This is not more convincing because the human body produces erythritol endogenously so high erythritol blood levels may be another effect of the health problems that cause heart attacks and strokes, rather than the cause. To prove causation they would have to track each subjects consumption of erythritol rather than their blood levels.
A plausible mechanism of action is no where near good enough. Molecular biology is crazy complicated and lots of things that sound plausible don't work (and maybe do the opposite). I'll take "it works, but we don't know why" over "this is why we think it might work" every time.
Anyone that has ever taken a class in molecular biology or biophysics knows that it's ridiculously complex. Many drugs that look promising in vivo or in animals fail to perform in humans. Empirical evidence is what counts. Even targeted enzyme inhibitors are made by a shotgun approach. Synthesize 1000s of candidates and try them all to see which ones work best in vivo and then try those in animals and then try those winners in humans.
But, but, but this guy I ran into at the park would not shut up about it so it must work. Plus I just like to take neurotoxins. Why would I want to take some fancy new tech mRNA vaccine that would allow me to travel internationally when I can just take some of my dog's heartguard?
Now this is some cynicism I can get behind. People like to tell other people what to do. Politicians are people so...it's almost like they don't care about their fellow citizens and just want to be in control.
How about they just make the tax laws so simple no one needs a "service" to figure out how much tax to pay? I know, that's crazy talk. Politicians wouldn't be able to carve out loopholes for their big donors and our entire system of government would fail.
Started playing with Docker because it was the cool new thing, but professionally I get more use out of Ansible > Digital Ocean. Seems like your Geodjango experience had more to do with the sharing of the script than the underlying tool.
Most healthcare is not for life threatening illness. The bigger problem in healthcare in the US is that consumers almost never know how much a service will cost beforehand.
I like the idea of enabling payments to content producers based on the amount of time spent on their site. Curious how much this is actually happening. A quick search for "brave payments to content producers" did not return anything resembling transparency about the aggregate amounts of these payments.
Do you want our drastically under funded state pension system too? Illinois wants revenue anyway it can it, selling pot, gambling, whatever. What's wrong with Missouri?
People not killing each other costs nothing. Cost is only incurred when the right to life is infringed. People providing healthcare to one another always has costs. If this "right" is infringed and no healthcare is provided then no cost is incurred.
Whether or not healthcare is a right is a lot less important than whether or not it is affordable.
The politicians solution: create another law.
The economists solution: create more competition, probably by getting rid of some laws. I guess JB Pritzker knows more about politics than about economics.
Agree price caps are not the solution. Don't agree about US big pharma. Novartis is a Swiss multinational, Roche also Swiss, Bayer is a German multinational, Glaxo Smith Kline is a British multinational... Big pharma is a global, or at least Euro-American effort.
It would be interesting if there was a way to inform people about effective options that are not profitable enough to receive much attention in our current system.