Imagine for a moment that you've been sued, and the court requires you to submit video evidence you were known to have taken. Instead, you delete the video.

In this scenario, the person suing you may be allowed what's known as an adverse inference. Essentially, the fact that you failed to produce the video is taken to mean that the video contained what the person suing you says it did, and the court rules under this assumption. In practice, this is an easy way to lose a case, and serves as a great deterrent against destruction of evidence.

My opinion is that we need the same thing for police misconduct, but turned up to 11.

Whenever police "lose" body cam footage, detention facility footage, or any other video evidence they were known to have collected, it should automatically and mandatorily trigger the worst possible set of adverse inferences not refuted by available evidence, regardless of any actual allegations.

For example, imagine someone is arrested for drug possession, and the police get a written confession during interrogation. However, when asked for body cam footage of the arrest, it "goes missing."

In this case, the court would be required to make the following inferences:

1. The search police performed to find the drugs was illegal and entirely baseless.
2. The drugs were planted by the police.
3. The police threatened to torture and kill the defendant if they didn't confess, and used excessive force during the arrest as a form of intimidation.
4. The defendant was told during the arrest that they wouldn't receive an attorney and had no right not to cooperate.
5. This entire course of events was premeditated by the police, and motivated by the defendant's perceived race/age/sex/disability/etc and/or act(s) of political speech.

In addition, these inferences should apply not only to the criminal case against the defendant, but to any civil action brought against police as well.

TL;DR: "lose" body cam footage, get spit roasted in court.

I'm Canadian, and was watching a UK TV show, then I heard one of the characters give an arrest warning:

"I am arresting you for [The crime they committed ]. You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defense if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court*. Anything you do say may be given in evidence. Do you understand?"*

It was the bold part of the arrest statement that really got my attention. In Canada, we have a codified Charter of Human Rights as part of our constitution, with strong judicial review. On of the rights which is guaranteed is the right the right to silence/protection against self incrimination:

11(c). Any person charged with an offence has the right not to be compelled to be a witness in proceedings against that person in respect of the offence;

18. A witness who testifies in any proceedings has the right not to have any incriminating evidence so given used to incriminate that witness in any other proceedings, except in a prosecution for perjury or for the giving of contradictory evidence.

19. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. ( R. v. Hebert d detained person must be in a position to make a free choice on the matter of whether to speak to the authorities or to remain silent

Our Supreme Court says the purpose of consulting counsel before questioning"to allow the detainee not only to be informed of his rights and obligations under the law but, equally if not more important, to obtain advice as to how to exercise those rights." This means you are free to consult with counsel before police questioning. You are not entitled to have counsel present during questioning. However, you can insist that you will only answer questions if counsel is present. Generally the advice will from a lawyer will be be say "Repeat the phrase: I'm exercising the right to remain silent." Obviously, in Canada, no adverse consequences from the defendant: staying silent or refusing to answer questions during detention or trial. You also cannot a compel them as a witness at their own trial. When you stay silent, you are simply choosing whether to exercise rights or not.

The UK appears to operate a lot differently:

The [Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994](https://www.le

Just a really quick question (possibly with a long, difficult answer.)

Does adverse inference apply in situations where police claim bodycams were: not turned on, footage was lost, etc. Or does this not apply because it's only allowed if footage were intentionally destroyed?

Has it ever been tried before? Are there explicit reasons (like the one mentioned above) why it can't be or wasn't successful in the past?

I know from the Ahmaud Arbery trial that anyone performing a citizen's arrest must have sensory evidence of a crime.

If someone is performing a lawful citizen's arrest and the suspect harms them, is it a crime? If someone reasonably believes I committed a crime, but I don't believe that and they try to arrest me, that would be attempted kidnapping from my perspective, so it would be acceptable for me to use violence to defend myself, right?

A bit long and windy, like most legislation, but quite interesting to those who want to be sure law enforcement acts within the law.

I noticed this didn't format well. This is a link to the state website and article it came from.

https://search.cga.state.ct.us/2021/SUM/pdf/2021SUM00033-R02SB-01093-SUM.pdf

§§ 2, 3, 9 & 10 — BODY-WORN AND DASHBOARD CAMERA REVIEW AND UNFAVORABLE INFERENCE IF CAMERA IS OFF Right to Review (§§ 2 & 3) Under existing law, police officers have a right to review recordings, with their labor representative or attorney present, when they are (1) giving a formal statement about the use of force or (2) the subject of a disciplinary investigation where a body-worn recording equipment (e.g., body camera) or dashboard camera recording is part of the review. In these instances, the recordings are disclosable to the public, upon request, by the earlier of (1) 48 hours after an officer has reviewed it or (2) 96 hours after the recorded incident if the officer does not review the recording. The act changes the latter to 96 hours after the initiation of a disciplinary investigation, thus potentially increasing the timeframe before public disclosure. The act also extends this right to review to instances when a police officer’s image or voice is captured on a recording for which a public disclosure request has been made and (1) the officer has not been asked to give a formal statement or (2) a disciplinary investigation has not been initiated. The act requires public disclosure by the earlier of (1) 48 hours after the officer has reviewed the recording or (2) 96 hours after the disclosure request, if the officer does not O L R P U B L I C A C T S U M M A R Y Page 3 of 7 review it. As under existing law, certain scenarios are, generally, not disclosable, including the following:

1. communications with other law enforcement personnel, unless within the performance of duties;
2. encounters with undercover officers or informants;
3. officers on break or engaged in personal activity;
4. people undergoing medical or psychological evaluations, procedures, or treatment;
5. people, other than suspects, in a hospital or medical facility;
6. activities in mental health facilities, unless responding to a call involving a suspect in the facilities; or
7. certain crime victims if it would be an invasion of personal privacy (e.g., domestic or sexual abuse) (CGS § 29-6d(g)). Unfavorable Inference (§§ 8 & 9) Use of Force. Beginning January 1,

Previous | Interlude VII | Next

---Veterans---

The Triple Ms, Shings and I stand in an open town square, nearby Bahari ya Kaskazini.

Terran security being what it is, Dr Zunberi wouldn’t have been able to collect us from there, so this is the agreed meeting place.

I look around at the others, all dressed in a fashion they call ‘smart-casual’… aptly named!

I can imagine them socializing at a gala or relaxing in their Commonroom in these clothes.

Even the Shings have emulated the style.

It almost makes me wish that R’qali wore clothes!

I’m sure that any outfit I attempted to fabricate to match this style would look ridiculous; for the combination of clothes already looking extremely unnatural on my species and the fact that I’m sure my mind wouldn’t be able to reproduce the subtle nuances of it, the way theirs effortlessly seem to!

I have to settle for having a slightly nicer sash for my welfare devices.

For a [nanosecond] earlier, I considered digging out my old medals to pin onto it but… well, Msia has told me that the one whose house we’re visiting is a veteran of the opposite side of the same conflict… it would probably be in poor taste!

Plus, all of my medals amount to ‘congratulations for not dying’… not really anything to be proud of!

I also believe that displaying medals might not be conducive to the ‘casual’ part of ‘smart-casual’.

Just then, a clear tube with an ornamental conical nose, ornamental swept wings and a single occupant sweeps, near silently, over the square before dropping to touchdown in front of the group.

Nkasiogi Zunberi throws open the access door, smiles and says “Get in, nerds! We’re going to dinner!”

There is a general chuckle as the group begins advancing on the transport capsule.

We file inside and Dr Zunberi explains “We’ll be able to accelerate to Mach 10 over the Northern Ocean before we have to decelerate to Mach 2 to pass over the other side of the Settlement Band, over the Agricultural Zone we can start accelerating again so we’ll be able to get up to Mach 16 over the Equatorial Desert. Should take no more than a few hours to get to the Rainforest Zone in the Southern Hemisphere.”

Msia puts a hand on his sister’s shoulder and asks “Your two aren’t coming?”

