Didn’t Microsoft try to pay for a nuclear plant to be recommissioned just to power a data centre or something?

Oh no, they don’t like pylons either. They just want coal plants in poor people’s gardens and subterranean power cabling.

Maybe ICUs will upgrade their staffing ratios instead if the costs change that much

Anyone using these apps at this point are fucked.

I have the Android app, but I can download podcast episodes on WiFi to save on mobile data. That’s as good a reason as any to use the app.

What is the point of your comment?

First-in-human just means it’s the first time that specific therapy is being tested on humans instead of animals (e.g. mice, dogs, monkeys), and the primary objective of the trial is to test that it’s safe for use in humans. It doesn’t refer to the concept of gene editing or lowering cholesterol.

Get ready for something they were doing 20 years ago?

I don’t think it’s anything as sinister from the current government. I’m not saying it’s a good idea, but they’re more stupid and weak than they are totalitarian. British Labour has had an obsession with “tech” solutions for social issues since the start of the Blair years. Sometimes it works, but as often it’s mired in incompetency and corruption.

I suspect that this recent spate of apparent puritanism is because they recognise that gender-based and sexual violence are “issues” after the discourse around Adolescence, but they can’t/don’t want to do anything actually meaningful (improve welfare, job opportunities, life prospects) so are latching onto what they believe are “easy” solutions. No-one with power actually understands how net infrastructure works, or cares about privacy as a principle, but they do have a group think that also leads them to think that this might make some inroads with “the right.”

It’s all absolute garbage being slapped together by career politicians who don’t understand anything and are primarily interested either in their next election or their post-parliament careers.

eminent

I’ll be back when they get back up.

I wish all mine were as good as the best I’ve had.

Yes, though if the sponsor is doing it on the cheap then they might pick facilities and monitors who don’t care or don’t have the capacity to pick up on all the details, or scrutinise minutiae. The monitor can only QC what’s written down for example, and an investigator can be perfectly capable of having the bare minimum of a consent process and copy pasta as if it was done thoroughly.

I’m glad all my participants are of sound mind; the idea of navigating the world of incapacity and research gives me the heebie jeebies.

When it comes to therapies that are likely toxic, e.g. chemo, that’s why the sponsor has to demonstrate through pre-clinical data that there is a high enough likelihood that the benefits will outweigh the harm that it is a legitimate therapy to trial on humans. Even then there should still be thorough, audited processes for obtaining fully informed consent before recruiting patients into these trials, including making certain they are aware the trial may cause more harm than standard of care.

It’s the burden of evidence required in pre-clinical data that makes me defend animal testing despite being vegan.