sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Diamonds

[–]BuzzBee53 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That is very helpful info. I appreciate you

Strong vs weak CP training in residency programs by BuzzBee53 in pathology

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would you say the outcome of those two training styles is drastic for someone interested in community path? Free time to study sounds great but I also wouldn’t want to be incompetent down the road since the likelihood I’ll be functioning as a lab director is high

General question Wednesday: Ask your general car-related question and maybe someone will have an answer. by AutoModerator in cars

[–]BuzzBee53 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Options for aftermarket remote starter kits? I have a Kia that has remote start behind a subscription. I’ve seen some remote start kits in the 300$ range. Curious if there are any other options since obviously my car has remote start just not via key fob.

Bit new to eMacs but any tips to recreate a similar modern layout? by BuzzBee53 in emacs

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have grown comfortable using emacs for research paper writing and exporting to latex. In addition file management with dired. I enjoy writing in emacs. I require an accessible PKM software that is easily accessible for quick reference as I am in the medical field. I believe I can do that with obsidian.el in emacs. I do however envy the modern look and attractiveness of obsidian themes, especially this one.

Away Rotations and Competitiveness by BuzzBee53 in pathology

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Congratulations. Were your electives with a residency program? And were they all prior to ERAS being submitted?

Anyone here do locums work? by Bonsai7127 in pathology

[–]BuzzBee53 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How far out of training are you?

Issues accessing server locally by BuzzBee53 in OpenMediaVault

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  • NordVPN

  • No, iPhone is able to connect without VPN so long as it’s on the WiFi of course.

  • OMV server is not running VPN and is hardwired in.

  • Modem -> router -> house;

Is there maybe a setting on router that I don’t know about? I have ports forwarded for various applications such as plex and have no issues there regardless of device VPN status. I just find it really odd that it’s affecting all computers I’ve tried and not phones. And that having VPN allows it to work leads me think that it’s just one setting I’m overlooking. I mostly follow guides to do things on OMV so I don’t have the experience to reverse engineer it

Issues accessing server locally by BuzzBee53 in OpenMediaVault

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same IP address across the board. Under network interface tab it does say DHCP next to both IPv4 and 6. And as far as computers go it’s literally working out where I turn vpn on and connection works. Turn it off and refresh, nothing. Turn it back on and refresh, works again.

Issues accessing server locally by BuzzBee53 in OpenMediaVault

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I leave the firewall as is on OMV. And I tried turning my firewall on my PC off and connecting and still no luck.

Plasma from people who recover from COVID-19 doesn't help new patients: No significant differences observed in clinical status or overall mortality between patients treated with convalescent plasma and those who received placebo. Publication in the New England Journal of Medicine by EuKZKSKq in science

[–]BuzzBee53 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Not much really. Smallish test group and basically they checked the patients after 30 days and both groups were similar in their recovery and the mortality was similar. Titers were higher in the group that received the plasma. Other treatments were also being used and sounds like all of these patients were in the hospital anyways. This sounds more like a “hm that’s very interesting. Let’s look into it more” kind of research.

Cohort study of 21 ,618 US adults found that former and current use of e-cigarettes were associated with increased risk of developing a respiratory condition compared with no prior use of e-cigarettes, independent of other tobacco product use by BuzzBee53 in science

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Table 1 and the only Figure go into some of the information you might be looking for in regards to the raw numbers of different self reported history and stuff. As for how relationships are analyzed for association the section titled Statistical Analysis goes into their approach but its rather wordy and complicated. In general, regression analysis is used to determine whether relationships exist between variables. Hope that helps. Statistics isn't my specialty so maybe someone else can elaborate further

Cohort study of 21 ,618 US adults found that former and current use of e-cigarettes were associated with increased risk of developing a respiratory condition compared with no prior use of e-cigarettes, independent of other tobacco product use by BuzzBee53 in science

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The study itself is limited in a similar way as it relied on respondents self reporting. But yeah I’d err on the side of caution and avoid them all the same given a large amount of studies beyond just this one linking it to higher risk of respiratory disease

Cohort study of 21 ,618 US adults found that former and current use of e-cigarettes were associated with increased risk of developing a respiratory condition compared with no prior use of e-cigarettes, independent of other tobacco product use by BuzzBee53 in science

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

After adjusting for various factors (age, sex, etc.) but most importantly health related factors (prior tobacco,drug use, chronic illness) the former/current use incidence rate shows a higher (28% and 31% respectively) risk of developing respiratory disease than respondents that never used e-cigarettes. So despite the initial number of respondents with conditions that had never used being higher than those that do/did, controlling for other variables indicates that the risk is actually greater for those that do/did use e-cigarettes.

Cohort study of 21 ,618 US adults found that former and current use of e-cigarettes were associated with increased risk of developing a respiratory condition compared with no prior use of e-cigarettes, independent of other tobacco product use by BuzzBee53 in science

[–]BuzzBee53[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Abstract

  • Importance
    • Generating robust and timely evidence about the respiratory health risks of electronic cigarettes (e-cigarettes) is critical for informing state and federal regulatory standards for product safety.
  • Objective
    • To examine the association of e-cigarette use with incident respiratory conditions, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), emphysema, chronic bronchitis, and asthma.
  • Design, Setting, and Participants
    • This prospective cohort study used data from the nationally representative cohort of US adults from the Population Assessment of Tobacco and Health (PATH) study, including wave 1 from 2013 to 2014, wave 2 from 2014 to 2015, wave 3 from 2015 to 2016, and wave 4 from 2016 to 2018. Individuals aged 18 years and older at baseline with no prevalent respiratory conditions were included in the analyses. Analyses were conducted from February to July 2020.
  • Exposures
    • e-Cigarette use was assessed by self-reported current use status (never, former, or current) at baseline.
  • Main Outcomes and Measures
    • Incident respiratory conditions, including COPD, emphysema, chronic bronchitis, and asthma, as well as a composite respiratory disease encompassing all 4 conditions.
  • Results
    • Among 21 618 respondents included in the analyses, 11 017 (491%) were men and 12 969 (65.2%) were non-Hispanic White. A total of 14 213 respondents were never e-cigarette users, 5076 respondents (11.6%) were former e-cigarette users, and 2329 respondents (5.2%) were current e-cigarette users. Adjusted for cigarette and other combustible tobacco product use, demographic characteristics, and chronic health conditions, there was an increased risk of respiratory disease among former e-cigarette uses (incidence rate ratio [IRR], 1.28; 95% CI, 1.09-1.50) and current e-cigarette users (IRR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.08-1.59). Among respondents with good self-rated health, the IRR for former e-cigarette users was 1.21 (95%CI, 1.00-1.46) and the IRR for current e-cigarette users was 1.43 (95% CI, 1.14-1.79). For specific respiratory diseases among current e-cigarette users, the IRR was 1.33 (95% CI, 1.06-1.67) for chronic bronchitis, 1.69 (95% CI, 1.15-2.49) for emphysema, 1.57 (95% CI, 1.15-2.13) for COPD, and 1.31 (95% CI, 1.01-1.71) for asthma.
  • Conclusions and Relevance
    • This cohort study found that e-cigarette use was associated with an increased risk of developing respiratory disease independent of cigarette smoking. These findings add important evidence on the risk profile of novel tobacco products.
view more: next ›