She shakes her head and says “No, unfortunately, Luul is still busy with homing your mirklets and Amahle… wasn’t feeling up to it… They’ve both said they’ll come ne

This is going to be a rather wordy post on why Vitamin D in its various forms is:

• An effective treatment mechanism for covid-19
• Predictive of outcomes (severity) of covid-19
• Able to lower cases and reduce mortality across populations

A more specific tl;dr is at the bottom.

I've written this post as a more "academic" vent, since I am extremely frustrated with the clear double standards held by every major academic and governmental institution regarding covid-19 treatment and prevention. Major institutions are desperately focused on NPIs like lockdowns, mask mandates, or movement restrictions while simultaneously sitting on their hands when it comes to even such a safe intervention as Vitamin D. Early treatment or better yet preventative measures that target the disease are obviously better than the late treatment we have seen in hospitals around the world. In this case, any sort of prevention and even early (post-testing or post-positivity) treatment has been systemically rejected or ignored, while we see NPIs pushed as some apparently infallible intervention. I have come to view it as an equivalent to abstinence-only sex ed: they'll only teach you how not to have covid.

I live in Australia but have used US sources for my discussion of the evidence double standard, since they are quite jarring to read. Frankly, Australian institutions have been far lazier than their US counterparts (somehow) and have not even looked at Vitamin D as far as I can tell.

Although many treatments have been proposed, many of them have far more significant criticisms in terms of legitimacy and efficacy than Vitamin D. Whereas we see criticisms of somewhat popular drugs that are proposed for treatment such as ivermectin or fluvoxamine in a general lack of high-quality supporting evidence (I would tend to disagree, but I digress) such criticisms are not valid for Vitamin D. Even so, I will only be citing publications in Q1 sources for this post. For anyone not familiar with academic rankings, a Q1 source is one which is in the top 25% of publications overall, and I'll use scimagojr for this. Although I am not one to completely discount articles from sources that are not Q1 journals, limiting the sources in this post to Q1 only makes the work by comparison much harder to critique in a lazy manner that you typically see.

Meta-Analysis and Reviews

I will briefly mention some very high-quality meta-analysis/review articles that have been

Hello everyone,

I am as confused, as most are as well, about where in stage 3 revive is currently. Let's stick to the facts of the press releases and remove the assumptions that we are inferring.

On March 21 2020:

" The Study is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and the safety and efficacy data at each interim analysis timepoint at 210, 400, 600 and 800 completed patients are only made available to the DSMB for review and recommendations on continuation, stopping or changes to the conduct of the Study."

From this we know: Revive will meet with the DSMB at 210, 400, 600, and 800 completed patients.

On July 15, 2021:

Phase 3 clinical trial ongoing with next DSMB meeting at 600 completed patients

From this we know we have reached 400 completed patients.

On October 26, 2021:

"The DSMB supported continuation of the Study in its last meeting as there was no serious adverse events or safety concerns reported and it is expected that the final interim analysis meeting, which will take place at 800 completed patients to be held in Q4-2021."

Everyone INFERRED that this meant 600 completed patients was reached. It was never explicitly stated that the last meeting was at 600 completed patients, it very it could easily be referencing the 400 meeting. It was compounded by the interview with BMT which stated was titled " BMT remains upbeat after Bucillamine clears @ 600 patient analysis" . As far as I can find, there is no documentation that supports this title, both TDR and BMT have no inside information, and thus this is just inference.

now Dec 29, 2021

"Screened approximately 700 subjects and expanding to Eastern Europe, including Turkey, as part of its clinical diversification plans to support global regulatory approvals"

As the facts go, this gives us nothing toward the enrollment or completion numbers of patients. The facts are that any inference on the definition of "screened" is an assumption and it is not fact. I heard BMT try to infer screening was after enrollment based on the definition of enrollment, but this is not a fact.

Let's also point out that this states " e***xpanding to Eastern Europe, including Turkey,"*** This implies countries other than Turkey, but factually only means Turkey.

So where are we ? Well, we past 400 and we are not at 800 completed patients, but thats it. This press releases have been crafted in a way to not be forthright with the information investors wa

How many social problems are caused by mental health issues? Serious question. This sub doesn't really pay attention to mental health stuff as a policy question, which I think is a mistake - but I think part of the reason is essentially that the good solutions either seem "obvious", or "ineffective" or the issue seems to niche, compared to say, regular healthcare.

In reality, I think there's something on the horizon of mental health that:

1. We can advocate for easily.
2. There is already a lot of momentum behind it, meaning it's easier to achieve than ever.
3. Is absurdly, unrealistically effective.
4. Has that efficacy supported by the evidence.
5. Because of the social problems it could solve, is an extremely low hanging fruit policy that we're ignoring.
6. Already dovetails neatly into things liberals care about anyway.

I can't find any research on general "social problems" and how much "bad mental health" is responsible, but I don't think it's unreasonable to speculate "Quite a bit more than most people expect" is the answer. I'm going to be speculating a bit, but only on things that I think are uncontroversial but difficult to prove, and I'll be using evidence wherever it's available. The key point that I want to illustrate is how important mental health is to a whole nexus of social problems.

The point of this is to set up just how consequential you should probably expect the current breakthroughs in mental health to be. Like, amazing treatments for basically every mental illness. I want to stress why this is probably a much bigger deal than it sounds, because the applications of this treatment is even wider than I thought when writing the post! But:

How many people are mentally ill? Well, it's hard to be sure, because quite a lot - probably most - goes undiagnosed. And more and more young people, particularly women, are mentally ill, usually anxiety and depression. Are younger generations actually worse off mentally, or are they more aware of their issues? I genuinely don't know, but it doesn't really effect the question for policy purposes.

When it comes to crime, very few crimes are directly linked to mental health symptoms, but it's well known that [mental illness is more prevalent among prisoners than everyon

1. Men and boys have been underachieving in education for decades, with major harms caused

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2013/09/how-to-make-school-better-for-boys/279635/

> This gap in education engagement has dire economic consequences for boys. A 2011 Brookings Institution report quantifies the economic decline of the median male: For men ages 25 to 64 with no high school diploma, median annual earnings have declined 66 percent since 1969; for men with only a high school diploma, wages declined by 47 percent. Millions of male workers, say the Brookings authors, have been “unhitched from the engine of growth.” The College Board delivered this disturbing message in a 2011 report about Hispanic and African-American boys and young adults: “Nearly half of young men of color age 15 to 24 who graduate from high school will end up unemployed, incarcerated or dead.” Working-class white boys are faring only slightly better. When economist Andrew Sum and his colleagues at the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University examined gender disparities in the Boston Public Schools, they found that for the class of 2007, among blacks and Hispanics, there were 186 females for every 100 males attending a four-year college or university. For white students: 153 females to every 100 males.

2. Disparities in education in favour of women and girls are largely caused by teacher bias, and can be removed by objective methods of evaluation

http://empathygap.uk/?p=121

> Gender bias in favour of girls by primary school teachers has already been reported in the USA, Ref.[3]. To appreciate the Abstract of Ref.[3], quoted below, you need to understand what is meant by the term “non-cognitive development”. This is defined as attentiveness, task persistence, eagerness to learn, learning independence, flexibility and organization. To be more blunt, these phrases mean “well behaved”. To be even more blunt, they mean “behave like girls”. Ref.[3] concludes,

> > We extend the analysis of early-emerging gender differences in academic achievement to include both (objective) test scores and (subjective) teacher assessments. Using data from the 1998-99 ECLS-K cohort, we show that the grades awarded by teachers are not aligned with test scores, with the disparities in grading exceeding those in testing outcomes and uniformly favouring girls, and that the misalignment of grades and test scores can be linked to gender differences in non-cognitive

I don't want to step on anybody's toes here, but the amount of non-dad jokes here in this subreddit really annoys me. First of all, dad jokes CAN be NSFW, it clearly says so in the sub rules. Secondly, it doesn't automatically make it a dad joke if it's from a conversation between you and your child. Most importantly, the jokes that your CHILDREN tell YOU are not dad jokes. The point of a dad joke is that it's so cheesy only a dad who's trying to be funny would make such a joke. That's it. They are stupid plays on words, lame puns and so on. There has to be a clever pun or wordplay for it to be considered a dad joke.

