Главная | Блог | Высший в интернете | Вебмастеру

 

Osimertinib(AZD9291)是一种抗大多数癌症药物,用于治疗非小分子肺癌(NSCLC)。 以批发价购买Tagrisso80mg由AstraZeneca提供#LetsMeds是一家值得信赖的仿制药供应商。 在2017中,FDA和欧盟委员会接受了这种药物作为大多数癌症治疗。

#AZD9291#奥西莫替尼80毫克片剂详情:

品牌名称:Osimert
盐名:奥西莫替尼片
国际品牌名称:Tagrisso
制造商:Everest Pharma
形式:片剂
包装:30粒装

什么通用Osimertinib80mg片剂用于?

Osimertinib80mg片剂用于帮助您在成人外科手术的帮助下,在肿瘤消除后避免非小分子肺癌(NSCLC)复发。 它同样被使用,因为一种确定的NSCLC的第一个补救措施必须展开到成人框架的不同组成部分。

Tagrisso№80mg片剂如何工作?

通用Tagrisso80mg片剂是一种抗癌药物。 它通过阻断指示大多数癌细胞繁殖的普通蛋白质的运动来起作用。 这使得能够防止或逐渐展开大多数癌细胞。

珠穆朗玛峰奥西莫替尼片的副作用是什么?

腹泻,口腔炎,皮疹,血小板计数低,副神经,头痛,食欲不振,恶心,头晕,嗜中性粒细胞计数低等。

当你有任何极端的方面影响,肺部疾病等时,请告诉你的医生。

通用可用品牌的Osimertinib片剂80mg:

Beacon制药公司生产的Tagrix片剂

由 Incepta Pharmaceuticals 制造的 Osicent 片剂

珠穆朗玛峰制药公司生产的Osimert片剂

Asso制药公司生产的Tagasso片剂

AstraZeneca制造的Tagrisso平板电脑

如何给予Osimertinib80mg片剂?

它是一种片剂,每天口服一次,按医生规定的剂量服用。 它可能是热情或不吃饭吞下Osimertinib(Tagrisso)完整的片剂。 现在不要再咀嚼,称重或分解药丸比服用它更早,现在不要再将它与膳食和液体混合。

以批发价在线购买Osimertinib平板电脑品牌的最佳地点。

LetsMeds是一个值得信赖的印度药房这是每个非司空见惯的批发经销商&司空见惯Tagrisso胶囊和他们的变化相对制造商除了不同的不常见的和有针对性的救生

为什么LetsMeds.Com?

我们在LetsMeds,是全球领先和值得信赖的药物供应商,由于每个客户都需要最好的,我们对物质的一致性有信心和忠诚。 我们的几个重要功能如下-

•100%质量保证。

*印度除了遥远的地方临床供应商。

*在高满意度的商品方面也是值得信赖的。

*最快的交货承诺在您家门口的150多个国家。

*超过10000+满意的客户。

•提供不常见和集中的救生高满意药物

我们运送货物的国家:

LetsMeds在全球范围内提供正确的服务,包括美国、中国、香港、澳大利亚、英国、约旦、沙特阿拉伯、马来西亚、阿联酋、新加坡、乌克兰、俄罗斯、越南、菲律宾、波兰、罗马尼亚、苏里南、卢森堡、匈牙利、台湾、新西兰、阿曼、印度尼西亚、柬埔寨、委内瑞拉、秘鲁、泰国、老挝、斐济、黎巴嫩、利比亚以及世界上几乎任何地方。

如何与我们联系?

你可以去我们的官方网站www.letsmeds.com 如有任何相关疑问,请通过不同的方式与我们联系:

呼叫/WhatsApp/信号/Viber:+91-7428091874,
Wechat/Skype:Letsmeds,
电邮:letsmeds@gmail.com.


Просмотров 456  

 

thought I was going to stay at Netflix forever. Top of market pay. Freedom and responsibility. Unlimited PTO. What more could you ask for?
So when I quit Netflix in May 2021, everyone thought I was crazy. My parents objected first. Coming from cultural revolution China where they barely had enough food to eat, they thought I was throwing away all the hard work they went through to come to America.
“Just keep your head down and do the work!” they said.
“Don’t be ungrateful for what you have!” they said.
None of my friends could believe it either.
“But the free food!”
“FAANG!”
“Just rest and vest bro!”
The only argument I heard against quitting that made me slightly pause was from my mentor at Netflix. He said I shouldn’t quit without another job lined up, because “I’d give up the leverage I had with my high salary at Netflix.”

Resting and vesting — waiting for stocks to vest
That made me pause for all of 3 days, but I quit anyways. Now 8 months later, I am 100% certain this was the right decision.
In this article, I discuss the 3 factors that helped me understand the real cost of golden handcuffs, and why even a half-million dollar salary a year couldn’t get me to stay at a job I no longer enjoyed.
A Failed Role Transition
With offices shutting down in March 2020, all the best parts of work — the socializing, the coworkers, the perks — disappeared.
And all you were left with was the work itself. So if you didn’t like the work, and that was all you had, COVID magnified this fact 10x more.
And I wasn’t enjoying the work. But it wasn’t always this way.
I worked at Netflix for almost 4 years as a Senior Software Engineer in growth. At the beginning I felt like I was getting paid handsomely to learn. And up to around the 1.5 year mark, I loved it. Netflix’s culture was so different than the more secretive culture I experienced before at Amazon. The memos for every product decision were available for all employees to read. It was like getting paid to do an MBA.

