Antidote Apk

[Onesimo Olafeso]

Theantidotes for some particular toxins are manufactured by injecting the toxin into an animal in small doses and extracting the resulting antibodies from the host animals' blood. This results in an antivenom that can be used to counteract venom produced by certain species of snakes, spiders, and other venomous animals. Some animal venoms, especially those produced by arthropods (such as certain spiders, scorpions, and bees) are only potentially lethal when they provoke allergic reactions and induce anaphylactic shock; as such, there is no "antidote" for these venoms; however anaphylactic shock can be treated (e.g. with epinephrine).

In early 2019, a group of researchers in Australia published the finding of a new box jellyfish venom antidote using CRISPR.[4] The technology had been used to functionally inactivate genes in human cell lines and identify the peripheral membrane protein ATP2B1, a calcium transporting ATPase, as one host factor required for box jellyfish venom cytotoxicity.[5]

I would really love to get antidote correction support directly in Obsidian.

No need to be real time at first, it could just show as a shortcut you can use to launch Antidote correction on any page.

Perhaps @Bibi53, you are right in saying a drop-down menu would be the most simple to make. I wonder which elements could be implemented as the plugin Dictionnary or not. Again, I am new when it comes to coding.

@phren0logy made me think of the english version of Antidote, which I assume you already use. I suppose the plugin should take into consideration which language you choose, as the program is sold separately depending if you are in French, English or both.

To access Antidote services you can attend one of our two drop-in services each week. You don't need an appointment. Alternatively please email anti...@londonfriend.org.uk with your name, the London borough that you live in and describe your substance use (e.g. name of drugs/ alcohol/ frequency) and briefly outline what you would like support around.

LinkedIn and 3rd parties use essential and non-essential cookies to provide, secure, analyze and improve our Services, and to show you relevant ads (including professional and job ads) on and off LinkedIn. Learn more in our Cookie Policy.

The evidence is overwhelming that other things being equal, obesity increases the risk for heart disease, diabetes, sleep apnea, dementia, disabling arthritis, and most other chronic conditions that plague modern populations. Obesity markedly elevates the risk for a wide range of cancers. Putting the fine point of recent and acute experience on all this, obesity greatly amplified the toll of the COVID pandemic, both directly and via its contributions to cardiometabolic disease; both in the U.S., and around the world.

Yes, there are bad foods; foods willfully engineered to be addictive at the expense of health are bad. Yes, ultra-processing is generally bad, because it is often done expressly to maximize the calories required to feel full- and works exactly as intended.

Which situates us between the horns of a dilemma. How can we combat both obesity, and obesity bias? How can we oppose the blaming of outcomes and the shaming of choices, while doing something meaningful to improve both? What, in other words, is the anti-diet antidote?

First, we should prioritize health and vitality rather than weight. Weight is a proxy for chronic disease risk; obesity is a canary in the coal mine of chronic disease. But it is the ill health that is the enemy here, not size. A focus on the pursuit of health for the sake of health, not the pursuit of size for the sake of size, should guide all efforts.

Finally, we must hold to account the machinations of the medical-industrial complex. Stated bluntly, we look on passively as one industry reaps enormous profits making us fat and sick, and another reaps enormous profits by treating conditions we never needed to get. This calamitous feedback loop has long hidden in plain sight; the staggering costs of the GLP1 drugs have only recently further illuminated its ruinous potential.

I close with an analogy I have long used: obesity is not a disease, nor is it any kind of character flaw. Rather, it is a form of drowning. We are drowning in willfully addictive junk where food ought to be; we are drowning in labor-displacing technologies and activity-depleting schedules.

David L. Katz, MD, MPH is a specialist in Preventive Medicine and Public Health, and former Editor-in-Chief of the Childhood Obesity journal. He is the founder of Diet ID, Inc, Chief Medical Officer for Tangelo, and past president of the American College of Lifestyle Medicine.

Scripture advises us that we should turn the other cheek to violence. However, my Jesuit training has taught me that in addition to nonviolent resistance we should hit back with love. Violence, in all of its forms, is meant to separate us and instill fear in our hearts. The most powerful antidote is love. It cannot just be about the absence of evil; it must be about the omnipresence of love.

