[ExI] ...so now we know...

[spike at rainier66.com]

From: spike at rainier66.com <spike at rainier66.com> 
Subject: ...so now we know...

 

 

>.I have a fun story for you.I asked (30 years after the fact) what the
study was for.  Answer: it was to correlate DNA with changing numbers for
vitals.  I gave them the six extra vials today.

 

>.Lesson: don't surf the internet.  Or if so, don't sign up for mysterious
medical studies, then move away shortly afterwards.  Or if so. take photos
of whoever they send to collect the samples.spike  

 

 

OK now, I find out the study wasn't too good to be true.  It was less true
than that: it was only sufficiently good to true, but insufficiently good to
be too good to be true.  Apparently, good true stories become false if
things get any better from there.

 

So, the dubious study story was true, and it sounds like a really cool
study: get gullible fools such as me to willingly hand over (bleed over?)
blood samples twice, spaced 30 years apart, compare the numbers and
correlate to DNA patterns.  Cool!  This was like the proto-23&Me, started
when Anne Wojcicki was still in high school.

 

OK so.I was part of that study.  But now. I STILL don't know who is doing
the study, where the results are published, whatever became of nurse Gunilla
Goodbody, I know nossink!  This sounds like a really cool project, I am a
data point in it somewhere, and I have no idea what became of that, or what
the hell, or where to find out.  I do have one important piece of
information: it really is connected to Stanford somehow.  

 

Have we medical hipsters here who might offer a vague clue where to find or
how to find a Stanford-based study of ageing which includes blood samples
collected 30 yrs apart?  Adrian, you have friends in that world ja?

 

spike

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20211029/9077119e/attachment.htm>