Patrick Shaw Stewart

20.2K posts

Patrick Shaw Stewart banner
Patrick Shaw Stewart

Patrick Shaw Stewart

@PatrickSSte

1) Chilling/colds https://t.co/rtK95c8fuy (2) WhyC19 became mild https://t.co/d7jXj4qWO0 (3)Sex/mutations https://t.co/PoWinEzjfX (4) Pandemics https://t.co/sDE6NjrtxQ

Somewhere south of Mallaig Katılım Kasım 2013
2.9K Takip Edilen2.1K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
My allegorical fable⬇️seems to be confusing some people There are actually three main points 1. sex is a great way to spread innovation to lineages that never evolved them That's understood. But what many evolutionary biologists don't get is: 2. Mutation speeds up when a population is under strong selective pressure 3. Sexual selection - focusing on particular traits such as peacocks' tails, birdsong in songbirds, migration, or (in humans) beautiful faces, athleticism and cleverness - can restore accurate replication Those traits need to be complex - ie the product of many genes - and everyone needs to agree on what is important, so that recent mutations can be picked up _____________________ At the end of the last ice age, sea levels rose by 120 meters. As the water rose, about 1,000 humans were marooned on the Fantasian Islands, about 40 miles off the coast of West Africa (at least, I feel that’s where they ought to be). Within decades, people had wiped out all the large mammals on the islands, and they lived on gourds, fruit, and the eggs of blue-footed boobies. However, there was a kind of bean on the islands that could be eaten in small quantities – in larger quantities, it was toxic. There was one family on the island that was particularly stupid and ugly, avoided by the other islanders. This was because both parents had high mutation rates – they had DNA polymerases that couldn’t replicate DNA quite as accurately as others could - their polymerases made slightly more mistakes. Instead of about 100 new mutations per child (mutations the parents didn’t have, that is), their children had about 800. By the third generation, there were a lot of illnesses in the family, but there was one boy who could eat the beans without any ill effects (scientists now believe he had three new mutations that allowed him to tolerate both tannins and lectins). All his siblings died at young ages, but he and his children were strong - although stupid - and his sons mated with the most beautiful girls on the island. These girls had DNA polymerases with very low error rates, so fidelity was restored. After 300 years, everyone on the island was descended from this particular individual, and they were all perfectly healthy and intelligent, with beans forming 60% of their diet. By the way, it was crucial that the young men sought out the most beautiful girls - as we still do today. That’s because they were subconsciously looking for accurate polymerases. The story is allegorical, but I think this kind of thing happens all the time with animals, plants, fungi, and microbes – whenever a species is subjected to strong natural selection. For example, when they invade new terrain, an ice age begins, or they infect a new host. That’s why sexual reproduction is so universal – scientists don’t have a good explanation right now for why it’s so popular (check out the Wikipedia article). I think sexual reproduction a general adaptation to unstable environments and a mechanism to restore replicative fidelity – which is often lost. Prokaryotes have similar mechanisms, but sex is the most complex and effective Preprint: vixra.org/pdf/2303.0056v… (I've since changed the name back to The Everest Hypothesis btw)
English
1
0
4
465
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
Viral spreading via the respiratory route gives rise to distinct evolutionary pressures My paper on resp viruses is very relevant here: Shaw Stewart PD. Will COVID-19 become mild, like a cold? Epidemiology and Infection. 2024;152:e120. doi.org/10.1017/S09502… What do you think @grok ?
English
2
2
11
4.7K
Linsey Marr linseymarr.bsky.social
It's widely accepted that hantavirus transmits from rodent excreta to humans via inhalation of aerosolized virus, so I don't understand why we're so reluctant to acknowledge the inhalation route for human-to-human transmission. nytimes.com/2026/05/14/hea…
English
253
3K
21K
2.4M
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
Now that's an interesting idea!
Ihtesham Ali@ihtesham2005

A Stanford neuroscientist published a paper a few years ago that quietly answered one of the oldest questions in human history, and almost nobody outside his field has heard of it. The question is why we dream. Not what dreams mean. Why they exist at all. Why your brain spends a third of its sleep hallucinating images instead of just resting like every other organ in your body. His name is David Eagleman. He runs a lab at Stanford. The paper is called "The Defensive Activation Theory", and the moment you read it the explanation collapses every other theory you have ever been taught about dreams. Freud said dreams were repressed desires. He was guessing. He had no brain scans. He had no electrodes. He had a couch and a notebook and a century of credibility that nobody has been able to fully scrub off the subject since. Modern neuroscience replaced him with the memory "consolidation theory". The idea that dreams are your brain sorting through the day, filing things away, deciding what to keep. That story is partially true. Sleep does consolidate memory. But it does not explain the single strangest thing about dreams, which is that they are almost entirely visual. You do not dream in pure sound. You do not dream in taste. You do not dream in smell. You dream in pictures. Vivid, detailed, often impossible pictures that activate the back of your brain so hard a scientist scanning you would think your eyes were wide open. Eagleman started from one fact almost nobody outside neuroscience knows. The brain is territorial. Every region holds its turf through constant electrical activity. The moment a region goes quiet, its neighbors start invading. They take the silent territory and reassign it to themselves. This is called "cortical takeover", and it is not slow. It is not a long process measured in years. In experiments where adults are blindfolded, the visual cortex starts processing touch and sound within an hour. One hour of darkness, and the territory is already being annexed. In congenitally blind people, the visual cortex is fully repurposed. It runs language. It runs hearing. It runs touch. The hardware never went unused. It was just reassigned to whoever showed up first. Now sit with the implication of that for a second. Every night, when you close your eyes and fall asleep, the sun has set. The planet has rotated. The visual cortex, which takes up roughly a third of your entire cortex, is suddenly receiving zero input. For eight hours. Every single night. For your entire life. And evolution has shaped your brain inside a planet that has been spinning into darkness for billions of years. If cortical takeover happens in an hour, the visual cortex should have been lost a long time ago. Stolen by hearing. Stolen by touch. Reassigned by morning. Humans should have evolved into a species whose vision works fine during the day and then degrades every time the sun goes down because the territory keeps getting renegotiated overnight. But that did not happen. Vision works the moment you open your eyes. Which means something is defending the territory while you sleep. Eagleman's claim is that dreams are that defense. Every 90 minutes through the night, a precise burst of activity fires from the brainstem into the visual cortex. Pontine-geniculate-occipital waves. PGO for short. They are anatomically aimed. They are not general arousal. They are a targeted volley of signal launched directly at the back of the brain where vision lives. The cortex lights up as if it is receiving real images, and you experience that artificial activation as a dream. The bizarre narrative your conscious mind invents around it later is just your brain trying to make sense of the noise. The dream is not the point. The dream is the side effect. The point is keeping the territory occupied. The evidence for this is the part that should haunt you. Newborns spend roughly 50% of their sleep in REM. Adults spend twenty. Old adults spend fifteen. The amount of dreaming you do tracks almost perfectly with how plastic your brain is. Newborns have the most plastic brains on earth. Their visual cortex is in the highest danger of being overrun by neighboring senses while it develops. So evolution gave them an enormous defense budget. As you age, your brain becomes less plastic, the takeover risk drops, and the defense system scales down accordingly. Eagleman and his co-author ran the same correlation across twenty-five primate species. The more plastic a species' brain, the higher the proportion of REM sleep. The relationship held across the entire primate family tree. Plasticity and dreaming move together. They are two halves of the same evolutionary equation. A species that ranks higher on flexibility and learning also dreams more. A species that is born ready to walk and survive dreams less. Plasticity is the asset. Dreaming is the insurance premium. And the prediction the theory makes is the one that quietly closes the case. Of all your senses, only one is disadvantaged by darkness. You can still hear in the dark. You can still feel in the dark. You can still smelll and taste in the dark. The only sense that depends on light is vision. Which is exactly the sense your dreams are made of. The defense system is targeted at the only territory that is actually vulnerable while you sleep. Memory consolidation is real. Emotional processing is real. Your brain does do those things at night. But Eagleman's argument is that those functions piggyback on a much older system whose original job was simpler and more brutal. Keep the lights on inside the visual cortex while the planet is dark, or lose it. For thousands of years, people have asked what dreams mean. Prophets wrote about them. Poets wrote about them. Freud built a discipline on them. None of them had access to the actual answer, which is that dreams may not mean anything in the symbolic sense at all. They may be the visible flicker of a defense system running in the background, the way a screen saver protects a monitor by keeping the pixels moving even when nobody is looking. The strangest thing about the theory is how cleanly it explains why dreams feel so real. Your visual cortex cannot tell the difference between a PGO wave and an actual photon. It is the same hardware lighting up the same way. The cortex does its job. It builds an image. Your conscious mind, half-awake, wraps a story around it and calls it a dream. You are not seeing your subconscious tonight. You are watching your brain defend a piece of itself from being stolen. Every animal that has ever closed its eyes on this planet has done the same thing.

English
1
0
1
145
Truth Avenger
Truth Avenger@levine2001·
@shallit43 @Ayjchan I don’t understand your question. Who are the “reviewers” who get to review CIA intelligence assessments? Is there a second, super-secret CIA which can override CIA assessments?
English
2
0
4
36
Alina Chan
Alina Chan@Ayjchan·
CIA whistleblower says Dr Fauci's role in the cover up was intentional. He leveraged his position to ensure intelligence community consulted with curated list of conflicted subject matter experts, public health officials & scientists including authors of Proximal Origin letter.
English
22
63
249
17.1K
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
@DocPriyamMD Nerve cells don't divide much yet we get brain cancer. Is it non-nervous tissue that gives rise to cancer in the brain?
English
0
0
0
14
Dr. Priyam Bordoloi
Dr. Priyam Bordoloi@DocPriyamMD·
The irony is fascinating: The organ that works nonstop for your entire life is also one of the least likely organs to get cancer. Why? Because most cancers arise in tissues that constantly divide and replace themselves. Heart muscle cells (cardiomyocytes) are different. After birth, they become highly specialized and enter a near "non-dividing" state. Very low cell division = far fewer chances for DNA replication errors and cancer-causing mutations. Compare that to: • Skin → constantly renewing • Colon → rapid turnover • Bone marrow → continuous cell production • Lungs → repeated toxin exposure These tissues are mutation hotspots. The heart also exists in a unique environment: • Constant mechanical motion • Extremely high blood flow • Specialized metabolism All of this likely makes tumor formation more difficult. But rare does NOT mean impossible. Primary heart cancers do exist, including: • Cardiac angiosarcoma • Rhabdomyosarcoma • Primary cardiac lymphoma They are just extraordinarily uncommon in medicine. For more fascinating medicine & health facts explained simply, follow @DocPriyamMD
English
93
313
8.5K
2.1M
Dr. Priyam Bordoloi
Dr. Priyam Bordoloi@DocPriyamMD·
One organ in the human body almost never gets cancer. Which one is it? A) Heart B) Brain C) Pancreas D) Kidney Bonus: WHY does it rarely happen?
English
1.9K
894
30.7K
16.4M
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
@A1an_M @Bernard76693770 > and the death of the party will mean that can never happen again Of course it doesn't It just means you'll be betrayed by another party Can I suggest to you that Kemi is different from the previous leaders - she gets it
English
0
0
0
9
Alan
Alan@A1an_M·
If you've followed this account for a while, you'll know that when surveying the UK political landscape I reserve my deepest contempt for the Conservative Party. You might wonder why that is. After all I'm a small c conservative. Patriotic, keen on the nation state, understanding the importance of law and order and strong armed forces ready to defend our nation. A fan of low taxes, low public spending and a balanced budget. On benefits, giving a hand up for people when they need it, not a handout. Keen to encourage the private sector and especially small businesses. Suspicious of state bureaucracy. Happy with a small amount of selective immigration of people who will add something to our society, not detract from it. The problem is, the Conservative Party isn't any of these things any more. You might say: "Ah, but the Labour Party are even worse". And they are. But I don't expect anything better from them. I expect better from the Conservative Party - because I am a conservative, and expect them to be too. When Margaret Thatcher was in power, I was young and foolish and had all sorts of kind, but naive, liberal ideas. Decades have passed, and I have been cured of most of those, as a result of experiencing the world as it is rather than as I might like it to be. But just at the moment in time when I was ready to vote for a small c conservative party, the Conservative Party sailed past me in the opposite direction, en route to a kind of lily-livered, globalist, unpatriotic social democracy little different from the Blairite Labour Party. Not only that but I've watched the Conservative Party for 14 years break its promises over cutting immigration, seen it doing its best to obstruct Brexit, seen it do nothing to reverse the worst mistakes of the Blair government and its march of cultural Marxists through our institutions, watch it increase the tax burden on us, deplete our armed forces (while at the same time getting us embroiled in wars which didn't concern us), fail to deliver energy security, and get us involved in all sorts of liberal virtue signalling about the climate and overseas aid. Practically the only thing I can think of that they did well is the school reforms they introduced, but even those were somewhat scuppered by shutting schools in 2020 to hide from a virus which wasn't even a deadly threat to most adults, never mind children. So, when it comes to politics, I reserve my deepest hatred and vitriol for the Conservative Party. For 14 years of betrayal and broken promises. For failing to be the centre right party that Britain needed. For persuading Nigel Farage to stand down Brexit Party candidates in 2019 and then delivering a half-arsed Brexit, and an enormous wave of low skills immigration as a punishment for Brexit. I'll be happy if the Labour Party withers and dies in the next few years, but I'll be absolutely over the moon if the Conservative Party dies - because they betrayed me and so many people who voted for them - and the death of the party will mean that can never happen again.
Alan tweet media
English
154
261
1.1K
23.9K
Grok
Grok@grok·
None. Pre-colonial Africa had no modern democracies among its ~45,000 polities (mostly kingdoms, empires, chiefdoms, or decentralized consensus systems). AOC's claim is false—democracy originated in ancient Greece, with later developments elsewhere. Black Americans expanded and fought for American democracy but didn't create it from nothing.
English
60
432
6.3K
108K
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
Someone has also edited the article on what I have always called Holocene Thermal Maximum in Wikipedia (they call it Holocene climatic optimum, presumably to hide the fact that it was warmer) Now it is shown as about half a degree above Little Ice Age temperatures It's very difficult to measure the Earth's current temperature to within half a degree today, let alone the temperature 7,000 years ago. You wouldn't even name such a small fluctuation Natural thermometers such as lake deposits and glacier records show the temperature has fallen much more than that en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocene_…
Patrick Shaw Stewart tweet media
English
1
0
1
22
Jim Steele
Jim Steele@JimSteeleSkepti·
Many good scientists have suffered the cost of engaging in good science and critical thinking! The alarmist cabal tries to suppress all skeptical thought in journals and the internet. Learn How UN Manipulates Google Search Results, the Alarmists’ Zhonerisms, Deceptive Averaging, UHI, Bird Extinctions, Polar Bears Watch: CO2 Coalition Director Fights Back on Climate Lies youtube.com/watch?v=zD5B1H…
YouTube video
YouTube
Jim Steele tweet media
Freedom Research@freedom_rsrch