Netflix’s transparency around all of its product decisions was one of the best perks of working there. It contrasts with the more secretive culture at Apple and Amazon.
But towards the latter half of my time, the engineering work started to feel like copy-paste.
Need to spin up a new microservice?
Copy paste an old one, change the business logic, and you’re done.
New A/B test?
Copy paste the old one, change a few of the test variations, and you’re done.
New email test?
Copy paste the old one and — I think you get it.

Netflix is very into A/B testing stuff. Here are 4 variations of the CTA they tested from the home page (from the Netflix Tech Blog)
I felt like there was no doubt that engineering could execute for Netflix, but I felt the better question was whether a particular project was a good use of engineering resources at all. So I wanted to transition into Product Management where I could lead these efforts. I spent 2 years going in a circle around the company, networking non-stop, talking to every organization, and applying for every role I could find.
I submitted proposals on what my priorities would be as a PM when I applied to every org: customer service, developer productivity, studios, partnerships, and notifications. I suggested creating a role on my own team to help manage the growing infrastructure. I also suggested that other PM’s could delegate more of their work to me so they can free up their time and grow their org. All of these proposals ultimately didn’t pan out.

I spent 2 years going in a circle trying to get a PM job at Netflix, but ultimately ran out of options.
Looking back, I realized my mistake. I thought if I just tried harder, I would eventually get the job. But now I realized that sometimes things are out of your control because of a structural issue. Netflix doesn’t have a process in place to support horizontal role changes like this; I have never seen an engineer successfully transition to product management here.
They offered me more opportunities to partner with product management to develop product skills, which I was grateful for. But partnering is not the same as having the role itself. Ultimately you can’t just read a book about swimming and expect to learn how to swim. You have to jump in the water.
Waning motivation, waning performance
Towards the end of my failed PM job search, I felt the high salary was an increasingly bad deal. Before I was earning and learning. Now I was only earning.
My team’s goals and my interests also started to diverge. My team was moving more towards a more engineering focused direction involving a platform migration. But my interests were veering more towards entrepreneurship and product management. The engineering work I was assigned would never be applicable to any other future work I did.
It started to feel like I was making a previous career mistake again — staying in a job that wasn’t a great fit longer than I should have. This mistake is more costly than people think. If you stay an extra two years at a job that you wanted to leave, and did that over 5 jobs in your lifetime, you just wasted 10 years of your life working jobs you didn’t want to do. I felt like I was wasting time.

There is nothing more anxiety inducing than missed work messages.
My motivation waned, and my performance waned with it. I became less engaged in meetings, minimized doing any work that wasn’t directly relevant to developing product management skills, and dragged my feet on communication. The only motivation at the end was just trying to not get fired. It was just kind of sad to feel like I had reached a point where I was aiming for such a low bar, and struggling to even cross that.
Unfortunately, my manager started to notice. In a heated performance review that lasted over 2 hours, he told me that I needed to 1) be more engaged in this migration and 2) be more communicative. In his words, I had to improve in these areas “if I wished to remain on the team.”
Reassessing life priorities during COVID-19
The pandemic was a wake-up call.
Watching millions of people die from COVID made me realize that tomorrow is not guaranteed. You could die from COVID before any of your dreams are ever realized. And the longer you put off a dream, the greater the risk that it never happens. So if there is anything you want, you have to go for it right now.
No more next time. Now is the time.

A dream deferred is a dream denied. My favorite quote of all time.
I realized what the real cost to golden handcuffs was. The cost is your youth, your time, and your life. People don’t accurately judge these costs, because a salary is a hard number, whereas the value of your youth is more intangible. But just because something is hard to measure doesn’t make it any less valuable than something countable like money. It’s hard to measure the value of a brand, mental health, or love, but we know it matters.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Seeing all these people die from COVID made me scared that one day my tombstone would read:
“Here lies Michael. He spent his life doing work he never wanted to do. Then he got COVID and died. Rest in peace.”
The longer I stayed in a job I didn’t enjoy, the greater the chance that this WOULD be my tombstone. I knew I had to take action now — I could not keep kicking the hard career questions down the road. I had to quit.
Final Days
I saw the bad performance review and the threat of getting fired as a way out. But I wanted to get a severance package first without getting fired.
So I proposed to my manager in a 1:1 a few weeks after that we discuss a “preemptive severance package”.
I said something along the lines of: “My performance is declining because my motivation is declining. I don’t see my motivation improving because the team’s goals are diverging further from my career goals. What if we just discussed a preemptive severance package out of Netflix now rather than drag this on? That way Netflix saves money, you can find a better fit for the team sooner, and I can go do what I want. A win-win situation for everyone.”

Breaking free.
After he discussed this with HR, I had a final meeting with him and HR where they agreed to preemptively terminate me, and I got my final severance package out. Golden handcuffs — begone.
Life after Netflix
I thought my life would be over after leaving corporate, but it has been the exact opposite. I was worried that I’d have no social life, but I’ve actually met even more people after quitting — other creators, entrepreneurs, and builders.
I saw my mental health improve as the anxiety I developed from worrying if I missed another email or slack message disappeared.
I now feel this deep calmness inside of me, an unshakeable belief that everything will be OK, even if any future success is not guaranteed right now. As I type this on a Sunday night, I have no problem working on weekends if it’s work that benefits me. There is no better incentive than knowing that I capture all the value of my own work.

And by working only on things that energize me, it might ironically unlock potential earnings even greater than I was making before.
It’s been 8 months since I quit in May 2021. I took a bit of a break for the rest of 2021. I lived in NYC for a few months, took a road trip through Utah and Arizona, and generally just enjoyed life.
I’ve decided to commit fully to working for myself. Although I’m just starting, and don’t have any real dependable streams of income, I’m going to trust the process that if I’m working on the things that energize me, good things will happen.


Просмотров 323  

 

“Don’t let your disability define you.”
I’ve lived almost 20 years as a disabled woman. Though I didn’t take my first steps until the age of 5, I’ve had no choice but to grow up in a hyper condensed amount of time. I’ve been forever bonded to the multitudes disabled life contains — the beautiful and the ugly. I’m not shocked by others’ bizarre behavior at this point. But I can’t wrap my head around the fact that people expect me to transcend my disability…I’m not even sure what that would look like. The closest thing I can think of would be my soul leaving my body, and that requires one of three things: drugs, dying, or being at a Taylor Swift concert every waking hour of my life. Choose your fighter! (To note: I choose the never-ending T Swift concert).
So, with those scenarios being completely unrealistic, I’m screwed in the transcendence department. Luckily, I have another unsolicited suggestion, to forget my disability, let it run its course, and just flip everyone off who can’t handle my presence. This ideology is one I’ve developed several hypotheses for and have tested out many times (the flipping people off part symbolically, though, I don’t have the fine motor skills or the guts to give the bird on a whim). Guess what? It doesn’t work, not even close. And when I tell people that this transcendental excursion and forced positivity fails, their faces turn inquisitive and frustrated, they begin to spew things like:
“You’re hyper-focusing on your disability,”
*after I ask for assistance* “you underestimate your capability, push harder.”
“Don’t wallow in your disability, that’s victimhood.”
“You should be more like this disabled person,” *shows me social media post* “they are just so positive and inspirational despite their circumstances. That mindset would be good for you.”
For the record, it’s only been in recent years I’ve started to let go of the unrealistic expectation to be an ultra-positive disabled person. I only really discuss the negatives if I open up to someone. But otherwise, I’m still constantly trying to embody this expectation because it feels like the only way to be taken seriously.
“Just don’t let it define you.”
“Don’t let your disability win!”
“People are probably being nice, you’re just overthinking.”
“You weren’t bold enough.”
In many cases, the people who tell me their revolutionary ideas are the same people who can’t shut up about my disability. They bring it up in every conversation, ask invasive questions, erase my pain and heartache as well as my joys and successes, treat me as inhuman, and then expect me to stop hyper-focusing on my “issues.” Am I really the one fixating on my disability here? I don’t think so. I was just asking if you pour your cereal or milk first, and now we’re halfway through my extensive medical history.
It’s taken a long time for me to realize this pattern because it becomes internalized. I become angry at myself for existing. No stomach bug can nauseate me the way this feeling does; this feeling of inadequacy and inhumanity just because I’m disabled. Just because my body is different. Just because sometimes I have plastic and metal on my feet, neck, and back. Just because I struggle walking and look different. Is this feeling that leaves me so frozen worth it?
Why do these suggestions, comments, and statements cut so deep?
Even if it’s done without malintent, telling someone they “hyper-focus” on their marginalized identity and/or that they should “just be grateful”, “push harder” or “just stay positive” is, in my opinion, the equivalent of spilling gasoline onto the already roaring fire of painful division blazing throughout the world. Well-intended people saying or implying these things will never get it, but they don’t have to, empathy doesn’t require experience. I feel bad to admit that it’s growing hard for me to find grace for these people anymore, so I keep quiet and make myself smaller.
To these people, I must kindly ask, If you “don’t see disability”, why do you whisper it like a dirty secret before introducing me to others or referring to me when I’m not there? Why do you have to look past my disability as if it’s a boulder blocking a stunning view? Is it scary? A turn-off? Does it make me inhuman? My disability doesn’t make up the entirety of my being, but it’s a huge component of who I am, and I need people to see it. Erasing it would be inauthentic.

My little sister pushing me (age 13) in my wheelchair post my double reconstructive foot surgery. (Photo by author)
I can’t stop thinking about my disability if the world can’t.
It’s not necessarily my decision, but most days I wake up and chase certain inner chaos in order to survive. I get so angry and distraught with how I’m treated that I attempt ghosting my disability, living my life without showing any “weakness”, letting things flow without making a scene, not caring what others think, and taking the suggestions I typically resent. That sounds like a good idea, right? Allow me to illustrate what the chaos looks like in motion:
A day in denial.
I wake up. Cool. I decide I can’t take living like this anymore. It’s too early for thought so haunting. I come to the realization that I can either a) disappear under my duvet for the rest of time, or b) get up regardless and turn my anger into strength. Trick question: I don’t get that choice, so it’s option B.
Electrical currents of pain course throughout my entire body. Wait, I can’t acknowledge that, it’s related to the thing I’m avoiding. Get up. The toothpaste tube and the weakness in my hands go to battle. Let the day begin. My body feels like it’s going to give out. I pretend not to notice. People are staring, but it’s probably in my head. Just be you. My pain has me on the verge of tears during class. I widen my smile until my face is contorted into an odd smirk. “Atta girl,” the voices of those who have shrunk my ring in my ears. Focus.
Post 10:40 am class, I’m hungry. I make my way to the cafeteria. Look at me, queen of independence, disability who? I pull out my phone to use Apple Pay but I can’t double click the button, I’m fumbling. Apple just forgot to make this accessible, it’s okay! I’ll accommodate! I have to pay cash. Breathe. The cashier audibly whispers to her co-worker “she’s struggling” as a decent-sized line forms behind me. I don’t have the heart nor do I have the range of motion to look back. I struggle with the wadded $20 from Christmas in the pocket of my elastic jeans (I can’t button regular ones). I give her the cash. She makes a point to further emphasize my struggle. Should I curse her out? I can’t pick up the change. I leave some coins sitting on the counter. I drop dollar bills. I struggle to assemble a paper bag and throw the cash right in next to my food. Gross, but I have no choice. Eyes bore into me, but maybe not? Maybe I’m delusional. Probably.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Anyways, I did it! I force positive affirmations through my head like the Shakespeare sonnets we had to memorize for high school poetry class – something about darling buds of May? I’m unstoppable. Tears are not welling in my eyes as I walk back to the location of my next class. My pain level is off the scale, making this seemingly mundane experience some semblance of a nightmare. Just get through it. The day goes on. I fall hard on the tile because someone forgot to dry the floor. Concerned faces haunt my peripheral. It’s cool! Everyone falls, maybe it’s quirky! Despite my fear, I start small talk with classmates to combat this all-consuming isolation. I’m met with half-hearted sighs and sometimes talked to as if I’m a toddler.
I’ve got to be an awful person – their behavior is most likely unrelated to the fact that I’m so confusingly configurated and that they all just saw me eat shit, right? I can’t play the victim and blame my disability. But I know the truth like the back of my hand, I’ve lived it. It is my disability, making me mystically invisible and hyper-visible simultaneously. This is all too much. I’m done pretending. How am I supposed to transcend my disability in a world that repeatedly obsesses over it and tells me (silently and blaringly) that my existence is either a burden or an after-thought?
“Band-aids don’t fix bullet holes”
I must admit it, dear reader, after letting all of that out, I’m scared. I fear that people will think I’m trying to write myself into some “woe-is-me” plotline. I’m not. My life isn’t a sad story, it’s complex, and that’s beautiful. Reducing myself to a black and white tragedy would erase the entire argument of this essay, erase my life’s purpose, and simply serve as untrue. I am not a sob story or a being whose only purpose is to remind people that they “have it good”. I’m a writer, artist, sister, daughter, friend, student, stranger, listener, and human. I’m writing this because it’s about time we disabled folks can embrace ourselves as humans, but you have to meet us halfway. Deciding not to care what others think of you is a luxury we don’t have. I chose to give this example of an average day in my life to illustrate that I depend on what others think or in most cases, don’t think. If buying food is inaccessible, I forego my lunch. If I can’t open a water bottle, I’ll just have to wait until there’s something I can drink. If there’s no elevator, I take on steep stairs despite the danger. If someone refuses me a basic job opportunity because of my disability, I don’t have money.
I’m not, in any way, trying to paint disabled life as tragic, but the way society treats us is. We are not at fault. I wrote this essay in an attempt to make sense of all the backward logic that has been thrust upon me. This is our reality, we live in a world that isn’t built for us, and we are reminded of it in all we do. Just because we’ve grown used to it doesn’t mean it isn’t soul-crushing.
If you have an open wound, you can’t just ignore it, be positive, leave it untreated, let it bleed, and expect it to heal. You must acknowledge the wound, cover it in salve, problem solve, and adapt in order to truly heal and finally wear that scar with pride.
This is the same thing as allowing disabled people to acknowledge the pain of living in an ableist society instead of telling them to just keep going or be more positive. We must be relentless in the pursuit to make the world equal for all, lives depend on it.
I can’t help but wonder what the world would look like for us if instead of being encouraged to look and move past our disabilities, we were encouraged to embrace them. I believe that’s where the healing begins.


Просмотров 310  

 

In 2015, photographer Massimo Sestini documented refugees leaving their homelands for safety as they crossed the Mediterranean, hoping to seek asylum in Europe. Sestini’s photographs were well praised and won several awards, but Sestini, as well as many others, recognized that the images do not properly recognize the personhood of the migrants on board the ships. Sestini’s most famous photo, taken from above, shows hundreds of people tightly packed on a shallow hull boat; many are children and few are wearing life-jackets. The image reduces the individual into a collection, negating their personal experience. This reflection inspired Sestini to start his “Where are you?” project to identify the humans aboard the ship.
On February 24, 2022, the same day Putin began a brutal invasion of Ukraine, the Associated Press tweeted a short video by photographer Filipe Dana that resembled Sestini’s image. The video clip was short footage of migrants on an overcrowded boat on their way to Spain for hopeful asylum. The AP was set to “drop” the clip as an NFT for purchase the following day on their new NFT marketplace. Following an incredible amount of vocal outcry, the AP deleted the tweet and apologized.

