular web page. I don't know if they somehow distinguish actual use versus "trying it out". I think it's great these things are considered but I'm a bit skeptical they actually increase physical safety of people at risk. Maybe these buttons increase perceived safety, which is a good thing?


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: