I'd like to know if there is any sort of explaination from rigurous biological arguments which could potentially explain how homeopathies could work?  I'm not talking about placebo effects (psychological) or "water memory" (purely hypothetic), but really about the immune system itself.  Usually, there is only 1, or a really insignifiant amount of toxins after the dillutions for the homeopathies. But does that mean that there is absolutely no effect on the organism, biologically talking? Or could there be some immune memory taking place here for example (ik it is usually in adaptative reaction with the lymphocytes, but does it happen with the white cells or other stuff)?  I'm just curious about it :), thanks!
122143
Even though we have a very high tech society, cancer is still a serious issue. We humans still are not entirely capable of fighting cancer.   Radiation and chemotherapy are still considered the best methods for treating it and frequently, even these don't work. And, as for this disease, it is a phenomenon of uncontrolled cell growth that has lead to the death of many people. Within these main two treatments, there is plenty of controversy surrounding applying radiation and chemo in a proper sequence.   However, there are also some different methods known and available on the market to treat cancer. Among them, homeopathic and herbal treatments are the most common. So, my question is, do they really work and is there any scientific evidence of that?  If yes then what is it?
83641
How long will it remain potent outside an organism?  I'm thinking in the context of if it can survive a couple of weeks or a month in the mail for the recipient to get infected.  Edit:  I tried looking at the WHO's page dedicated to the virus, have not found anything pertaining to my question in the PDFs there (maybe I overlooked something, I guess I'm just lacking the proper keyword to use for the search)  I tried looking at the coronavirus Wikipedia page and have not found anything there.  I did find somewhere that a flu virus would typically not remain potent for more than 14 days outside of an organism, but I'm not sure if this applies to all viruses.
74947
What is autophagy? How and under which circumstances is it used by the cell? I believe The reason for autophagy is some kind of recycling, am I right? But why does it occur in infections?
70193
As we know, the homunculi can heal themselves and don't age because of the philosopher's stone.   However, Wrath doesn't seem able to heal and he gets older, despite being a homunculus. I always thought that's because he is a human who was turned into a homunculus, but Greed can also regenerate, even though he still has Lings soul and isn't 100% homunculus.  Why isn't Wrath like a normal homunculus?
122698
I'm working off the article, . I think it's well-written, but I'm not convinced about this part:     So what is causing the change in the particle’s behaviour?      In the example given above, when electrons are fired at a fluorescent screen, when we bombard the electrons with photons the interaction changes the state of the system catastrophically as, despite lacking mass, photons do carry momentum.   Here the author strongly implicates the momentum of photons as being responsible for the collapse. But is that correct to say?  I have read that the  verified that obscuring which-way information restores wave-like behavior. So it feels to me it's more about some "outer" state (perhaps well-characterized as "information") that we don't yet understand that collapses the system, not per se the photon-electron interaction.  Or am I wrong, and in fact for example, the process of obscuring in the quantum eraser experiments somehow "undoes" the photon-electron interaction or restores the quantum state through another interaction?
65573
I think I misunderstand Horcruxes here - are they used up? Or do they just exist to stop the person dying but are not actually 'used up' in the process? By this logic someone could be killed infinite times and still not die?
113246
What are the results of the infection of malaria?      In the question sentence, is the use of "the results" correct? Can I use "the effects" instead of "the results"? If the answer to the question is :      Enlargement of the spleen and liver and blockage of capillaries in the brain.   I would like to know how to ask the question.
89347
I have yet to understand why so many viruses or bacteria haven't evolved to be harmless (specifically, I don't know of any harmless virus). I think it would be greatly beneficial for a virus to control his population and use natural transfer channels that dont cause discomfort(like feces), since it would be allowed to stay in an organism indefinitely and would have a lifetime channel for transmission, hopefully getting to be the most common strain.  So, why have viruses not evolved to be harmless to their hosts?
50179
In a , I mentioned the possibility of killing a character and restoring them to life as a possible method of removing conditions from them. On reflection, I have no idea whether this works or not, and I can't find anything in my books to prove or disprove it.  Are some or all conditions removed when a character dies? If the answer is some, which ones?
55402
There seem to be a number of ideas about why we age. Hypotheses include the gradual accumulation of cell metabolic products affecting organism function and the reduction of  during cell division. My hand-wavey idea would be "wear and tear".  Are we anywhere near a consensus theory of senescence?
97338
Im not sure how this would ever be tested but is there a limit to how much the brain can 'hold' before it reaches capacity ?  I guess this could also be interpreted in terms of memory, as how well some one remember something before reaching capacity / forgetting 'old' memories to make way / space for new ones.