Again, to all the fellow dads, I apologise if I'm sounding too harsh. But I just needed to get it off my chest.

When you use "Game Grumps" and "racism" in the same sentence, the obvious example of Arin's...er...sordid past comes to mind. The thing is, I can empathize with Arin. Whereas a lot of people will call him a hypocrite for going hard in the other direction when it comes to topics like political correctness, I have been in a similar place as he has. I used to call my friends the n word or f word and dismissed anyone who criticized me for doing it. I grew up and realized just why shit like that doesn't fly in polite society and I began fighting in the opposite direction. Whether it's genuine or not, I think Arin is attempting to do the same, albeit in his trademark clumsy way. And, of course, maybe I'm wrong.

Now Dan on the other hand...

I can't tell if it's a vibe I get from him, or just my experience with people his age, but I get the impression that he has a lot of biases and, let's say, "outdated" opinions that he knows to keep under wraps for the camera.

I think it was the Breath of the Wild playthrough where I became hyperaware of this vibe. When Dan says "WHAT'S UP N...BIIITCH. I almost dropped the n bomb!" He apologizes immediately and says he doesn't know where it came from. But then he goes on to say, "That could have been a career-ruiner!"

On hearing him say that, it occurred to me that Dan was more concerned with getting cancelled than being part of a social change. The Grumps office has most likely had the specific meeting where they discussed using offensive words. I can imagine Arin standing in front of the table and explaining that "we used to say words like this on the show, we all have thought these words were funny, but that's not how we operate any more." Also, I can imagine Dan rolling his eyes at the sentiment and begrudgingly accepting that the "optics" would be better if he went along with this new "woke" way of thinking.

Of course, he's let his true colors slip a few times, with the BoTW stumble being one of the more egregious examples. I'm not motivated to find a big list of examples as of now (this is probably the most effort I've ever put into a post on r/rantgrumps) but Dan really seems to not take the modern approach to casual racism seriously. Dan is not adverse to making inflammatory anti-Semitic jokes, which are excused (I guess) by him being Jewish, but are in bad taste nevertheless.

And who can forget the "BE-SCUUSE ME?" story where Dan happily mocks the stereotypical accent of a culture he does not name, but is

TLDR: Silymarin is comprised of chemicals that inhibit a transmembrane transporter of thyroid hormone into cells (MCT-8), as tested in vitro with murine (rodent) astrocytes (which are rather important for neuronal health!). Silichristin is by far the most potent inhibitor of this transporter. Healthy humans given 400 mg milk thistle extract had peak serum levels of silichristin sufficient for inhibitory action.

I was just looking into milk thistle extract, and from wikipedia found a study that shows that silymarin very strongly inhibits a transmembrane protein, MCT-8, responsible for transporting thyroid hormone into cells. Their study is on rodents, but they find that all of the flavonolignan components of silymarin, and by far most potently silichristin (a.k.a silychristin), inhibit MCT-8. They actually zeroed in on silymarin, and then silichristin, from a group of candidate chemicals because the inhibition is so potent

The authors state that most of the benefits that have been attributed to silymarin are focused on silibinin A & B, which are quite weak MCT-8 inhibitors, and so silichristin having such a profound effect has mostly been unnoticed, thus the potential harmful effects may have been underrepresented. They gave human volunteers 400 mg of milk thistle extract (weaker than ND's I'm sure, but higher dose), and found that the silichristin levels were within range of the in vitro IC50 (which is how much of a drug is needed to inhibit a biological process by half) - so they infer that in-vivo MCT-8 inhibition is very likely (if not certain, by my reading).

