This article leaves me with a lot of questions. As I understand it, SPF labels in the US have to apply to both UVA and UVB. They tried labels specific to each but decided that they were too confusing. Next, you don't need more than about SPF 35 to get appropriate protection from skin cancer. SPF rating higher than that offer only marginally more protection. Lastly, how are these "chemical" sun screens blocking UV. If it's not physically blocking the light, are they somehow changing the spectrum of the light so that it is not harmful? So, other than this guy who has spent $18B to try to sell his product in the US gunning for it, what is the advantage of the newer "chemical"? Do they last longer, cost less, have other functions for health and beauty? Are they generally easier to use?

This just reads like an ad. There doesn't seem to be any journalistic value to this article and it's got a clickbait title. At minimum, it should have noted results for competitors.

Wow! That site sucks on mobile.

Stupid title for an article (duh!) but interesting research. I really think cellular microarchitecture is going to help explain a lot of functions in the body that we currently struggle to understand.

Considering that my wife has a crush on one and abhores the other, I'd say they are different.

I really liked their option to rewrite clickbait headlines. That saved so much time and frustration reading nonsense articles.

Gasoline is explosive. Do not poor it on a fire. If for some reason, you decide that a fire needs gasoline (first, rethink what brought you to this point) poor it on the unlit material and then walk about 20 meters away making a small trail of gasoline away from the material to be lit. Liquid gasoline is not explosive. The vapor that comes off of liquid gasoline is what is explosive. When you go to light you trail of gasoline, stand away from it toss your match or whatever at the trail. The vapor will ignite before the flame hits the ground and then race to whatever you poored the gasoline on. It will then explode and shake the ground under your feet because you thought "if a little is good, more is better." Better yet, just get some actual lighter fluid that was designed for what you're doing and not for propelling a ton of steel down the highway.

They say the same thing about demented old men, so I've given up on thinking that I know what the word "cute" actually means.

I see this in my office constantly and there are lots of reasons surrounding it. All of my patients get a mini mental status exam (MMSE) with their yearly physical after age 65.The ones with any impairment tend to deny it as real. If there is impairment, I try to work it up with labs and then a brain MRI. Insurance won't cover a brain MRI for MCI, so it has to be coded as "memory loss". Memantine and donepizil are not indicated for MCI, just dementia, so we don't prescribe them that early. We wait until it progresses. Also, I've seen a ton of patients over the years who have "microvasular changes" on brain imaging done for other reasons that no one has discussed with them, much less actually done an appropriate cognitive assessment and further workup. I don't know why I am such an outlier in these areas, because I'm not doing things that aren't indicated by specialty recommendation. I think it's just another sign of our broken system.

Also, what exactly are "essential cookies"? Why does the website get to decide if they are essential?

All I want is for the screen orientation to match my eyes orientation so that it doesn't flip or require me to mess with a toggle when lying down while I read something.

I had to stop using mine when I ignored it for about 6 months and came back and it couldn't connect to wifi anymore because it needed a system update. I have had time to try to do anything with it through my desktop, so it just sits on my nightstand and does nothing. I got a new Nook since then (easier to buy something than fix something. Ugh.)