4571
Background I am a computer programmer who is fascinated by artificial intelligence and artificial neural networks, and I am becoming more curious about how biological neural networks work. Context &amp; what I think I understand In digesting all I have been reading, I am beginning to understand that there are layers to neural networks.  A front-line layer of neurons may receive, for example, a visual stimulus such as a bright light.  That stimulus is taken in by the front-line neurons, each of which produce a weighted electro-chemical response that results in a binary decision to pass an electrical charge through its axon to the dendrites of the tens of thousands of neurons to which it is connected. This process repeats through layers channeling the electrical signals and focusing them based on their permutations until ultimately a charge is passed to a focused response mechanism such as the nerves that control shrinking of the pupils. Hopefully I got that correct. Preamble to the question ;) Assuming that I am not completely off-base with my basic understanding of how a biological neural network operates, I am beginning to grasp how an input (stimulus) results in an output (response) such as motor movement or reflexes.  That would just seem to be basic electricity of open and closed circuits. HOWEVER, what confuzzles me still is how a memory is stored.  The analogy to an electrical circuit breaks down here, for in a circuit I can't really stop the flow of electrons unless I dam up said electrons in a capacitor.  If I do that, once the electrons are released (accessed), they are gone forever whereas a memory endures. So. . . How the heck are memories constructed and stored in the human brain?  Are they stored in a specific region?  If so, where?
97298
I'm sure everyone is familiar with the Ship of Theseus paradox, basically "If you replace parts of a ship over time until none of the original ship is left, is the end product still the same ship?"  I just read pop philosophy books, so spare me if this is an idiotic question, but could this be applied to the Brain and consciousness? If you were the take individual atoms/neurons, and somehow replace them with its exact copy one at a time, how would the person experience that?   I don't think there would be an interruption of consciousness, but at the end it's a completely separate (but identical) brain from the one you started with. Exactly as if you had just cloned the whole thing, right? But without interruption.  What interests me is the gradual transition of consciousness here, is it possible to know how that would  work?  I think I remember hearing people argue similarly for both the existence of a transcendent soul and also AI consciousness. And the only other discussion I found of this was on a flat earth forum, so I don't know what to make of that.   I hope I articulated my question clearly. Thank you!
56689
I have an Ancestry autosomal DNA kit that we are trying to get a 95 year old woman to take and having trouble.  I provided the  to my cousin that is trying to administer the test:     If providing adequate sample volume is a challenge for you or someone you are assisting, the following may help increase saliva production:         Gently rubbing the outside of your cheeks   Making chewing motions with your mouth   Adding a small amount of sugar to the tip of your tongue   Smelling or imagining sour foods such as lemons   Thinking about your own favorite food         Biting or scraping your cheeks is not recommended; keep in mind that the majority of the cells analyzed in your saliva sample will not be epithelial cells from your cheeks but white blood cells that are found naturally in your saliva.   However, they have now reported back:     I worked with my mom using your list of suggestions. I think she may have produced some saliva, but she wasn't able to spit it out. She seems to automatically swallow the saliva and has nothing to spit out. I am not sure what to do. I talked with her but she doesn't seem to understand. If you have any ideas I am willing to try again if she is.   Now we could switch to cheek swab using Family Tree DNA, but I would prefer to stick with Ancestry since I get DNA circles and can transfer to FTDNA in the future.  Perhaps getting her to look down so gravity is helping as someone rubs the checks?  What other suggestions do folks have in getting saliva for an Ancestry.com DNA sample?
7451
At school, we've been taught that human infants produce rennin/chymosin (which aids in the digestion of milk). More specifically, it is the peptic cells in the stomach which secrete prorennin, the inactive form of rennin (in addition to pepsinogen, the pepsin proenzyme).  User @another'homosapien's answer  also seems to concur with this (excellent answer by the way, I enjoyed reading it).  However  According to Mod. @AliceD's answer  (yet another excellent answer):     ...in humans there is only a chymosin pseudogene present...   Which (probably?) implies that humans (infant or otherwise) do not produce rennin.  I managed to get my hands on the Textbook of Medical Physiology (Guyton and Hall, South-Asian edition), and according to the book (Chapter Gastric secretions, page 406) peptic cells produce a large quantity of pepsinogen. There is, however, no mention of prorennin. I even flipped over to the Appendix at the back to look up "Rennin", but it turns out there is absolutely no mention of rennin in the book.    My questions,   Some sources claim that rennin is produced in human (infants). Is this true? Other sources claim that rennin is not produced in humans ( we have a pseudogene for it though). Is this correct (I mean the "rennin-is-not-produced" bit, not the "pseudogene" bit)? If rennin is produced in humans only during infancy, what stops it from being produced as we mature? (I'm asking this because every source I've seen that claims that rennin is produced in humans, explicitly states that is done so during infancy...which would suggest that rennin is not produced in adults)
99018
If you eradicate a disease in Pandemic without finding a cure first (ie remove all of one colour from the board) does it remain eradicated or can it still come back unless it has also been cured?  The rules are a bit unclear on this point ... Or I missed the rule that explicitly states this.
122864
I am an allium lover with a strong allergy to all alliums. It is technically a sensitivity, as it isn't an instant reaction, but spending an hour in the bathroom because of one stray piece of red onion warrants a scarier word then "sensitivity". For those not familiar with plant taxonomy, alliums are the plant family that holds garlic, onions, chives, and leeks.  My allergy is progressively getting stronger and I can no longer lie to myself. I need a good substitute for that fantastic allium taste. Right now I can still eat garlic in reasonable amounts (thank god), but red onions are out, and everything else from white onions to leeks is somewhere in between. Any and all preparations of allium trigger the allergy, so no onion powder.  I am desperately looking for a non-allium onion substitute. My hope and dream is something that tastes like onion but isn't an allium. I would accept any strongly flavoured class of plants to switch addictions to.