January 09 2021, 03:12

Georgia turned out to be the decisive state, the election results of which determine the color of the Senate, and the ease of passing presidential initiatives through the Senate. And now, after processing 98% of the votes – it’s 50 to 50. The difference is less than one percent. Such a scenario is scripted, with a tie, the president’s party wins.

A good video that shows why a two-party system leads to such results. And why a two-party system emerges organically – https://youtu.be/yhO6jfHPFQU

January 07 2021, 10:56

I stumbled upon such an interesting advertisement. The company is recruiting volunteers for COVID vaccine trials, using a photo of GAM-COVID-VAC by Gamaleya in the ad. They promise to pay up to $1220. I decided to register and see what happens next. I answered a dozen standard questions and booked a slot for a video call—literally the next morning.

The company that collects volunteers is Acurian Health. During registration, there was no information about the actual study; I received that later by mail. They are testing a new vaccine from Arcturus Therapeutics, under the code names LUNAR-COV19 and ARCT-021. So, it’s definitely not Sputnik. A big question to Acurian, of course, is why they use random images in advertising. I’m sure that even “up to $1220” is plucked out of thin air.

In the docs they sent, there is no $1220 amount. If I decide to participate, they compensate my time for phone sessions – $25 per session, which adds up to $250, assuming all sessions are by phone. But it’s not the case—they require several blood donations at least. They compensate $50 for each visit to an actual clinic without blood donation or $100 with a donation. There’s also $150 for a dosing visit, which probably takes more time, and another $150 for unplanned visits. Up to 10 visits to the clinic in total, so $1220 is likely their “maximum” compensation. Yes, they pay for transport to the clinic (taxi, for example). If something goes wrong and my insurance refuses to cover it, the study organizers will take on the expenses. Treatment is only at clinics involved in the research. No maximum amount is specified.

Today I spoke with a representative of the group collecting volunteers for ARCT-021. The main concern for me, of course, is safety and then effectiveness. I immediately refused, as I had planned from the start, because participating in the second phase (there have only been 70 people before me), with a 25% chance of ending up in what seems to me a small group of unvaccinated people for more than a year… The study lasts 14 months, and if they inject me with a placebo, or if the real vaccine is not effective enough… I did not have any doubts.

Now about the terms of participation. The attached documents indicate that they plan to recruit 600 people from the USA and Singapore—countries where Arcturus is present. 15 clinics, they pay for a trip to the nearest clinic. They promise at least 10 visits. They administer three injections. The second one—a month later, and the third—half a year later. They provide a ruler, a diary, and a digital thermometer. I will need to measure something and record it every day for 14 months.

The company pays any costs associated with the study, including treatment of complications if they arise.

About the mRNA vaccine LUNAR-COV19/ARCT-021 itself. It is based on self-replicating mRNA. Synthetic pieces of the coronavirus genetic code are created at Arcturus using their mRNA synthesis technology STARR, after which they are injected into the body in a lipid emulsion LUNAR (so-called lipid-mediated delivery, lipid nanoparticles). Why self-replicating—it differs from Pfizer and Moderna vaccines—the viral RNA fragments begin to “replicate” inside the body, which potentially makes the vaccine more effective (but also increases risks for patients if something is not well thought out). The virus itself does not replicate, of course, we are talking only about proteins. It is claimed that antibodies to the spike protein are produced as early as the 19th day after the minimal dose (0.2 mcg), and their levels in response to its single introduction are produced for 50 days—both parameters are higher than those of vaccines on the market.

https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04480957

January 02 2021, 22:29

So, we’re coming back from Philly, and at home, a BAT is circling around! The shocked cat is coming to his senses. For one thing, we have no idea how it got inside the house at all. We carefully open the front door to prevent the cat from escaping (he tries). The balcony too. Plus, it seems we haven’t gone out there for a while. All windows have screens. Ventilation has a grate. So, I concluded that it flew in as we were entering the apartment. It does fly swiftly after all, and it must have miscalculated its maneuver and “chose the wrong door”.

December 29 2020, 00:16

An intriguing video. In it, Derek explains some quantum effects using the example of oil droplets jumping due to vibration on water.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIyTZDHuarQ

More details here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W9yWv5dqSKk

((Let me remind you of the famous double-slit experiment, which isn’t normally explained (attempts are made through quantum theory). In it, there is a screen with two slits, which is bombarded with electrons. Behind the screen with slits, there is another screen that displays the trace from the electrons that hit the first screen. As a result, an interference pattern forms on that second screen – you have all seen this “comb”, because the waves superpose on each other. This ostensibly demonstrates that electrons behave like a wave while passing through the screen. There is nothing unusual about this.

So, if electrons are emitted one at a time – an interference pattern will form.

But if detectors are placed at the slits, which are supposed to determine through which slit the electron passed, the interference disappears. That is, merely observing the electron changes its behavior (For those new to this – see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TT1trz4ANWI )))

December 28 2020, 13:35

Flipping through my notes from American English pronunciation lessons,

* it turns out that in English the emphasis in a sentence often falls on the last word. I had never considered this, and maybe I spoke that way too, but practice showed that this is not always the case.

* it turns out that I was terribly mixing up read (read) and read (read).

* also, it turns out that in yes/no questions the intonation always goes up, whereas in regular WH-questions it goes down.

* cosmetic – I was pronouncing it wrong. It should be “cosmetic,” with an “s,” not with a “c.” * At the same time, not epi-zode (episode), but epi-sode.

* know and home – I had been saying “naou” and “ham” instead of “nou” and “houm”.

* Own (own), not Aun

* also – darn, why didn’t anyone correct me, I was saying “alzo,” not “also”

* with us/with them – I always stressed us/them, whereas in most cases the stress falls on i in with.

* I had (and partially still have) issues with contractions – there’s, isn’t, and similar. To make a contraction work, the stress needs to be on the first syllable, but I always put it on not or is. It’s a minor point because you can stress on not too, only in that case, it’s not a contraction. Might have had is pronounced as “might of had,” not “might have had,” as I used to say.

* in many words, the vowel disappears – for example, I said opera, but it should be “oprah”. Or “evrij” (average), not everij; Useful (useful), not use-ful.

* significantly corrected my slushy “r” in words like rarely, rural, drawer, jewelry, February, regularly, scroll. It turns out Siri couldn’t even understand me with it. Now my English “r” is almost correct, and I didn’t even try to correct the Russian one.

* I didn’t know the difference between Access and aXcess, and always stressed the first syllable.

* I was stressing the second syllable in essay, but it needs to be on the first.

* I was saying week-end, but it needs to be weekend.

* I was saying cousin, but it should be cuzzin

* I was saying discOvered, but it should be discOvered. Same with wondered

* I was saying “appreciate it,” but it should be “appreci-ate it”

* I was saying “did you,” “would you,” when in the USA they say “didj you,” “wouldj you”

* not pretty, but prIty

* won’t is pronounced as “woant” (or woun), not wont.

* meanwhile not “I wont” (I want), but “I want” (or I wan)

* etiquette is pronounced with an E — “etikit,” not “etiquette”

* not “parents,” but “parents”

* at the end ones sounds “z,” not “s”

* not “nObodi” (nobody), but “nOubodi”

* ice cream is pronounced with emphasis on “ice,” not on “cream”

* guitarist, not guitarist and not guitarist (as I would have said)

* component, not component

* being, not being

* fast, not fast.

* favorite, not favorite. Close, not close

* post, not past. Postoffice is pronounced as postoffice, not as pastoffice.

* Fiancée is pronounced as fian-say.

#English #pronunciation #notes