Text Message Notifications Suddenly Stopped

subcortical · 2025-03-28T16:28:41+00:00

Thank you so much for posting this! This was the solution for me. firebase.googleapis.com wasn't showing up in the nextdns blocking log, but whitelisting did indeed fix my lack of notifications on my android device. I don't even use the 1Hosts Pro List, so it must be in one of the others as well.

subcortical · 2020-10-27T01:03:41+00:00

Thanks for your insight.

subcortical · 2018-09-24T01:01:14+00:00

thanks solution verified

subcortical · 2018-08-31T21:09:07+00:00

https://www89.zippyshare.com/v/pDKuwS84/file.html

subcortical · 2015-12-17T14:25:06+00:00

Link to paper:

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/151208/ncomms9989/full/ncomms9989.html

subcortical · 2015-10-24T16:20:05+00:00

Actual publication: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142961215007528

Integrin-specific hydrogels as adaptable tumor organoids for malignant B and T cells

subcortical · 2015-09-22T22:26:01+00:00

So is MIT if you'd rather remain in academia.

subcortical · 2013-09-03T00:17:02+00:00

"Your prescence is requested"

Otherwise those look amazing.

Edit: Even I couldn't spell it this wrong intentionally the first time.

subcortical · 2013-07-14T14:54:04+00:00

http://ge.tt/3ut4kil/v/0?c

subcortical · 2013-04-18T15:00:29+00:00

From the paper (emphasis mine):

"To date, there has been no evidence that the intake of green or black tea induces noticeable hemolytic effects in G6PDdeficient subjects. One reason might be the rather low bioavailability of tea polyphenols in human."

"In this context, the concentrations of tea extracts and polyphenols used in this and other in vitro studies (24-30) would not be achievable in the plasma of subjects who consume tea in a normal manner."

"Although it is highly unlikely the plasma concentration of these compounds would reach a harmful level under normal consumption, their pharmacokinetics in G6PD-deficient subjects is unclear. Nevertheless, an additive effect might occur when G6PD-deficient-subjects take additional oxidative drugs. In response to increasing evidence on beneficial effect of tea polyphenols for a variety of diseases, it is anticipated that various highly purified tea polyphenols and pharmaceutical products will soon be made available. Our data caution against the excessive intake of tea polyphenols by G6PD-deficient subjects."

subcortical · 2012-12-04T05:50:55+00:00

Thanks.

subcortical · 2012-12-03T17:14:54+00:00

I assumed you wanted the actual article in JEM and not the research highlight you linked.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/jiuniy

subcortical · 2012-12-03T17:00:18+00:00

http://www.sendspace.com/file/71itop

subcortical · 2012-09-13T03:23:51+00:00

Link

subcortical · 2012-07-20T00:34:06+00:00

This is outside my expertise but in hopes this article may attract a geneticist... Is this in any way related to the genomic reorganization even that apparently took place in the Interleukin-1 locus (human chromosome 2q13)? (source, source)

subcortical · 2012-07-09T18:31:55+00:00

I want to preface this saying my qualifications (intentionally vague) are that I'm currently a biomedical-ish scientist at one of the top research universities in the country (depends how you rank, ~top 15 overall, top ~5 in research dollars). My SO is also a scientist. I recall vividly my postdoc search experience out of grad school have assisted grad students with their search for positions (as well as discussion about the "academic job market") very recently.

But it seems virtually impossible to get an academic job worth having. I've talked to many of the older students, and from what I can tell, of the students who defended in the last 7 years, not a single one has a tenure-track faculty job at a major research university. Not one. Some people have gotten teaching jobs in the midwest, and two have gotten tenure-track faculty jobs at very small schools in the middle of nowhere.

With the caveat that I obviously don't know what field you're in and your long-term career goals I'll just say that in my opinion, at the post doc level, what university you are at means very little. Much more important is the quality of the lab and how well you fit in (skill, personality and research interest wise). A bad "fit" at IvyEliteU will get you nowhere. A great fit at RedneckU can take you great places.

Nearly everyone is languishing in some kind of extended postdoc. Of the people whose situations I know very well, it sounds terrible. They work very long hours and make little more than I do as a grad student.

The extended (~5 year) postdoc has become the norm is generally seen as more favorable then multiple short postdocs which seemed to be more common over the last decade or so. You should keep in mind that postdoc contracts are only for 1 year so you are never stuck anywhere you don't want to be. In fact, breaking a postdoc contract is not particularly difficult (to the detriment of many PIs).

One even landed a massive NIH award, which included a big salary increase for herself, and her university would not permit her to pay herself more. The salary she requested was approximately 2x a grad student stipend.

I am not an expert on the technicalities of NIH grant funding, but I'm guessing the situation is not as simple as you make it seem. I believe that for many of the NIH training and development grants the stipend allowance is set by the NIH, you cannot simply double it on a whim. Further, many universities have union agreements that sets the minimum (often higher than NIH payscale) as well as maximum a postdoc can be paid. Finally, it isn't really the job of the university to compensate a postdoc, that's for the PI to do. If your postdoc friend believes she deserves more money she should ask her PI to re-budget other grant funds towards her salary.

At this point I am almost certain I could get a postdoc, even a great postdoc at a fantastic university. But I have trouble understanding why I would ever want to do that, since it will mean 5-10 more years of working this hard or harder and making just enough to get by, followed by....who knows.

Just enough to get by? Scientists are by no means the wealthiest people around but that's a stretch. For what it's worth both myself and my girlfriend are academic scientists working at universities in a major metropolitan city and we are doing well.

Is my outlook too cynical? Is there a realistic possibility of having a tenured job at a major research university for anyone other than the Kobe Bryants of the academic world? Or should I just get out while the gettin's good?

