There is an interdependent relationship among making money, having sex, and being physically healthy, according to new research published in the International Journal of Manpower.
The study found that workers who have sex two to three times per week earn an average of 4.5 percent more than coworkers who have sex less often. Based on a behavioral study that surveyed 7,500 individuals, researchers found that” workers with health problems who are sexually active earn 1.5 percent more than those with similar ailments who are not sexually active.”
Dr. Nick Drydakis, who led the study from Anglia Ruskin University, concluded that having a higher income results in leading a more active sex life, and that having more sex supports our efforts at the office:
Here’s one of the most intriguing — and consequential — theories circulating inside the White House: The generals, the New Yorkers and Republican congressional leaders see themselves as an unofficial committee to protect Trump and the nation from disaster.
This loose alliance is informal. But as one top official told me: “If you see a guy about to stab someone with a knife, you don’t need to huddle to decide to grab the knife.”
The theory was described to Jim VandeHei and me in a series of private chats with high-ranking officials:
There is a growing list of aging biomarkers available to researchers that help them measure how well someone is aging and assess how aging interventions are working in preclinical testing.
Some clinical biomarkers, such as DNA methylation and telomere length, are commonly used in labs. Other biomarkers, such as blood pressure, grip strength, heart rate variability, visual reaction time, and decision reaction time, are non-invasive and easy to test.
Currently, DNA methylation is generally regarded as the gold standard for aging biomarkers, although new techniques, such as cell functional age, are attempting to challenge that. The sensible choice, of course, would be to combine both methods to further improve the accuracy of results.
A new interview I did on my transhumanist California Governor run:
On August 4th, Zoltan Istvan joined Merion West’s Erich Prince for an interview to discuss his campaign for Governor of California. Running in this race as a Libertarian, Mr. Istvan previously ran in the 2016 presidential election as a member of the Transhumanist Party. Working previously for National Geographic, Mr. Istvan is well-known for his writings on transhumanism, the movement that aims to improve human life and extend longevity through science. A pillar of his campaign for Governor of California includes a proposal for implementing universal basic income.
Erich Prince: Mr. Istvan, thank you for joining us this morning. Could you start by explaining the connection that you see between transhumanism, the movement you’re so involved with, and libertarianism?
Zoltan Istvan : The transhumanism and libertarian movement are connected through this concept called Morphological freedom. Morphological freedom is the idea that you should be able to do anything with your body that you want to do, as long as it doesn’t hurt someone else. It’s a core transhumanist concept. Of course, it’s also a core libertarian concept. It’s the idea that your body belongs to you; it’s part of the non-aggression principle, and because of that single issue, transhumanism and libertarianism have always been connected. As a result, when the movement first began, it was very libertarian-oriented, and I still find it very libertarian-oriented, especially when it comes to government staying out of the way of people wanting to do science and not face interference.
Among the demands of Wednesday’s rallies was the allocation at least three percent of the GDP to scientific and technological research and 10 percent towards education, a statement by the march organisers said.
People across 25 cities join scientists in demanding more funding for research and promotion of scientific temper.
Laurin-Whitney Gottbrath 09 Aug 2017 20:19 GMT Asia, India, Science, Science & Technology.
A team of physicists from the UK and Canada have provided a simulation that supports the theory that our universe did not start out the way the Big Bang model proposes, but rather expanded to its current state after a period of contraction—a cycle dictated by the Big Bounce Theory.
The Big Bounce theory states that the universe follows a cycle of contraction and expansion, repeated infinitely. According to this theory, the universe did not begin with a violent explosion, but rather formed as a previous universe expanded or “bounced” back collapsing during the contraction phase of this endless cycle.
