CharonY

No problem, it was what I meant with compliance. Though I see that I could have written it more clearly.

That is what I said.

Yes, if you wash the same time with cold water and soap, it is as efficient in reducing bacterial load. The important bit is to work the soap in thoroughly followed by extensive rinsing and scrubbing. A good antibacterial wash can take 1-5 minutes.

It does not make sense. It is not that light selective activates or inactivates genes rather there are specific genes responsive to them as there are typically enzymes that can be activated by light and then control gene expression. None of the things proposed in the last two pages make any sense for bacterial inactivation.

The efficiency of removing germs are primarily dependent on the use of soap and the length (and thoroughness) of your wash. Warm water increases the likelihood of compliance (i.e. washing your hands longer) as with cold water it may become uncomfrotable for some folks.

I am happy to credit Lincoln with abolishing slavery although today Republicans are the party of choice for white supremacists.

That is not likely the point though. I do not know the situation in the UK, but if a disabled, but otherwise capable person applies for a job, they would at least be considered equally if not preferentially if they are citizens. or permanent residents. I.e. if they are not in the workforce, why should they suddenly be a replacement for loss in workers?

To be fair, the industrial lobbying is not only targeting Republicans. The lobbyist have been very successful in demonizing the EPA which resulted in their decline since the 80s and budget cuts have also been enacted by democrats (though not in the same celebratory manner) . However, the current administration is not only doing budget cuts, but is essentially trying to systematically dismantle the agency by putting anti-EPA persons into strategic positions and firing folks that provide crucial environmental information. By undercutting science they try to control the flow of information. It is probably going to work until they realize that the resulting health issues are going to be far more expensive.

Well, if your go-to distraction is bigotry and hatred, it tells a lot about your thought processes.

For natural antibodies, I think so. But not universally for the adaptive response (the differentiation . I am not up to date on current research so I would refer you to some recent reviews. Nutt et al (Nature Reviews Immunology 15, 160–171 2015) describes the differentiation of plasma cell and their differentiation with some information on the molecular basis. However, it may be somewhat advanced. I also found an article by Chu et al. ( Scand J Immunol. 2011 Jun;73(6):508-11) which describes more how these plasma cells survive and sustain antibody production. I guess there must be some easier literature around in textbooks somewhere, but unfortunately this is not really my field and I cannot make any recommendation off to the top of my head.

It is incorrect to assume that complex organism acquired new genetic functions. In fact, eukaryotes have lost a lot in terms of metabolic capabilities. In turn regulatory and signaling function have become more complex in eukaryotes. For example, the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans has about the same number (or slightly more) than humans. Most of the genome are not genes but are remnants of our evolutionary history (e.g. viral sequences), though it is quite unclear how relevant they are for normal cell/tissue/organismal functions.

These words, together in that order. No sense they make.

I assume we are talking about annual GDP growth rate. When we look at those numbers we see that the highest average rates were (in order) Kennedy (5.4%), Johnson (5%), Clinton (3.8%), Reagan (3.5%), Carter (3.2%) Nixon (3%), Eisenhower (2.5%), H.W. Bush (2.1%), Bush (1.6%), Obama (1.2%). I am a bit lost on the overall point of it. At least I would be hard-pressed to see that either party has a working plan to benefit working class. The literature is contentious, but there are really no good stories regarding the US working class. Some conclude that the overall social mobility is declining since the 90 (esp. compared to other countries, and especially in the lowest income classes, as the paper from Wilkinson and Pickett suggest). Others with longer-term data suggest that it was always low. One thing that seems to be a common themes is that it is consistently overrated in the US.

Or how about just use your eyes. If your pupils dilate or constrict, does your field of view change suddenly? Neither theoretical nor empirical evidence point to a change in the field of view.

The OP has a number of misconceptions to start with. Obviously iso and shutter speed have of no influence on how much light passes through a lens. It only affects image exposure due to increased sensitivity of the detector (or film) or by collecting light for a longer time. What is not clear to me is what you mean specifically with field of view. If you mean the angular extent of an view imaged on a sensor. In photography, this is depends on the focal length of the lens and the size of the sensor/film. If you think that aperture should influence that, I'd like a more precise explanation why you think so. What the aperture does influence is the depth of focus, which is related to the circle of confusion. It would help if you could specify what you mean precisely and where you are getting confused.

Nope, that is not an example of evolution per se. What is mentioned is technically just different selective pressures but it is wrapped in an easy to misunderstand context. And even the use of stone age is problematic. It covers a range of ~ 3.4 million years and tools were found over 2 million years old. I.e. while they were simple, it is not that they just discovered, they were used for an extended amount of time within a time frame that is roughly covered by the term stone age.

Also, all these threads show a disturbing lack of understanding what correlations are.

Mechanistically, long-term presence of antibodies are produced by a range of long-lived plasma cells from different lineages. Members of the B1 lineage are involved in the secretion of low affinity antibodies (mostly of the igM isotype, IIRC) that are maintained throughout life (also called natural antibodies) and which do not need to be induced by a specific antigen presentation. For the adaptive response the case is, to my knowledge not entirely clear. However, this knowledge is about a decade old and more information may be available now. What is assumed is that short-lived plasma blasts, (short-lived, proliferating, less differentiated) migrated to the one marrow and terminally differentiate into plasma cells. These can be either short or long-lived. At least in mice, the long-lived plasma cells have shown to maintain adaptive serum antibody levels through the lifetime of the animal. It has been proposed that it is the balance between plasma blasts and plasma cells that ultimately decide the length for which antibody levels are maintained in blood.

There are various cell types that lose organelles, including the nucleus. These cells are incapable of replication and tend to be limited in their biochemical capabilities and often have a limited life cycle. They need to be replaced, typically by less differentiated precursor cells.

Almost all traits fall into the both category. Genes generally code for proteins and their combines biochemical actions result in cellular and organismal phenotypes. However, they react to feedback, such as e.g. availability of nutrients. When a cell lacks the appropriate amino acid certain proteins cannot be produced without activation of anabolic pathways to synthesize those, for example. Genes always act in the context of their cellular environment.

Most humorous trait: my looks.

Most of the bacterial inactivation outside UV are based on exciting porphyrins which then can react with oxygen to form reactive oxygen species, which ultimately kills the cells. It is also cytotoxic for eukaryotic cells (including human) but the light does not have a lot of penetration (and we are covered by dead cells).

Actually, the worse thing is arguably the forced kiss, even if it is less instagrammy. But if we are at it, there was hearing where house lawmakers described pervasive sexual harassment. Again, it shows how pervasive it is at any workplace.

It could be considered sexual harassment and as Franken said, it really does not matter that much, as it is about how the victim felt about it. That being said, the main difference at this point between Franken and Trump, Moore and Wiener is that the latter have shown a behavioral pattern, combined with little remorse.

Now think about the error rate when you have runs of identical bases.