One of the papers I read through spoke about it that way. https://biology.stackexchange.com/questions/97619/does-n1-methyl-pseudouridine-occur-naturally-in-any-rna is also interesting in saying that tRNAs of most archaea contains it.
Googling "1-methyl 3'-pseudouridine" brings up 14 hits not all actually containing the term and some on facebook. I think this refers to N1-methylpseudouridine.
From a EU report on Moderna's vaccine:
The RNA contains modified N1-methylpseudouridine instead of uridine to minimise the indiscriminate recognition of the mRNA by pathogen-associated molecular pattern receptors (e.g. TLRs
There's a paper that also suggests that's in Pfizers vaccine.
Googling it + FDA doesn't show any discussion that you would likely see if it's the reason that the FDA rejected other approval.
The fact that the substance naturally occurs in mammal also suggests that it's not toxic and mammals can handle it generally.
I do mind, after having spent several minutes annotating images of self-driving cards
I think it's worst when you have edge cases like the Google Captcha that shows 16 tiles and you have to choose which tiles contain the item they are looking for and some of the tails contain it only a little bit on the edge.
Karma, the amount of people reached by a post and the impact it has on people correlate with each other but neither determines the others.
What is your advice now?
How about looking at the posts that he writes? https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/MSpfFBCQYw3YA8kMC/violating-the-emh-prediction-markets and https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/ybQdaN3RGvC685DZX/the-emh-is-false-specific-strong-evidence are posts that advocate concrete trades.
Looking at the other posts it seems he shares some other advice at some EA groups.
Why do you believe it isn't a combination of both?
Having extreme political opinion is unfortunately correlated with being politically engaged. A majority of the people who don't have extreme opinions aren't engaged enough for a project like this. Even in the general population a majority doesn't vote in primaries.
I would expect that it makes more sense to focus on voting reform in individual states then to build up such a pesudo party.
I'm not talking about sterilization of the human body but sterilization of the hospital enviroment. It leads to selection effects for bacteria that are adapted to the hospital enviroment.
If you have plants in a room then part of the room is filled with bacteria that interact with plants and that creates a more diverse microbial enviroment. Having plants in a room makes it more likely that a random bacteria in the room is a plant pathogen compared to a human pathogen.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmicb.2014.00491/full#B7 is a paper that for example argues for maintaining microbial diversity in the different environments as an important issue to avoid pathogen outbreaks.
I would expect that in 50 years you will have plants with microbiomes in hospitals that are selected for hosting a microbiome that increases the surrounding microbial diversity and not hosting human pathogens. Hospitals will move from the paradigm of "everything should be sterile" to the paradigm of "there should be a lot of microbial diversity without human pathogens".
The will regularly test what bacteria are around and when there are problems use a mix of adding new bacteria to the enviroment that contribute to healthy microbial diversity and phage therapy against those bacteria that are unwelcome.
Having cheap ways to measure the microbial enviroment via cheaper gene sequencing will lead there but there will be a lot about how to have a good microbial enviroment that we have very little understanding of today.
Contra the idea that the internet is to blame, polarization seems historically to be the "natural" state in both the USA and elsewhere. To get less of it you need specific mechanism that have a moderating effect
The US got steadily more polarized along political lines over the last decades by metrics such as how important it is for people that their spouse shares their party affiliation while getting less polarized along race by those metrics.
Matt Talibbi's Hate Inc is a book that describes the process over the last decades well.
In the normal state the human body has ten times as much bacteria cells and a bunch of phages that attack those bacteria.
Bacteria phages don't infect human cells, which many part of the immune system do care about. Whether the immune system will start attacking some phages depends a lot on the context.
In many cases when fighting an infection you have the problem that the host immune system doesn't effectively work.
In periodontitis for example periodontopathogens like Porphyromonas gingivalis, synergistically disarm host defence systems as a recent review paper on using phage therapy for it describes. In the paper they write about immune system interaction: