I have reacted to reports of medical research, while distinguishing what I said from claims made by accounts I quoted. These posts do not provide enough study detail to verify the reported findings.
On December 3, 2024, I wrote “Dude” while quoting @IterIntellectus. That account claimed a team at EPFL in Switzerland had published a paper about restoring walking in people with spinal cord injuries using deep brain stimulation (DBS), targeting a new brain region for movement. @IterIntellectus characterized the results as “insane.” I did not independently confirm or explain the claims, and the captured post gives no paper title, team details, specific brain region, participant count, effect size, or other study evidence. The quoted thread begins with “1/” and includes a link, but no further thread content is captured.
On November 26, 2025, I predicted that “Ecom health guys are gonna go absolutely insane with this one.” I was reacting to @sciencegirl’s claim that Australian scientists found honeybee venom could destroy aggressive breast cancer cells in lab tests, and that the discovery might inspire future treatments. The quoted post included https://t.co/RQvlD1qhrz. It gives no further details about the scientists, experiments, evidence, or any clinical testing or resulting treatment.
On September 2, 2026, I called a longevity report “crazy” and said, “No wonder the health sector is booming so hard.” I was reacting to @JoinLifespan’s account of a new paper in Nature: it said semaglutide recapitulated many benefits of caloric restriction in female mice and extended their lifespan by almost 100 days. The quoted post said males had not yet been tested for lifespan and described red traces in the accompanying material as mouse movement. My reaction does not independently verify the study; the capture gives no further methods or results, and leaves male-mouse lifespan results unknown.
Related: ecom health hype claims, weight loss drug gold rush, longevity experiments and daily inputs