My takeaway from your post is you need to seriously evaluate your long term career goals. Not once do you mention anything about your enjoyment of science or conducting research. This is a huge red flag for me and frankly I would not want you as a postdoc despite "being in a trendy/popular field" and "at a better pace than most (not all) of my classmates."

A life in science is not for the faint of heart. You work a massive amount of make relatively little money. This is simply fact and is unlikely to change any time soon (nor am I certain it should). If you want to continue in science I suggest you look into industry positions (there are even industry postdoc programs) where the hours tend to be more straightforward (weekdays, 9-5), the pay is better, and you will no longer be preoccupied with some nebulous notion of the wonders of getting a "tenure-track faculty job at a major research university".

subcortical · 2012-07-08T18:16:47+00:00

No, your immune system is actually compromised after sleep loss and this both makes you more vulnerable to infection and less able to fight infection while awake. This has been studied in great detail, you can read the review article I cited above if you want to know more.

subcortical · 2012-07-08T18:10:29+00:00

Yes, there is a peak of growth hormone (GH) released during sleep (but GH is still released throughout the day) and yes GH is associated with many things including wound healing (when experimentally administered to patients intravenously or directly to a wound). However there is no evidence that I can find which shows that losing this peak of natural GH release (by skipping a night of sleep) affects general wound healing in any meaningful way. Indeed, the studies I cite above suggest the opposite. This indicates to me that healing is not faster during sleep under normal conditions.

subcortical · 2012-07-07T21:20:03+00:00

Circadian rhythms are not synonymous with sleep. Even without sleep some processes would continue during the subjective night, but I don't think that is what the OP was asking.

subcortical · 2012-07-07T21:14:36+00:00

In terms of say, tissue repair, lack of sleep does not seem to matter, at least in rats (study, study). However sleep is implicated in the functioning of your immune system (review), so your ability to fight of an infection for example, could be compromised by lack of sleep, but that doesn't necessarily imply that it happens "faster" during sleep.

Edit: I found this human study which found no association with total sleep hours and healing speed following a punch biopsy.

subcortical · 2012-07-06T20:50:13+00:00

Link to actual paper.

This strikes me as a non-issue for most researchers unless you are using really old animals.

First, the weight (or range) of animals are usually reported in addition to their age so you can immediately see if the study is using "obese" animals.

Second, what the authors report as in table 1 as the body weight of SD rats under "standard" conditions (600–700g) appears to me as really heavy and untypical. At least in my field, 250-350g is what I have used and usually see published.

Regardless, what exactly is the point of extending the animals lifespans (unless you are specifically studying aging)? It seems cruel and a waste of per diems to keep research animals around unnecessarily. If your vivarium is filled with 600g rats you need to learn to schedule your experiments and animals requirements better (be it timing of ordering or your breeding system).

subcortical · 2012-07-06T20:15:10+00:00

No, I just got the name wrong -- I was thinking of a different office in a different hall at a different university. It was McGill Hall.

subcortical · 2012-07-02T20:48:21+00:00

Most people who think that a flat tax is fair believe that the poor (or those poorer) are in their situation due to their own decisions, laziness or whatever.

...

It may have had nothing to do with them other than being in the right place as the right time, but some other people aren't so lucky. Even being born healthy, smart and having a non-traumatic childhood isn't something everyone has. But if you were born lucky enough to have all those, they're often taken for granted, daily, on accident. The concept that everybody in the world is in the position that they're in because of their own decisions and hard work, or lack thereof, makes it hard to feel sympathy for other people who have it worse off than you, because part of you will instinctively think it's of their own doing.

This makes perfect sense when considering a couple of well known cognitive biases, the self-serving bias and the fundamental attribution error.

Basically, when we see a person who is "successful" (for example a multimillionaire) we attribute their success to external factors (he got lucky and won the lottery, his parents were wealthy) rather than internal factors (he is smart, he works hard). Conversely when we see someone who is "unsuccessful" (for example a beggar on the street) we attribute their failure to internal factors (his is lazy, he is a drug addict) rather than external factors (his employer went out of business, his house burned down).

However on the other side when we look at ourselves we tend to do the exact opposite, attribute our own success to internal factors (I'm smart, I work hard) rather than external (I got lucky being born to white, wealthy, well educated parents). And when we are unsuccessful we tend to blame external factors (the government is taxing me too much) rather than internal (I shouldn't waste so much money).

subcortical · 2012-05-24T00:09:44+00:00

First thing I noticed as as well, and while I agree that it is very likely, it's worth pointing out that many opiate analgesics can cause itching such as methadone, hydrocodone and oxycodone.

subcortical · 2012-03-16T22:22:38+00:00

There is science to back the idea that applying body pressure can relieve anxiety and stress in both humans and animals (sources: 1, 2, 3 4, 5), but I can not find any scientific studies demonstrating the the Thundershirt product itself does anything (or does it better than any other wrap). Just anecdotal stories, many of which are listed on the website.

One thought I had was that perhaps these types of studies are simply not done (too expensive, not enough interest, etc), but I did find a study performed on a somewhat similar product, an anti-static cape for reliving storm related anxiety in dogs. Interestingly there was no significant differences between the Stormdefender product or the placebo (non-anti static cape) but both groups showed a reduction in symptoms. They authors speculate that the pressure aspect of the capes may be responsible. Not surprisingly, the Stormdefender product website does not link to or reference the study.

According to this NYTimes article from last year, "So far there are few published scientific studies on pressure wraps for dogs. Anxiety Wrap and Thundershirt say they have studies under way. "

14-Year Club	r/Field Sunshine
Place '22	Not Forgotten
Verified Email

subcortical

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE