> Figure3 shows plasma levels following a 36g dose of liposomal vitamin C, for both subjects. This resulted in peak plasma levels, in the region of 400mML21. A 95% interfractile range (34–114), which contains 95% of the distribution with a mean of 74 corresponds to a calculated standard deviation of 17.4. We note that, under these conditions, an outlier measurement of 400mML21 would correspond to a deviation of 10.3 s with a theoretical p-value of 1.6610213 (i.e. p,0.0000000000001). With this high dose, both subjects exceeded their bowel tolerance, leading to diarrhoea. This intolerance presumably arose from the high intake of phospholipid, without food buffering, in fasting individuals. However, our observations using hourly doses suggest that daily intakes of this magnitude are tolerable without bowel effects, as long as the dose is spread throughout the day.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1359084080230542...
It's interesting that a side effect of pretty much every treatment for cancer is nausea, weight loss, etc. Almost like reduced nutrient absorption is the main mechanism by which the treatments work.
Since most cancer treatments target fast-replicating cells and the gut is lined with such cells I think you have the arrow of causality backwards in this case.
From my reading, they would say some particles are just much more energetic than usual (for some reason we are ignorant of). See the post above about flipping a coin. According to the statistical model we use for coin flips, it is really unlikely to flip 100 heads in a row but not impossible.
Wouldn't it be possible to see this experimentally? You'd find particles jumping out of a "potential energy well" which they shouldn't be able to escape via tunneling.
Sounds like the wave model describes the statistical properties of a population of photons.
Eg, a coin flip is deterministic if you know all the forces involved (airflow, force of flip, exact distribution of mass of the coin, etc). But since we are usually ignorant of all that, instead we model it as a bernoulli trial.
But that’s not what qbism is about: a wave function (pure state) doesn’t represent ignorance about a true underlying physical state, it’s a maximally sharp state of belief.
> Regarding quantum states as degrees of belief implies that the event of a quantum state changing when a measurement occurs—the "collapse of the wave function"—is simply the agent updating her beliefs in response to a new experience.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_Bayesianism
You could be right, That is what this sounds like to me though. According to the model there is a 50% chance the coin will land on heads, until you flip it.
For a pure state a measurement doesn’t improve our knowledge about the state of the physical system, it changes it (and we get information about the new state). The Bayesian updating applies to mixed states, where there exists “classical” uncertainty while for a pure state the uncertainty is purely “quantum”.
"Quantum measurement is nothing more, and nothing less, than a refinement and a readjustment of one’s initial state of belief. [...] Let us look at two limiting cases of efficient measurements. In the first, we imagine an observer whose initial belief structure ρ = |ψ⟩⟨ψ| is a maximally sharp state of belief. By this account, no measurement whatsoever can refine it. [...] The only state change that can come about from a measurement must be purely of the mental-readjustment sort: We learn nothing new; we just change what we can predict as a consequence of the side effects of our experimental intervention. That is to say, there is a sense in which the measurement is solely disturbance."
Cancer cells rely much more on glycolysis than oxidative phosphorylation (respiration, basically breaking down sugar with oxygen). You get a net of two molecules of ATP from glycolysis compared to 30 or so from respiration, so you can expect that cancer cells need much more sugar than normal cells just to survive.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellular_respiration
Second, glucose competes with dehydroascorbate (DHA, oxidized vitamin c) for glut1/3 transporters. DHA gets transported into cells (in particular RBC's) to be reduced back to the anti-oxidant form by glutathione: ascorbate. Then that ascorbate molecule can remain in the cell acting as an antioxidant or be pumped back out of the cell to the blood, etc.
If DHA doesn't make it into a cell quickly it gets hydrolyzed and excreted and you lose that molecule of vitamin c. So chronically lower blood sugar is expected to conserve your vitamin c and allow higher ascorbate levels, especially within your cells.
This can have all sorts of beneficial effects. Strengthened collagen makes it easier for a tissue to heal/encapsulate the cancer and harder for it to metastasize, quenching free radicals can prevent damage to surrounding tissue, etc.
Those free radicals can go onto to kill the (high iron) cancer cells. For this reason vitamin C kills almost all cancer cell lines in vitro at doses that do not harm normal cells: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2516281/
I met someone who went for a checkup and they convinced him to get a screening colonoscopy. It was clear but a few months later he started having problems and went back. Then they told him he had colon cancer caused by damage to the tissue during the colonoscopy.
The first immunotherapy was approved in March 2011. An article from 2017 listing diseases with approved immunotherapies misses fully 1/3 of the years (3 out of 9) in which immunotherapies have been approved.