Patrick Downes is a graduate of the Lynch School of Education and recently received his doctorate in psychology. Patrick and his wife, Jessica Kensky, were severely injured in the Boston Marathon bombings and helped to raise more than $250-thousand to endow the BC Strong Scholarship, which supports a student with a physical disability. This essay was originally written for C21 Resources, a publication of the Church in the 21st Century Center at Boston College.

What is published in NATO Review does not constitute the official position or policy of NATO or member governments.

NATO Review seeks to inform and promote debate on security issues. The views expressed by authors are their own.

Hybrid warfare remains a contested concept and there is no universally agreed definition of it. It has been subjected to a lot of criticism for lacking conceptual clarity, being merely a catch-all phrase or a buzzword, and not brining anything distinctly new to policy debates. Nevertheless, the concept furnishes us with key insights into contemporary and future security and defence challenges.

To put it simply, hybrid warfare entails an interplay or fusion of conventional as well as unconventional instruments of power and tools of subversion. These instruments or tools are blended in a synchronised manner to exploit the vulnerabilities of an antagonist and achieve synergistic effects.

The objective of conflating kinetic tools and non-kinetic tactics is to inflict damage on a belligerent state in an optimal manner. Furthermore, there are two distinct characteristics of hybrid warfare. First, the line between war and peace time is rendered obscure. This means that it is hard to identify or discern the war threshold. War becomes elusive as it becomes difficult to operationalise it.

The second defining characteristic of hybrid warfare relates to ambiguity and attribution. Hybrid attacks are generally marked by a lot of vagueness. Such obscurity is wittingly created and enlarged by the hybrid actors in order to complicate attribution as well as response. In other words, the country that is targeted is either not able to detect a hybrid attack or not able to attribute it to a state that might be perpetrating or sponsoring it. By exploiting the thresholds of detection and attribution, the hybrid actor makes it difficult for the targeted state to develop policy and strategic responses.

Recent studies on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq demonstrate how costly all-out wars can be in terms of human, economic, as well as social and political losses regardless of how disparate the capabilities of the conflicting parties or adversaries are. Owing to rapid technological advancements and the rise of asymmetric warfare, all-out wars can be ineffective even vis--vis powers that have relatively less resources and clout. Victory might thus become an extremely tough proposition.

With the cost of war ratcheting up and newer tools being at the disposal of states, the will to fight all-out wars might be diminishing. This, however, does not herald the waning of conflicts, but changes the dynamics of war. It is against this backdrop that states are increasingly resorting to hybrid warfare below the threshold of an armed conflict in pursuance of their zero-sum security goals. In a nutshell, the overall security environment is radically changing despite the nature of conflict remaining the same.

Hybrid warfare makes conflict dynamics murky not only because it offers a large and expanding toolkit to undermine an adversary but also because it allows its security to be undercut on two fronts in tandem. This also relates to the overarching objectives of hybrid warfare. On the capability front, the vulnerabilities of the targeted state in the political, military, economic, social, information, and infrastructure (PMESII) realms are exploited insofar as it is tangibly and functionally weakened.

Considering the complex nature and dynamics of hybrid warfare, a range of policy and strategic responses have been propounded by experts. Some of these revolve around measures for detecting, deterring, countering, and responding to hybrid threats in a meticulous manner. Nevertheless, with the information, cognitive and social domains becoming the cornerstone of hybrid warfare, any set of solutions sans confidence-and trust-building will probably fall short of offering effective antidotes.

We have already discussed that hybrid warfare often takes place below the traditional threshold of war. What takes the centre stage here is the role of civilians: how they think and act in relation to the state. Contemporary digital and social media platforms allow hybrid actors to influence this to the detriment of the adversary state with considerable ease. The Russian online disinformation campaigns, some of which are very subtle yet grave, against some Western states constitute a good case in point.

Also, as alluded to earlier, the state is spineless without the people. It draws legitimacy and, by the same token, power from its people. This applies especially to polities that are democratically structured. By driving a wedge between the state and its people, one can create conditions for its implosion. This is precisely what a hybrid actor aims at doing below the war threshold.

3a8082e126