I do try to cycle everything, but I take this one pretty frequently because it is an effective component of my predrinking stack, and is also in the berberine tablets, which I take around the holiday season (think:feasts). I was wholly unaware of this significant risk. I would feel a lot better knowing how much silichristin is in the silymarin that nootropics depot sells. I would almost think that you would want as close to no Silichristin as possible in the product, especially since all of the flavonolignin components inhibit MCT-8 to some degree (which all the components in silymarin are, other than taxifolin, as far as I can tell).

The last few paragraphs sum up why all this is so concerning:

>Dysregulations of the TH axis are not always resulting in overt and acute states of disease, but a constant dysregulation will likely lead to adverse effects in the long run.

Do your worst!

I'm surprised it hasn't decade.

For context I'm a Refuse Driver (Garbage man) & today I was on food waste. After I'd tipped I was checking the wagon for any defects when I spotted a lone pea balanced on the lifts.

I said "hey look, an escaPEA"

No one near me but it didn't half make me laugh for a good hour or so!

Edit: I can't believe how much this has blown up. Thank you everyone I've had a blast reading through the replies 😂

It really does, I swear!

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/crinm/2017/2503762/

Conclusion

The case of the New Zealander female presented in this manuscript is one of the few cases documented in the body of literature. The patient had a frequent use of NPS, psychedelics, and other psychoactive chemicals including antidepressant medications. It can be inferred that the burden of (ab)use of hallucinogenic and other NPS chemicals is not to be underrated, particularly in the developed world, including Australasia. These substances can be abused as early as childhood leading to irreversible consequences including adverse pathophysiological changes of body systems, dependence syndrome, incidents of intoxications, fatalities, and sudden death. The magnitude of these hazards is obscure in relation to the developing countries, including the Middle East, Asia, Africa, and Latin America. In connection with the Middle East, more in-depth epidemiological investigations are mandatory to infer an estimate in relation to the spread of psychedelic (ab)use.

Because she wanted to see the task manager.

Heard they've been doing some shady business.

They’re on standbi

BamBOO!

I am on non-materialism side for various other reasons than the hard problem of conciousness, but I will actually argue against it here. Let's say that non-materialism is true and consciousness can't be defined as an emergent property of the material world. Then how would life look in a purely material universe?

Life definitely could exist in material world. There's nothing we can't explain here. Intelligence could exist in this world as well, as we created not that far from intelligent machines with purely material abstractions right now.

What's more, evolution must design some form of executive center - some cells lack energy and get hungry, but there is adversity somewhere, so something must make a final call for the whole group of cells whether to look for food or hide. It doesn't seem that the executive center wouldn't eventually evolve in a purely material universe - its an optimal evolutionary strategy and it doesn't seem impossible in the material universe.

Eventually cells would organize into subsystems, those subsystems must somehow structurize the summary of information they pass to the executive center. Evolution would design some form of a dashboard of all the relevant, summarized information it needs to know to survive for the executive center. Do we deny such dashboard would eventually evolve? How would that dashboard look like differently from the "hunger means get more energy" or "color red means it's a ripe fruit"? How would this dashboard be different from the consciousness? Do we deny that the executive center would "experience" this dashboard?

As there are different priorities it seems that some reward/punishment system probably would evolve as well, as how otherwise would the executive center weight different priorities of summarized information against each other? Heck, our AI algorithms use such mechanisms quite frequently - even back propagation could be seen as a reward/punishment system.

Now as we are interacting with other executive centers and our survival depends on those interactions, it would be very advantageous for survival to infer the state of the dashboard of other executive centers. If the executive center wants to get really good at it, it probably needs to be able to simulate some of the others dashboard in the own dashboard. It seems probable that if you get too good at the simulation, some of the simulated dashboard state would leak into your own dashboard. How would that be different from empathy and imag

Clinical trial evaluates INO-4201 as potential booster vaccine following initial vaccination with Ervebo, an FDA-approved Ebola vaccine

