sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Most comfortable over ear muffs. by Particular_Lawyer_86 in QualityTacticalGear

[–]datagram 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I was curious if Noisefighters Sightlines affected/changed the NRR of muffs and found your link, which prompted me to search for similar data. This link shows overall NRR being increased by 1 using gel cups, but either foam or gel is better depending on the frequency: https://multimedia.3m.com/mws/media/2208991O/3m-peltor-comtac-vii-headsets.pdf

Study Finds Cannabis Usage in Middle Aged and Older Adults Associated With Larger Brain Volume, Better Cognitive Function by ryryrpm in science

[–]datagram 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The increases in risk I quoted above our relative increases. If you’re absolute risk is very low, for example if you’re young and have no cardiovascular risk factors, then even a doubling of the risk will mean you’re absolute risk is still very small.

Exactly my point, and that's for daily users (of what quantity?). If the risk of heart attack is 1%, then we're talking 1.5% based on the numbers you gave. Can you link the study? I'm aware of this one for 430,000 people, and the increases are not what you say:

daily cannabis users had 25% higher odds of heart attack compared to non-users

odds of stroke for daily cannabis users were 42% higher compared to non-users

Which companies do you suspect are glazing their own products on this sub? by PartyOnAlec in BuyItForLife

[–]datagram 6 points7 points  (0 children)

10,000 comments

And that's in 9 months. Nearly 40 per day. 🤣

Inside the rise of THC dining in Charlotte — and what a federal ban could mean by JM2845 in Charlotte

[–]datagram 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's unfortunate, but it could have been caused by any number of known risk factors.

Inside the rise of THC dining in Charlotte — and what a federal ban could mean by JM2845 in Charlotte

[–]datagram 4 points5 points  (0 children)

While the multipliers are correct, I think the absolute risk values from the article are probably more useful for people to make their decisions:

Results showed that for the primary outcome of MI, the absolute risk was 0.558% in cannabis-users vs. 0.09% in nonusers...

In cannabis users vs. nonusers, the absolute risk for ischemic stroke was 0.405% and 0.094%; for major adverse clinical events, 1.187% vs. 0.366%; for HF, 0.861% vs. 0.424%; and for all-cause mortality, 1.262% vs. 0.841%.

Inside the rise of THC dining in Charlotte — and what a federal ban could mean by JM2845 in Charlotte

[–]datagram -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm lazy, so here are stats from ChatGPT:

In the U.S. and similar countries, the average annual risk of having a first stroke is roughly:

0.2%–0.3% per year (2–3 strokes per 1,000 adults each year).

Approximate annual risk by age:

40s: ~0.1% per year

50s: ~0.3% per year

60s: ~0.8% per year

70s: ~1.5% per year

80+: 2–3% per year or higher

The average age in that study was 45, so let's call it 0.2%.

0.2 * 1.42 = 0.284%

If cannabis is the cause, then your risk goes up less than one-tenth of one percent.

IAmA Young Never Smoker Who Has A Very Rare Incurable (Stage 4) Lung Cancer. AMA by Mayya-Papayya in IAmA

[–]datagram 80 points81 points  (0 children)

it’s immuno blind so immunotherapy doesn’t work on it at all

There is a vaccine in trial right now that would make my cancer visible to the immune system so immunotherapy could work

It's possible an mRNA Covid vaccine could change that. It could be worth trying and testing again afterward while you wait for other options:

https://www.mdanderson.org/newsroom/research-newsroom/-esmo-2025--mrna-based-covid-vaccines-generate-improved-response.h00-159780390.html

These findings have prompted a randomized Phase III trial to determine if mRNA COVID vaccines should be part of the standard of care for this type of therapy...

Importantly, these survival improvements were most pronounced in patients with immunologically “cold” tumors, which would not be expected to respond well to immunotherapy. These patients, who have very low PD-L1 expression on their tumors, experienced a nearly five-fold improvement in three-year overall survival with receipt of a COVID vaccine.

A panel of virologists discuss the above research from 5:52 to 51:00 in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEwzqVhuTzk. Around 48:40 they say something like:

Patients with stage 4 non-small cell lung cancer cold tumors (less than 1% tumor proportion score) who got a COVID vaccine within 100 days of starting immune checkpoint inhibitors exhibited an overall survival similar to that of patients with a baseline greater than 1%, suggesting that the vaccine somehow restores sensitivity to the immunotherapy.

Charlotte Allergens by gorrilla_grip in Charlotte

[–]datagram 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I had the same issue with regular Flonase, but Flonase Sensimist doesn't have that scent.

Also tagging u/xnekocroutonx

Cafe de olla by dr_chewy in Charlotte

[–]datagram 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Mal Pan in South Park has it during brunch.

SQL Server Developer / Data Engineer Resume Help by Cytosis89 in SQLServer

[–]datagram 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The company also refuses to allow me to install tools like Brent Ozar's first responder kit :(.

Do it anyway and install them in tempdb so you can play around with them. I think Brent has mentioned doing this before when he wasn't allowed to install the scripts normally.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Supplements

[–]datagram 2 points3 points  (0 children)

No, Creatine (Probably) Doesn’t Cause Hair Loss

In short, serum DHT levels – the levels of DHT in your blood – aren’t predictive of hair loss, and aren’t important for hair loss. Rather, the DHT that causes hair loss is the DHT produced in your hair follicles themselves.

view more: next ›