[removed]

[removed]

Some autoimmune disorders like rheumatoid arthritis and psoriasis are indeed associated with an increased risk of cancer. The link between psoriasis and cancer was considered relatively recently.

A Danish systemic review, Prevalence, Incidence, and Risk of Cancer in Patients With Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (Vaengebjerg et al) made these observations about psoriasis:

> From a total of 112 studies included in the analysis, overall cancer prevalence among persons with psoriasis was 4.78% (95% CI, 4.02%-5.59%). When keratinocyte cancer was excluded from the analysis, the prevalence of overall cancer decreased to 4.06% (95% CI, 3.31%-4.87%). > > From the 14 studies that reported risk estimates in the context of overall cancer or included a reference group, the risk ratio for cancer development in those with psoriasis was 1.21 (95% CI, 1.11-1.33), but decreased to 1.14 (95% CI, 1.04-1.25) when keratinocyte cancer was excluded.

Here is an article summarizing the findings. Lymphomas and skin cancers are among the top cancers seen in among psoriasis patients.

A challenge with these studies is that they often look at people with severe manifestations of the disease, or that are being treated with immunosuppressive drugs such as biologics. The above study tries to account for the latter, but not (if I remember correctly) the former. While I don't have a citation in front of me, the association is mostly with severe psoriasis, not mild psoriasis.

Rheumatoid arthritis is another autoimmune disease tied to cancer. RA patients have double the risk of developing [lymphomas] https://www.arthritis.org/health-wellness/about-arthritis/related-conditions/other-diseases/arthritis-and-cancer-risk in particular.

To piggyback, I checked around and seismologists suggest this was at a depth of 18 km below the surface. Not as deep as some, so more surface effects.

Also a horizontal strike slip, so lateral movement between the two plates, so there won't be much vertical component. 7.8 is a massive earthquake, but by no means as insanely powerful as some of the 9+ that have hit Chile within recorded history. I recall reading that one of those in the 1950s had an offset of 30 meters along its rupture zone (deep in the earth), but I'd need to go find a source on that.

For an exceptionally rough estimate, OP could try envisioning the ground suddenly shifting laterally 15 meters while they stood upon it, then scale that back by a factor of more than 10 as this one was considerably less powerful.

Devastating for a building that rises multiple stories, while having a narrow base and made out of inflexible materials. But for a person on the surface of the earth, it would knock them flat.

Edit: Good illustration posted in pics
https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/comments/10wsr6n/anatolian_plate_moved_335_meters_after_the/

Society. Steroids and HGH have wild potential for improving the human condition, but instead what we got was Congress investigating cheating in baseball and passing some wrong-minded legislation* and serious social stigma (thanks, infotainment!) to prevent further cheating in hitting a ball with a stick.

This is, admittedly, oversimplified. It is also close to the truth.

^(*targeting drugs- can you believe it?!)

[removed]

[removed]

What do you mean by change position?

no because having an over active immune system is just as bad because if your immune system is fighting the wrong stuff it won't fight what it need to . and then combine that with taking immosupresive meds . i am a life long sufferer of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis and i dont say i get sick more but when i do its harder to shake

So the main rotor doesn't change position at all? It's all combination with the tail rotor?

u/saywherefore

The rotor to move in relation to the heli's body. "Rotate"
Like the tires of a car turn in relation to the chassis

The gas turbine (jet engine) has an output shaft. This goes into a gearbox which drives the rotor and tail rotor. The helicopter turns by changing the pitch of the tail rotor, and so the sideways force at the end of the boom.

[removed]

[removed]

Prevalence of diagnosed dental fluorosis is increasing (though in spite of the loaded phrasing in the question it's generally not an actual health risk) and there are probably at least three reasons:

1. Misdiagnosis
2. Improved diagnosis
3. Increased fluoride exposure.

The fluorosis that's increasing is, to a large extent, mild and very mild fluorosis (Current Guidance for Fluoride Intake: Is It Appropriate?; Dental Fluorosis: Chemistry and Biology). That means that the symptoms are not as dramatic as the classic severe fluorosis, and because there are many other disorders that look like mild fluorosis, there's a fair bit of misdiagnosis:

>Thus, misdiagnosis of non-fluoride-induced enamel defects may occur frequently. Reports of unexpectedly high population prevalence and individual cases of fluorosis, where such diagnoses are irreconcilable with the identified fluoride history, highlight the necessity for a more precise definition and diagnosis of dental fluorosis.

--Dental Fluorosis: the Risk of Misdiagnosis—a Review

Because there's increasing awareness of fluorosis it's also more likely to be correctly diagnosed today than it was 20 or 40 years ago, meaning that even if there was no increased prevalence there would still be increased diagnosis.

Finally, even taking away those factors, there is a genuine increase in mild fluorosis, and the reason is probably just what you'd think - Because adding fluoride is so effective and so beneficial, fluoride has been increasingly added to more and more products. When water fluoridation was introduced, the assumption was that people wouldn't be getting fluoride from other sources. Today, since that's obviously no longer true, there's movement toward revising water fluoridation guidelines, but since the current levels are clearly still safe as well as effective, the moves to reducing fluoride levels are cautious so that the baby isn't thrown out with the bathwater.

>In the present review, we discuss the appropriateness of the current guidance for fluoride intake, in light of the windows of susceptibility to caries and fluorosis, the modern trends of fluoride intake from multiple sources, individual variations in fluoride metabolism, and recent epidemiological data. ... An "optimal" range of fluoride intake is, however, desirable at the population level to guide programs of community fluoridation, but further research is necessary to provide additional support for future decisions on guidance in this area.

--Review of Fluoride Intake and Appropriateness of Current Guidelines

[removed]

[removed]

In Greek it's still 'imaginary'.

[removed]

thank you so much for the detailed response man it was such an interesting rabbit hole

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

This is why a combo of hGH and AAS with supplementation works wonders at healing tendons and ligaments