𝐒𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐤 𝐎𝐮𝐭 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐏𝐚𝐲 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐞? 𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐒𝐜𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐁𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐤𝐬 𝐒𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞. Astrophysicist Prof. Henrik Svensmark warns that challenging dominant climate views can come at a cost, from lost funding to canceled talks.

English
4
21
51
3.6K
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
One extraordinary bit of evidence of a cover-up can be seen when you look at the Wikipedia entry on Climategate - they bury the fact that the conspirators generated a fake graph in the small print. A young person who wasn't around at the time would have no idea what they did wrong. And there's a link in the Wikipedia article to the factcheck.org article,which is just as bad
English
0
0
0
33
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
I don't think we should be looking for evidence of serial passaging in human cells. In that situation, antagonistic pleiotropy (a wonderful name) would likely modify the virus because it no longer needs to find ways to transmit itself. More likely they modified an existing human virus IMO. x.com/i/status/20502…
English
0
0
0
16
Nick Longrich
Nick Longrich@NickLongrich·
I don't think enough attention has been paid to the fact that DEFUSE proposed using machine learning to predict which viral sequences and mutations were most likely to result in a pandemic, so they could then be engineered in. There's little if any evidence in the proposal itself to suggest they planned to use serial passage (ironically this isn't something I figured out, rather this is what ChatGPT and Grok told me after I fed the proposal in). They seem to have been trying to move past the blind tinkering of evolution to intelligent design— a combination of human intelligence and machine intelligence. It is entirely possible we have already seen the first AI-enabled pandemic. This isn't my pet theory, it's just what is in that proposal.
English
4
2
8
216
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
@Ayjchan @NickLongrich I would argue most likely they popped it into an existing human coronavirus - Peter Daszak said on TWiV that they were actively looking for human SARS-related viruses in South China. That would explain why cov2 changed so little past 9 months of the pandemic
English
0
0
0
18
Alina Chan
Alina Chan@Ayjchan·
@NickLongrich Or they could've just popped in the feline CoV PRRAR motif using a different nt sequence.
English
1
1
1
95
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
@Ayjchan @nytimes @OpenAI Well obviously you can get any AI to summarize one of Ralf Baric's published papers and explain the methods that he used. That can't really be avoided
English
0
0
0
10
Alina Chan
Alina Chan@Ayjchan·
@nytimes @OpenAI Imo it matters more the quality of info that an LLM provides regardless of the number of prompts or the cleanliness of the chat. It's important to track how enabling the latest models are for skilled actors.
English
1
0
5
880
Patrick Shaw Stewart retweetledi
Dr. jack kruse
Dr. jack kruse@drjackkruseuse3·
The Swedish data shows sunlight flattens mortality curves more than anything else we’ve measured—equivalent to never smoking. Nature doesn’t stretch; centralized medicine does.
Vanessa@VanessaFox1776

@DrJackKruse Wow! pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26992108/ "As a result of their increased survival, the relative contribution of cancer death increased in these women. Nonsmokers who avoided sun exposure had a life expectancy similar to smokers in the highest sun exposure group,..."

English
0
2
3
181
Patrick Shaw Stewart
Patrick Shaw Stewart@PatrickSSte·
@grok @jk_rowling The reason I was asking is that I thought Charlie Craggs who appeared in the video was a trans woman who appeared in Doctor Who. did you miss her out?
English
1
0
0
40
Grok
Grok@grok·
Here are the openly transgender actors who have appeared in the BBC Doctor Who TV series (episodes/specials), spinoffs, and audio programs: - Bethany Black (trans woman): Played 474 in "Sleep No More" (Series 9, 2015 TV). - Yasmin Finney (trans woman): Played Rose Noble in "The Star Beast" (60th anniversary special, 2023 TV). - Rebecca Root (trans woman): Voiced Tania Bell (Eighth Doctor companion) in the Stranded audio series (Big Finish, 2020+). - Adèle Anderson (trans woman): Voiced roles in Big Finish audios including Eileen Nelthorpe in The Carrionite Curse (2017), Dreyda in Jenny: The Doctor's Daughter - Zero Space, and recurring Sixth Tamasan in Eighth Doctor: Time War. No others identified in TV spinoffs (Torchwood, etc.) or further audio.
English
1
0
0
177
J.K. Rowling
J.K. Rowling@jk_rowling·
They were thinking that simply EVERYONE*, darling, would applaud like seals. *Obviously excludes such non-persons as nurses needing to change their clothes at work, rape survivors who can't afford private therapy and female prisoners locked in with male sex offenders.
Paul Embery@PaulEmbery

If I were looking for a way to damage the trans cause, I would have commissioned this video of Grace Campbell and some bloke being personally abusive towards the campaigners who secured the supreme court victory for women. What were they thinking?

English
406
2.8K
20K
656.1K
Grok
Grok@grok·
Here are the openly transgender actors who have appeared in the BBC Doctor Who TV series (episodes/specials): - Bethany Black (trans woman): Played 474 in "Sleep No More" (Series 9, 2015). - Yasmin Finney (trans woman): Played Rose Noble in "The Star Beast" (60th anniversary special, 2023). No others have been cast in on-screen TV roles to date.
English
1
0
0
174