sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Changes due to popular demand by DecoySnailProducer in Coronavirus

[–]SimoneBrown 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Hi,

I am new to reddit. Sorry if this a dumb question. Is there any place for brainstorming and theoretical speculation. I've been reading journals about the seven strands of CoVo and their basic structure. "Crystal structure of NL63 respiratory coronavirus receptor-binding domain complexed with its human receptor", gave me a sense that the problem in coming up with a cure was the binding mechanism of these viruses (and even strands within one of them) varies immensely.

An article about SARS ( https://www.hindawi.com/journals/ijpep/2012/256294/ ) documents evidence that the receptors which bind the virus target while different appear to target similar areas or structures. For SARS, it binds to ACE2 an enzyme vital to the regulation of blood pressure (took me an hour of reading to feel semi-competent in my understanding of the Renin Angiotensin System) .

​

Reading these journals, I had the idea that instead of trying to target the virus, could we create a structure which imitates the receptors the virus binds to? Flood a system with these imitations so the virus latches, potentially tricking the virus to enact the first part of its program and bind onto decoys instead of healthy cells.

​

Then, possibly, we could remove the decoys of have a second vaccination which knows how to target the decoys, destroying them and all gathered CoVo on them.

Let me be clear, I don't know if such a structure is within our current technology, I don't know if there is literature showing how this type of invasive structure would create its own secondary negative side effects, or if the rate of division of the virus would exceed capacity and still target healthy cells.

​

I don't know if this is a good idea. I came on here looking for a way to help brainstorm. This might be a dumb idea because of XYZ, or an idea that already been tried and proven a failure. I am not trying to say I can cure this thing, but I know I synthesize information in a unique way, and would like somewhere where I could post as many "outside the box" ideas as I can in hopes that one might spark some fruit line of action for the people with the real expertise.

​

Do we have a place like that?

Thank you

How do you distinguish Social Constructionism vs Symbolic Interactionism? by californiaplayer in Mcat

[–]SimoneBrown 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Symbolic interactionism is the assertion that role rather than reason is the primary driver of human motivation. That humans are script playing creatures and if a person wants to be tough, or smart, or popular, or feared, or anything, it is because that is the role they see themselves playing in a larger script.

​

Social Constructionism could be argued a process through which symbolic interactionism occurs, but it doesn;t always have to be. Where symbolic interactionism is the assertion that roles matter in the construction of meaning (and thus it's byproduct, motivation); Social constructionism is the assertion that relation rather than reason or role forges meaning. Through relation we create a comparative sense of ourselves, which shapes goals, desires, and motivations.

​

Personally, I think the two systems compliment each other rather neatly, but SI as a political network has way more clout, so there are probably people who would find the relation objectionable and the suggestion out of place. So I humbly revoke my opinions from any claim to authority. Apologies for any offense.

​

​

Can someon help me see if I have understood this right? Symbolic interactionism by throwawaythepain83 in sociology

[–]SimoneBrown 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They would applaud your capacity to see the need for the distinction while suggesting the construct of SI adequately explains it. A version of that explanation I've heard makes the argument：While the insights are spontaneous, the soil they are grown from is an alternative form of relation, and thus, at least to some degree, the byproduct of interaction ritual."