Aside from the gratuitous commodification of human pain using the crypto market, the image perpetuates the negative depiction of refugees through the mediation of migration. This ongoing debate about how we see the migrant in media can be considered again through the AP’s mistake.
In her book, Mediating Migration, Radha Hegde writes that the immigrant body is “disciplined, racialized, and surveilled” and the body is often all the immigrant has when they “navigate spaces of uncertainty and risk.” The migrant and refugee are not often seen as a human person in media representations, but rather as a state of temporary being, one who is seen in transit, but rarely in a settled destination.
Hegde further explains that in our mediated present, not only do migrants have to worry about technologies of surveillance, but also the overt “patriotism of citizens” who enact exclusionary tactics.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
While some countries are leaning into authoritarian leadership, immigrants are often framed as a problem or a boogeyman. The reduction of the person to a “crowded boat” does not help the story of the individual struggling for safety. In fact, Filipe Dana’s image does more to confirm the stereotype of an invading group of outsiders.
In a lengthy analysis of Sestini’s photograph, authors Paul Mihailidis, Liat Racin and Eric Gordon wrote Digital Crossroads: Civic Media and Migration in 2016. Their extensive report analyzed the concept of Mare Nostrum (our sea) operation, the refugee crisis, and othering through media. The report also provided tools to combat xenophobia.
Mihailidis, Racin and Gordon argue that the current flows of population are unique in global migration history due to the combination of economic migration and those fleeing war and our ability to capture images and share them online. The authors found that the media continues to represent these migration flows (from either on foot or over water) from a macro standpoint, seeing the mass of people rather than the human individual. The paper calls for an immediate adaptive strategy to combat the perpetuation of mediated xenophobia.
Distinct from Sestini’s photograph, the recent AP NFT project not only perpetuates the depiction of migrants and their plight, but also attempts to reward it through profit. As an aside, the AP also used Discord to enable people to ask questions and it did not go well.
The war in Ukraine has displaced millions of citizens and turned them into refugees. This has correctly created some consternation among human rights activists who see the different ways we use media to represent the migration crisis.

As Dr. Ayo Sogunro tweeted in response to the absorption of the Ukrainian migrants, “Europe never had a migrant crisis. It has a racism crisis.”
In these tumultuous times, the AP should have known better than to attempt this project. The image, fortunately, was never minted and an AP spokesperson said the video was noted to be “a poor choice of imagery for an NFT” which is quite an understatement.

Migration will be part of the rest of our lives as we live due to the unfortunate reality of oncoming climate disasters, economic shifts, unjust wars and population changes. We have the opportunity to learn from this and recognize individual people as we are attempting to do in the Ukraine crisis. This should be extended to those on boats crossing treacherous seas or people walking thousands of miles.
And most importantly, we should engage in conversation about the work of journalism in terms of rights, commodification and storage on the blockchain. To reiterate what Mihailidis, Racin and Gordon propose, we need to ask journalists and reporters to tell a “living story” about the people on the boat and recognize their present reality. Let’s hope we can learn from this error and help people in need.


Просмотров 286  

 

The other day, I finally decided to have a free session to discuss my new book, Making Numbers Count, with readers.
It was small and very informal — a group of people discussing numbers, asking about different ways to present data at work. Twenty minutes in, a woman, Lauren asked a question about an upcoming presentation.
“I only have one slide, but I have oodles of data. How do I choose what to put on the slide?”
It’s just the kind of question I spent the past few years researching and writing about. I had a few slides ready to screen share on the topic. I had studies to back it up. I had some wonderful examples to use that never made it into the book, and was really excited to share these with her. Helping people answer questions just like that was one of the reasons I decided to write the book and have a free session in the first place.
Instead, a guy named Peter answered the question.
So I just sat there.
At first, I thought, “oh, okay, this is like… a round table discussion. I’ll just play it cool.” But the other participants had asked me the question, not him. I did, eventually, get the chance to chime in.
Someone else asked another question.
Peter answered again.

Photo by Liza Summer from Pexels
What if Peter had spent a few years researching a topic, writing a book, and then decided to give some of his time to answer reader questions for free? And what if some random person jumped in and started answering questions?
A few hours later, after talking to a few people, I decided to send him a message:
I did just want to say that while I enjoyed having you, you answered a few questions that were directed towards me. I didn’t want to use the word mansplaining, so decided to wait and address it afterwards. It was informal and I’m sure you didn’t mean anything, but constantly having to face that makes me less likely to do these things in the future. Thanks for coming!
Based on his response, it’s safe to say that he thought I was overreacting. (Based on what he said during the session about his wife and daughter, he has a lot of “overreactors” in his life.) But pretty much every time in my life that I’ve accused someone of overreacting, all that really meant was that I was missing a lot of information.
What I’ve learned over the years is that sensitivity is relative. In the same way that laziness does not exist: If you think that someone is overreacting, it really just means that you don’t have the whole story.

