Nostr Web Client

Totally nostr:npub1tkfex6fd5er9h83299pzxcn699lxdrd3ff3859vhqfm9twtz5leqppwnl5. Many issues to ponder especially while building a decentralized censorship resistant publishing platform like MedSchlr.

Thinking about the point around the limited ability to interact with pre-print content of such kind, a gap that MedSchlr could fill since it is a Nostr native social networking knowledge commons that integrates nostr:npub1s3ht77dq4zqnya8vjun5jp3p44pr794ru36d0ltxu65chljw8xjqd975wz Alexandria library is infrastructure for engagement and learning that traditional platforms are without. It could be a viable tool that: 1) encourages individual learning in a novel way. In a user’s MedSchlr instance they could create lists, publish new content, remix other content with attribution, reference external links to articles using doi’s; 2) allows users to follow, comment, and synthesize related content of people they follow; 3) be a network of discovery and organic community formation not just for healthcare professionals and researchers but other users interested in medicine and health. The features and health related content are somewhat starting to take shape now, and that’s why we are building a landing page to help guide interested users.

There are many things to consider like relays and quality standards. If users aren’t using the same relay how would they be able to see others content and discover new? And also how is quality determined of academic works, web-of-trust? For ‘academic’ quality publication is it enough to have a charter that notes the rules of the community and for different study publication types ensure publication guidelines with checklists like CONSORT for randomized controlled trials as an example? There may need to be a degree of centralization for certain user groups but the decentralization could help to further reach and transparency.

Another aspect where MedSchlr could shine is content types. There could be transcriptions of videos, podcasts, etc. of medical and heath sciences information. This is already possible using #Alexandria. This would greatly expand what pre-print sites allow.

On the note of the publishing inertia, zaps, might potentially be a way to incentivize people to publish papers on Nostr and could be indexed in MedSchlr. Professional communities could form and could create new peer-review processes using the new value incentive structure.

These are all preliminary ideas to see how to leverage the MedSchlr-Alexandria-nostr ecosystem to better medical and health sciences publishing. Additional thoughts are always welcome.

Sovereign Tribes 2mo ago

Great discussion all around.

My hope for MedSchlr is to have discussions around emerging solutions to chronic disease.

As an example, suppose a low-risk intervention on a disease. Suppose that low-risk intervention is not widely supported, for any number of reasons. Suppose one main reason: the low-risk intervention in question uses non-patented natural medicines, or pharmaceuticals with expired patents, or both, and suppose that if the intervention is found to be helpful against one or more chronic disease, that it will represent a real threat to pharma profits and reduce the need for expensive surgical procedures.

Now suppose there are regular people, some with chronic diseases, who like to try stuff and read scientific developments on health topics (enter biohackers). Suppose that some of them are trying some emerging protocols already and suppose we just suggest to them a template for documenting their results as a case study.

And suppose those who get on board start publishing their case studies individually. Could be on MedSchlr for discussion.

The example I'm writing of is real world for me.

Dr. Makis' protocol using ivermectin and fenbendazol has been reported to help cancer patients shrink their tumours. So if it's good for shrinking tumours, what about shrinking non-cancerous growths like endometriosis or fibroids? As a biohacker I tried most of this protocol (I didn't use the vitamin C or the HBOT, but did use pretty much everything else). I did it for 12 weeks. An endometrioma cyst that used to be visible by ultrasound for years on my left ovary was gone after 12 weeks of this protocol. Wrt fibroids, the results were less conclusive. Two fibroids grew and two shrank. Overall total volume of fibroids grew, but at a slower rate than recorded from prior ultrasounds. Symptoms related to the fibroids disappeared for the duration of the protocol.

I would love to try another 12 weeks with more rigorous controls and documentation and publish it on MedSchlr or wherever people could access it to discuss constructively.

Here's the protocol:

https://isom.ca/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Targeting-the-Mitochondrial-Stem-Cell-Connection-in-Cancer-Treatment-JOM-39.3.pdf

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

MedSchlr 2mo ago

Thank you for your thoughtful feedback and input. MedSchlr strives to be a place where experience and information can flow for learning purposes around chronic diseases and other health and medical sciences topics.

Based on your feedback, we are currently drafting and contemplating use of a content/publishing guideline for general content, personal experience reports, and self-documented case studies. Potentially if interest increases there could be additional guidelines for other major content types that aim to be ‘peer-reviewed’ literature etc.

What you describe for your particular use case sounds like a self-documented case study. We’ll appreciate your feedback once the guideline is published and see how it can work for your needs and more broadly for others interested in this type of content publication.

Additional thoughts are always welcome in this early development phase of MedSchlr.