I haven’t heard vitamin d administration is associated with better outcomes, but I’ve heard that vitamin d levels are inversely correlated with outcomes - i.e., people should take a blood test and determine if they are vitamin d deficient, and supplement as needed.
> Of 50 patients treated with calcifediol, one required admission to the ICU (2%), while of 26 untreated patients, 13 required admission (50 %) p value X2 Fischer test p < 0.001.
Strengths: Randomized, very strong effect, strongly statistically significant.
Weaknesses: single trial, single center, relatively small sample, not blinded.
> Greater proportion of vitamin D-deficient individuals with SARS-CoV-2 infection turned SARS-CoV-2 RNA negative with a significant decrease in fibrinogen on high-dose cholecalciferol supplementation.
Strengths: Randomized, blinded trial
Weaknesses: single trial, single center, relatively small sample, secondary outcome measure
It’d be pretty useless to only research and document phenomena that you already understand. But in case it seems that odd to you, here’s 16 other cases of cancer that went into remission after a viral infection:
A good example was the AWS S3 outage that occurred when a single engineer mistyped a command[0]. While the outage wouldn't have occurred had an engineer not mistyped a command, that conclusion still would have missed the issue that the system should have some level of resiliency against simple typos - in their case, checking that actions that wouldn't take subsystems below their minimum required capacity.
Systems should still be able to be taken offline, though, even if that means failure.
For example, let’s say you have a service that uses another service that raised its cost from free to $100/hour and you call it 1000 times per hour.
Even though you may not have a fallback, and your service may fail, you need to be able to disable it. In this case, an admin is unavailable and the only recourse would be to lower the capacity to 0, since you have that control.
That doesn’t negate the benefit of validation, but don’t be too heavy-handed with validation, just as a reaction to failure without fully thinking it through.
Ideally a destructive command shouldn't be accidently triggerable. At the very least it should require some positive confirmation. Alternatively, a series of actions could be required, such as changing the capacity (which should be the comqmnd where the double checks and positive confirmations happen in my opinion) followed by changing the services usage.
I think many, like myself, will concede this point. Harden is a genius at "hacking" basketball. I don't really complain that what Harden does is traveling as much as the traveling rule needs updating so that it is.
If you go to YouTube and type in “FIBA gather step”, you’ll see a video released by the rules body showing legal 0 steps, the rule is being used exactly as intended, to the point where they want people to know it’s explicitly legal.
What you don’t notice is that the gather step is used for many more movements other than a euro step, but the euro step also has a change of direction and change of acceleration that combine to make the movement look illegal to someone who doesn’t understand the rules.
I’m just as concerned about:
> According to one cyber-security expert, the claims sounded "believable".
One anonymous source at the topic of the article that bolsters the claim, then all the experts who were willing to attach their names to their words all temper the articles claim are towards the end of the article.
