Affordable Care Act and Veterans Affairs. Military vets get fully funded government health care. ACA partly expanded Medicaid and provides government subsidized insurance that is bought by some ppl without employer based insurance.

And Medicaid, ACA and VA

Yes, typically 1.5-2X as much as OECD countries. And the outcomes are worse.

GWAS finds risk alleles, not causative alleles, as they’re only performed on complex (polygenic) traits. But what they say isn’t exactly true as WGS is sometimes done, even though WES is much more common.

This encapsulates one of the most debilitating problems in academic science right now. How is this possible, and who/what is responsible? Also, are these data posted somewhere?

Factoring anything in other than the scientific relevance is unethical and unscientific, unless there are multiple, equally valid options for citations, and including all of them puts you over the journal limit.

I think the boys in crisis narrative is mostly about the west, particularly the U.S., so I’m not sure if global analyses will be helpful here. Both young men and women seem to be in crises of well-being compared to past generations, at least in the U.S.

2/ really relevant for humans, and thus the change from 100% heritability to something lower is less likely to occur in such a drastic sense. Also, nothing is 100% heritable (or 0%) in human populations, I'd wager.

1/ Right, but this is only when the environment changes, right? So heritability in environment 1 is 100%, but if environment 1 changes in certain ways heritability becomes <100%. I think in the real world there is always massive environmental variation for ppl, so the "perfect" environment 1 isn't

I don’t understand the claim in the abstract that heritability doesn’t tell us the relative role of genes and environment in the development a trait. That’s exactly what it tells us, albeit in a specific population at a specific point in time.

And…..we don’t even have good ways of estimating it!

This is so exciting, especially with the corroborative pre-print from Stanford. This locus is so important but the genetic association has been such a tough nut to crack.

Looks very exciting, and I just applied - I hope it's not too late!

Nvm!

I’m confused, is this satire or real?

Very nice analysis. I may have missed it, but did this take into account the baseline 10% MYF that NIH has most years?

Where do you see 40%? I thought MYF was going to be limited to 2025 levels, which was about 25%

Looks like early neuro differentiation to me. Maybe SOX2 and TUJ1 or MAP2?

No it’s actually the overall acceptance rate. 65% of submissions get peer reviewed.

I’m surprised at the relatively high (35-45%) acceptance rate, given the quality of the journal! They must get very good submissions in general.

3/ also, in the context of PTA’s other films, I think it’s even less likely that this movie should be interpreted as anything other than artists trying to make interesting art.

2/ or go -100% and make up an entirely new universe with new laws of physics. My impression is the author thought this movie was something that it wasn’t, i.e. a vessel to promote (or disparage) specific political and cultural movements.

1/ I didn’t interpret the movie as making any attempt to do anything other than be a movie. I don’t think it was designed as political messaging, or to perfectly reflect any specifics about current or past American culture or politics. Movies can go documentary style with 100% adherence to real life

Help me, I don’t get it

Wow!

I think this is likely, at least in steady state. They may be more important in cell lineage or cell state changes, but overall they seem to do very little for gene expression. E/P interactions seem to form before, and independently from, TADs, after mitosis

2/ dynamic, doesn’t fuse or exhibit fission, and doesn’t exhibit concentration-dependent behavior, it can’t have formed through LLPS right?

1/ I think it’s falsifiable (in theory) to hypothesize that a specific body formed through LLPS, but not that LLPS exists *somewhere* in the cell. You can’t falsify the latter bc it’s not feasible, but you could falsify whether a specific body formed through LLPS, right? If it is not spherical,

Can LLPS exist in cells without scaffolds, as defined here? IOW is your critique about the proposed mechanism of LLPS, or LLPS in cells in general?

I’d appreciate a nomination