4 ms·

I don't think that the idea is to disable it forever.

• roenxi 5y ago
  If we disable oxygen to the lungs for 30 minutes then switching it back on doesn't help. The lung owner is probably dead. Some of this stuff causes permanent changes. There is reason to be optimistic, because if for it to be really bad then there'd need to be: * Permanent change * Causing negative symptoms * Which took a long time to be symptomatic (which, coincidentally, HIV/AIDS exposure is a great example of) Now if frameskipping supressing drugs are something we expose people to as a matter of course then very well, probably would work out great. But if this is new then it is absolutely not safe to do a mass rollout in the next decade. There are obvious risks.
  • Clostridium 5y ago
    There are always risks, and ignoring a novel approach is also a risk. The issue is to gauge risk intelligently, based on extensive prior medical, biological and physicochemical knowledge and modelling, and on sound clinical testing using randomized controlled trials (the kind of trial that proved dexametasone and disproved ivermectin, hydroxyquinoline etc. as a therapeutic for covid).
    • pessimizer 5y ago
      And the final step, declaring that disabling a cell mechanism cannot possibly have long term effects.