I'm just looking at the subscriptions and there's 10x more at locksmiths.

The problem as I've experienced with other subs is the right type of repliers in the sub to answer the questions.

Ie. Users may ask a question in the layman sub but may not get an answer or not a good one, so one may have better chances in the more subscribed subreddit.

Glad they did it while he was alive to see it, but part of me thought the same thing.

Why bring anyone else into this? What not just celebrate accomplishments of those that have done good without bringing other folks into it? You have just taken away the attention from the deserving and given it to someone else, even if it's negative attention.

Honestly it means a lot less considering universities are more about degree churning than quality of education.

Considering it's a "global university" especially. I wouldn't doubt it was some sort of discreet ad either.

Still better than University of Pheonix though

Some of those don't really count, specifically N Korea and Israel.

But Hiroshima sure was an act of terrorism as well as a means to eliminate the enemy's military.

Because they are ignorant on what that means if they don't provide medicine to Russia.

It isn't some medicine to make super soldiers. It's medicine to help kids and civilians, and yes, it may help their military people as well, from getting sick and dying.

It's funny one of the most rare things happens to be on reddit in the same comment chain, someone's mother, and two people themselves.

It's internet so forgive me for my skepticism.

Your history shows talking about personality disorders and anxiety/depression. I don't think they would have let you donate, but I don't let false information fill my mind.

Where they reluctant to let you do it and why did you do it? What gain is there for you? Even if minimal, ie. spiritual gain, or satisfaction that you know you helped someone.

There's quite a bit of ethic issues that arise from non directed donation that folks wouldn't think exists. You'd think providers would be happy to have volunteers but that's not the case.

There was someone on reddit who made an AMA about it and I feel they shouldn't have been allowed to do it based on the rules of being excluded if you desire to do it for attention since it seemed to indirectly related to attention seeking.

That sounds like a true alturistic donation. No one in your family recieved a kidney in return?

Here's a link describing the chain for anyone else wanting to see it. https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/nondirected-living-donor/pyc-20384850

Paired organ donation is what it's called.

The only living donor without benefit is an alturistic kidney donor. They, nor their family receive anything for it, so they don't do a kidney exchange, they just give a kidney.

This article is a bit misleading or unclear, im not sure if his daughter received a kidney from a deceased donor or a living one or if it was a "paired match" type of donation as you mentioned.

It sounds like his daughter got a kidney, and he, after, decided to be an alturistic donor. But I'm not sure.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/nondirected-living-donor/pyc-20384850

Edit: looks like it was a living donor scheme so exactly as you said with matching other families. He was doing it in exchange for his daughter. Not to be pessimistic but he did it for a reason. Someone gave his daughter a life changing present and he gave them a life changing present.

Very very few living donors are allturistic ones.

I don't know why but I read up on the most random things.

That's clever. I never thought about that as an option.

Do you have any publications or sources for doing it this way? If it's not any trouble.

I don't use crispr for anything at the moment, but there might be something I want to try it on. This 100% seems like the better option. And you could reuse the same plasmid with the cas9 and guide correct me if im wrong, and change the genes on the second plasmid if you want to try introducing a different gene in the same region?

Is it Ecoli or mammalian cells you are editing?

You transfect the cas9 plasmid and not deliver the enzyme itself?

Do people not typically send the enzyme itself using electroporation? I was unaware of this part.

Basically all you are doing is a transduction/transfection then, with all the necessary genes being sent through.

Besides research or development, there is the manufacturing fixed costs. But research and development has their own fixed costs in process development to get it to the commercial level. Clinical trials are not cheap either.

Basically think of it this way. A machine is going to cost 100 million and it only makes 100 doses per year because that's how many people need it. This is just an abstract number to show the concept.

On the plus side, the alternatives are very expensive as well and you need to take them repeatedly, whereas this is a possibly a cure IIRC.