What Peter didn’t see:
The fact that I immediately started thinking “I could be doing something better with my time than dealing with this.” (Opportunity cost is a major source of mental fatigue.)
How awkward it was for the other participants to have to listen to him.
How many times I’ve had to deal with that in the past. Social stressors, when chronic, can have a lasting impact on our health.
How tiring it is to have to engage in this “should I/shouldn’t I say something” mental gymnastics.
In the past, whenever I’ve accused someone of overreacting, they were under a lot of pressure at work or home. They were tired of having to answer the same question for the 1,000,000th time. There was an entire world of information that I was completely oblivious to — and judging them for.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Now, whenever I think that someone else is overreacting, I take a minute to consider the fact that I’m contributing to their stress. I’m a part of the pile-on.
If it seems like everyone else is overreacting, then it’s my problem: I’m the one who’s not being sensitive to others. I’m choosing to remain ignorant of how I’m contributing to the situation.
We’re never completely objective observers: we’re a part of the situation. Thinking that someone is “overreacting” just means that there’s more to the story that we have yet to learn. If you think that people should learn how to laugh, learn how to take a joke — and that we’re coddling young people — then, just maybe, it would help if you learned funnier jokes that aren’t being told at someone else’s expense.
The flip side of “No one is overreacting”
There are two sides to every story, of course: I have to take my own medicine.
I can’t just use this as blanket advice to give to others when I think they’re mansplaining or being insensitive. If someone else seems to be overreacting, I have to examine my own role. Maybe they’re not used to having someone else call out their behavior. Maybe I made a mountain out of a molehill. Maybe I could have just let it go. All I can do is examine my motives and get other perspectives.
All I can do is understand that I don’t have to be friends with everyone. When it comes to some people, the best thing we can do is let them go.


Просмотров 278  

 

