Is the cause "air" pollution, or could it be "noise" pollution? I would think living near loud traffic areas might lead to less quality sleep for the brain. And a lack of sleep is linked with alzheimers. Just a thought.
Why? I am not being trite. Why should we assume "no effect", or "no correlation", rather than "everything has some effect on everything else" and "everything is correlated with everything else"?
I'm curious if this could be related to lack of exercise or lack of sunlight or perhaps poor diet. All would probably go along with living in a high pollution area?
Edit. They mention they control for a lot of those factors. I wonder how well they can do that?
"surprising" as in "not surprising" - way to go LA Times. You hit another one out of the park with backwards editorializing. Next, another "surprising" link between water pollution and cancer.
It is surprising that particles going into your lungs would have significant cognitive effects.
Although it's fashionable to assert that pollution causes every imaginable ill effect, there needs to be a causal chain. In this case, "air pollutants induced inflammation, cell death and the buildup of amyloid protein in the brain".
That chain is not intuitive (and not predicted), thus, "Surprising."
Same here, with uMatrix added, too. Rather pleasant experience, too. No autoplaying video (I would see that there was a video and I'd bet it would autoplay had I not had uMatrix).
My issue is that even paid subscribers are served an unbearable amount of ads, e.g. videos in-line with the text of the article. I wrote their support to let them know that I'd gladly pay more on a higher tier to avoid ads, and this is their response:
"Ad-blocker must be disabled to allow advertisements and to continue to continue to the webiste. Paying for our content is similar to paying for cable or buying a magazine. You pay for those services but they still have advertising. Advertisements help to keep the cost of digital subscriptions extremely low in relation to other newspapers."
Thinking he has early onset. From my medical opinion. Would explain how he can contradict himself in the same interview. All those years in NYC taking their toll.
the Trumpmind is always looking for what sounds virtuous and popular. but that varies depending on the audience. and audiences change from hour to hour. so he's constantly contradicting himself based on his most recent audience.
one hour he's talking to some heavyweights from the energy industry. the next it's some heavyweights from the war industry. then it's some heavyweights in the legal profession. then it's an expert in terrorism. and their opinions all differ somewhat. Trumpmind soaks it all in and regurgitates it.
he's an actor -- always eager to please the audience with an outrageous performance.
Sylvester Stallone should cast him in one his righteous ass-kicking mercenary movies. then Trump could go on screen and terminate Arnold. the ratings would be sky high!!!