PLYMOUTH MEETING, Pa., Nov. 16, 2021 /PRNewswire/ -- INOVIO (NASDAQ: INO), a biotechnology company focused on bringing to market precisely designed DNA medicines to treat and protect people from infectious diseases, cancer, and HPV-associated diseases, today announced that several volunteers have been dosed with its DNA-based, intradermal Ebola vaccine candidate, INO-4201, as part of a randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase 1b clinical trial (NCT04906629). The trial will assess whether INO-4201 can be used as a booster in healthy volunteers previously vaccinated with rVSV-ZEBOV (Ervebo(R)1 ), an FDA- and EMA-approved viral-based vector Ebola vaccine. It follows INOVIO's pre-clinical and Phase 1 trials which suggested to investigators that INO-4201 was well-tolerated and resulted in 100% seroconversion after two doses.

"We are excited to begin this Phase 1b trial with our intradermal DNA vaccine candidate INO-4201 as a potential Ebola booster vaccine," said Laurent Humeau, Ph.D., Chief Scientific Officer, INOVIO. "Due to the potential for anti-vector immunity after primary Ervebo vaccination, boosting with the same vaccine several years later may not be possible. INOVIO's DNA vaccine candidate INO-4201 has the potential to serve as a booster in the setting of prior Ervebo vaccination depending on its tolerability after multiple administrations. Furthermore, our DNA vaccine candidates could offer scalability and allow for room-temperature storage critical to transportation within tropical environments."

Investigators plan to recruit approximately 50 healthy volunteers to participate in the clinical trial. The trial will evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of INO-4201 in healthy adult volunteers who previously received a single intramuscular injection of rVSV-ZEBOV (Ervebo). Ervebo is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the prevention of disease caused by Zaire ebolavirus in individuals 18 years of age and older as a single dose administration. Ervebo is a replication-competent, live, attenuated recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (rVSV) -based vaccine.

Trial participants will be randomized to either INO-4201 or placebo (4:1 ratio) and will receive an intradermal injection followed by electroporation using INOVIO's CELLECTRA(R) 2000 smart delivery device. The prim

Pilot on me!!

Nothing, he was gladiator.

When that happens, a party can file a motion to compel, asking the Court to order the opposing party to produce the contested documents or information. If a motion to compel is granted and the Court orders the information produced, failing to comply with that order can lead to serious consequences.

I am on non-materialism consciousness philosophy of mind side for various other reasons than the hard problem of conciousness, but I will actually argue against it here. Let's say that non-materialism is true and consciousness can't be defined as an emergent property of the material world. Then how would life look in a purely material universe?

Life definitely could exist in material world. There's nothing we can't explain here. Intelligence could exist in this world as well, as we created not that far from intelligent machines with purely material abstractions right now.

What's more, evolution must design some form of executive center - some cells lack energy and get hungry, but there is adversity somewhere, so something must make a final call for the whole group of cells whether to look for food or hide. It doesn't seem that the executive center wouldn't eventually evolve in a purely material universe - its an optimal evolutionary strategy and it doesn't seem impossible in the material universe.

Eventually cells would organize into subsystems, those subsystems must somehow structurize the summary of information they pass to the executive center. Evolution would design some form of a dashboard of all the relevant, summarized information it needs to know to survive for the executive center. Do we deny such dashboard would eventually evolve? How would that dashboard look like differently from the "hunger means get more energy" or "color red means it's a ripe fruit"? How would this dashboard be different from the consciousness? Do we deny that the executive center would "experience" this dashboard?

As there are different priorities it seems that some reward/punishment system probably would evolve as well, as how otherwise would the executive center weight different priorities of summarized information against each other? Heck, our AI algorithms use such mechanisms quite frequently - even back propagation could be seen as a reward/punishment system.

Now as we are interacting with other executive centers and our survival depends on those interactions, it would be very advantageous for survival to infer the state of the dashboard of other executive centers. If the executive center wants to get really good at it, it probably needs to be able to simulate some of the others dashboard in the own dashboard. It seems probable that if you get too good at the simulation, some of the simulated dashboard state would leak into your own dashboard. How would that be