Let me paint a picture of what e-learning days in my house look like.
We found out last night that this will be an e-learning day because of cold weather. So this morning, the kids are on their second breakfast by 9 am and they’re keyed up and itching to get started.
By now they’ve caught on to the fact that e-learning actually means they’ll have a very small amount of work and then a full day of play. Both my sixth grader and my third grader see e-learning as a small hurdle to be jumped before reaching the promised land of unlimited Minecraft and movies.
Even though we have tight limits on screen time on normal days, e-learning days are not normal days. My partner and I will be working, so typical limits are suspended for everyone’s survival. The kids will be mostly on their own, not in a dangerous or negligent way, but in a get-your-own-snacks and keep-yourselves-busy and don’t-bug-us-when-we’re-working kind of way.
As I’m running out the door for the in-person component of my work, my partner, who works remotely from our home every day, is taking a work call on his cell phone. He’s hiding in the guest bedroom, trying to evade the voices of small children while on his call. My younger child is searching for him with the intensity of a heat-seeking-missile, loudly calling, “DADDY!!! I need help with my Chromebook! DADDY! HELP!!!”
I try to reassure this frantic child that Daddy will help her as soon as he can, and that I’ll be home around lunchtime to help as well.
“Bye!” I say as I exit the scene, relieved to be delivered from supervising e-learning for the morning while I do my own job. They’ll all be fine, I tell myself.
I return home around lunchtime to find that they are not, exactly, fine. The kitchen looks like the scene of a battle between Cocoa Puffs and goldfish crackers. My partner is at his computer working on a project he has to finish this morning, and my younger child is next to him resting her tear-stained cheeks in her hands. I gingerly make eye contact with my partner. His eyes are wild and his look says, just don’t even ask.
In the next room, I discover my other child still in pajamas doing a Wordle. “Mom, I need help,” he says in a voice dripping with frustration. I solve the Wordle — the word is tacit, one not yet in his vocabulary — and he whines that he couldn’t possibly figure that out if he’s never heard the word. He triumphantly declares himself done with his e-learning, and in record time — today it took him 20 minutes. The Wordle was the final bit, the finish line.
“Your language arts lesson was a Wordle?” I ask. His shoulder shrug says, I guess so?
Later that evening my partner and I sigh and collapse into the couch, celebrating victory after another day of e-learning. He tells me what precipitated the tears I had seen earlier on my daughter’s face. She’d needed to summarize a story and while he was patiently coaching her through it, she had yelled, “But I don’t know HOW to summarize! YOU DON’T UNDERSTAND!” through tears of exasperation. After that she’d spent an hour doing cartwheels in the living room.
I thank him for facilitating most of the e-learning, again, and acting as IT support. He had rebooted one of the Chromebooks four times, supported one child who could not find any of the assigned work, and dried each child’s tears of frustration. Even though the actual e-learning assignments were relatively brief and minor, the emotional distress experienced by all of them was enormous in comparison. My partner appreciates my gratitude but I can see he’s growing weary.
We all are.
My children have had at least one e-learning day each week for most of the winter, and some weeks it’s been two or three days. To be fair, January and February in the Midwest are snowy, cold, and foggy. But we’re getting sick of each other, and though we’re getting very good at Wordle, I’m questioning what we’re doing here.
I grew up having snow days occasionally, but I remember them being few and far between. They were celebrated and rare oases of hot cocoa and sledding with friends. These e-learning days I’m now experiencing alongside my own children are much more numerous, and, dare I say, frivolous. Some of the days when school has been shifted to e-learning have legitimately been for really difficult weather, but some have been marginal — by which I mean there was a solitary snowflake in the air so the school shifted to e-learning. There is a neighboring school district that has e-learning every other Monday all year long, because what started as a pandemic-related day for extra cleaning has been continued into this year as well.
I recognize, obviously, that technology has shifted our capacity to do e-learning in a way that clearly has potential benefits. If it’s truly impossible to get kids to school on a snowy day, or if we truly need a whole day during the week for cleaning, I see legitimate benefits to having some way to continue to engage them in learning.
What concerns me is the number of unnecessary e-learning days, and the ease with which we can now shift to e-learning with a false sense of security, without recognition that we might be careening down a slippery slope.
The two main things I’m concerned about with respect to e-learning are efficacy and equitability. Does e-learning work, and does it work for everyone? I’m not sure we can answer these questions yet, and therefore, we need to take a pause.
During the pandemic, we forged full-speed ahead on e-learning because we had no other options. We went into emergency mode, and in emergency mode, we’re just trying to keep things afloat. As schools closed for Covid cases and quarantines, e-learning was better than the alternative at that time, which was no school at all. However, our landscape of alternatives looks different now, at least from where I’m sitting. Our alternative now is having kids in school. Now, we need to be asking if e-learning is better than having kids in school.
My partner and I are exhausted after a day of e-learning because we’ve rearranged our work schedules to try to accommodate the need for constant supervision and support as our kids navigate their assignments on their Chromebooks. And our friends who have kids in the neighboring district with e-learning every other Monday have used all their vacation time for the year to stay home with their kids on those days. Instead of visiting the national parks or going to Disney this year, they’re doing e-learning every other Monday with a third-grader and a first-grader.
We’re extremely privileged, though, to have those choices. What about the kids whose caregivers can’t afford to take that time off, or will lose their jobs if they need regular time off during the week to supervise e-learning? I’m suspecting those kids are home alone on e-learning days. I’m guessing those kids do not have someone acting as IT support to help them operate their Chromebooks. Because equity issues are not just about access — giving kids Chromebooks does not make e-learning equitable. It takes more than that.
We should have amassed a great deal of evidence by now on the efficacy and equitability of e-learning, and we do have some that points to loss of learning during virtual instruction and cascading effects of e-learning on society. We should be using that evidence as a system of checkpoints, speed bumps, much like cells in our bodies have a series of checkpoints governing whether or not they continue to proliferate. In cells when those checkpoints are not functioning or are ignored, the result is their uncontrolled proliferation, which can give rise to cancer.
I’m not directly comparing e-learning to cancer in the education system, but I am looking around for the checkpoints, the speed bumps, the data being used to decide whether this model should continue to be employed. I fear that continuing along this path of uncontrolled proliferation of e-learning is, at best, supremely irresponsible.
Could we assume that e-learning is probably acceptable, and just go with it? Yes, we could. We do that fairly often in many aspects of our society. We also have glaring equity problems in all of our systems.
It’s worth pointing out that our existing education system is deeply inequitable. I’m making no assumption that our status quo is working. The question, then, is whether our current model for e-learning makes existing inequities worse, or better. Does it shrink the gap or widen it?
There is some evidence that e-learning can be beneficial by distancing kids from racism in their schools. In these cases, I think e-learning and other forms of distance learning should be supported as components of a more equitable system.
A lot of the other evidence, though, is pointing the opposite direction, showing the loss of learning that disproportionately affects historically less privileged groups. Perhaps the disparities seen with e-learning are simply more visible manifestations of more hidden and long-standing disparities. Or, perhaps e-learning widens the equity gap. Do we really know yet?
If we’re going to continue adding e-learning days to the calendar, we need to be sure it’s not piling more learning losses or inequities on top of existing ones. There’s too much at stake for us to passively adopt an innocent until proven guilty mindset toward e-learning.
We need to adopt a guilty until proven innocent mindset instead. Our first iterations of new ideas and processes will likely be inequitable because they are part of a self-fulfilling system that reproduces the same inequities ad infinitum. We will only interrupt the cycle by intention, and by challenging our assumptions.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
We moved toward e-learning rapidly during the pandemic, under duress. Now, though, we have the time to really evaluate it. We need more data, more analyses, more focus on equity, and significant improvements to the way e-learning is happening.
Then, perhaps, e-learning could be a vital component of a transformed, more equitable, and more culturally relevant K-12 education system.
In the meantime, my kids continue to cry their way through their e-learning, and they’re well-adjusted fully able kids who like school and learn easily. If this is what it looks like for some of the most privileged kids, something is wrong.
E-learning has potential, but we’re not there yet. We need to pause and take a good, hard, evidence-based look at our current model of e-learning and how it fits in the larger context of our educational system. If we don’t, we might slip all the way down that slope. We might make things worse.


