sjmcmahon

6 ms·

1.
by sjmcmahon 1mo ago
Setting aside my bias about whether my large glass of wine last night was one drink or two, I find the claims in this post odd. None of the issues noted seem inherently problematic, and indeed several are as I would expect. Disclaimer: not
2.
by sjmcmahon 3mo ago
Most radiobiological effects for acute exposures are actually quadratic in dose - this applies to things like mutations, chromosome aberrations, and lethal events. The quadratic term relates (loosely) to interactions between damage from mul
3.
by sjmcmahon 3mo ago
It's interesting that the core of this effect - that large doses delivered on timescales of a second or less significantly reduce normal tissue toxicity - was actually observed over 40 years ago, e.g.: https://radiation-rese
4.
by sjmcmahon 6mo ago
The article is a bit unclear, but we have both a very wide range of X-ray vs charged particle studies, and increasingly of conventional vs FLASH studies with a range of modalities (e.g. the seminal FLASH paper was FLASH electrons vs convent
5.
by sjmcmahon 6mo ago
That phrasing isn't perfectly clear, as there's two things at play. If you're delivering a large dose D all at once, FLASH spares normal tissue compared to conventional rate irradiations, with maintained anti-tumour effect. B
6.
by sjmcmahon 2y ago
It's probably worth noting that there's a lot of discussion about challenges reproducing the workflow of this paper, and that as-described it seems to suffer from data leakage, so much so that you can replace sections of their alg
7.
by sjmcmahon 2y ago
This is generally good advice, but isn't it inappropriate in this specific instance? The lady's claim was (allegedly) that she has a perfect ability to distinguish between the tea-milk orders, so in that case even a single failure