Просмотров 257  

 

Бездепозитные бонусы зачастую даются новым игрокам, считается приветственным подарком которым направлены для ознакомления с казино. Бонус который получит игрок за регистрацию, можно использовать в конкретном слоте, зачастую это бесплатные фриспины от 20-100 вращений, после успешных вращений игроку начисляются денежные средства, которые достигают до 60 000 RUB (ваваде) После чего игроку нужно отыграть свои выигранные денежные средства, то есть нужно сделать первый депозит. Например игрок выиграл в бесплатных вращениях 1000 RUB, значит нужно умножить вейджер на *40 (В казино Ваваде вейджер 40) 1000*40=40 000 нужно сделать общие ставки на эту сумму, не путайте с депозитом, депозит можно сделать и 100 RUB чтобы отграть данную сумму. Многие игроки считают самым лучшим бонусом в казино - это бонус на депозит, зачастую его называют приветственным бонусом, так как он дает умножит свой депозит от 100%-500% Мы расскажем в каких казино есть такой бонус Бонус казино - Бонусы казино 2022 (freecasino2022.site) на нашем website есть полный список приветственного бонуса, где можно подобрать лучший для себя бонус. Так же огромное количество бонусов за регистрацию игрокам с бесплатными фриспинами. Количество казино в интернете огромное количество и каждое казино стараеться привлечить новых игроков своими бонусами, но как показывает практика не каждое казино имеет лицензию, что ведет разочерованию в казино. Мы отобрали лучшие казино для стран СНГ и России, также и Европы - где игроки по настоящему выигрывают и выводят огромные суммы денег, самым популярным казино является Вавада, Play Fortuna, Booi, Jozz - они являются нашими фаворитами так как, моментально выводят выигрыш на карту игрокам и легко пополняются. Мы хотим чтобы бонусы были доступны для многих игроков.

Посетите сайт для обзора бонусов Бонусы казино 2022 - Бонусы казино 2022 (freecasino2022.site)


Просмотров 407  

 

I have seen many of my friends are jealous of my profession. I also believe programming is a better profession than most other professions. Though it's my personal opinion, most of my programmer friends and colleague agree with me.
There is a famous quote about life:
The Grass is Always Greener on the Other Side
When someone is not satisfied with their own life, they always assume better things are happening with other places or other people's lives. But somehow, I don't find it valid for myself. I find that my life is good, and one of the main reasons is my profession.
So, why do I think that programming is a good profession and I am happy with it? Let's discuss it.
Remote job
Remote jobs are very available for programmers. Yes, you can also find remote jobs in other professions, but it's very easier and widely popular worldwide in the software development industry.
Remote jobs have made life very easy. Most of my friends and colleagues like it too. The main reason is I can spend more time with my family, and I love it. It also helps me save my money. When I used to do my job going to the office, I had to spend at least $20-$50 dollars for food, transportation, and other staff.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Freelancing
Freelancing is very popular among programmers. Not all profession has the luxury to let you become a freelancer. But programming is a very freelancing job. Why? Because it's easy to find a job as a freelancer and the money is good.
The money is so good that many programmers take it very seriously and leave their job and become full-time freelancers.

High Salary

Programming is a high-paid job. According to 2020 data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, the average salary for programmers was $95,640 per year. However, the compensation depends on the country, company, and some other factors.
But you have to admit a junior programmer can earn better than most other professions.
Being an Entrepreneur
I would call this the most significant unfair advantage of all. As a programmer, it's very easy for a person to become an entrepreneur. Why? Tech business is one of the hottest businesses after the internet and smartphone become very affordable.
We can see that most of the top billionaires were once programmers. Building a tech product can be costly. Many passionate wanna-be-entrepreneurs can not build the prototype of their products because of it.
But a programmer has an unfair advantage of it. They can build their own prototype and raise money from the investors after having some reactions. This is one of the main reasons I have become a programmer.
Besides founding their own startups, many programmers are becoming part of other early-stage startups by contributing their extra time and effort.

Creativity

In many jobs, people become bored because there are not enough curves or scope of creativity. But in programming, it's so much fun. You would find new problems every day.
Programming would never become a tedious job unless you make it into one. New and new technology is invented every year. You can always learn new things and work on them.


Просмотров 220  

 

While working at a fairly evolved digital organization, my colleagues developed a customized bot within the business messaging app, Slack. Most people who use Slack for communication know you can utilize bots inside the application to set reminders, schedule meetings, or even make jokes.
Our team, however, decided to explore how we could use an automated bot to encourage more inclusive language. While the team was diverse, we didn’t interact in a way that enabled non-verbal communication, which is vital in synchronizing common meaning. I found this out firsthand during one such experiment when we created a “Guys Bot.”
The premise of the Guys Bot was simple. When someone typed the masculine word guys in chat (as in “Good morning guys!”), the bot would send an automated message to the original poster. The message would state, “Excuse me, it looks like you said guys. Maybe consider more inclusive language like friends, pals, or teammates.”
This experiment prompted a debate at our virtual water cooler on preferred alternatives to the word guys when addressing a mixed-gender group of people. Friends, teammate, or mates were all frontrunners.
“I like folks. Folks Is hip, fresh, easy to type. And it’s used regularly in some of the other affinity groups,” chimed in one colleague.
The custom Slack emoji below this comment spun like a slot machine with thumbs up, hearts, and a 100 different other icons.
Other people chimed in.
“Yeah, folks is great.”
“I like to spell it folx. It’s edgy.”
It went for a few minutes. Eventually, the buzz died down, and we returned to our normal work routines. It was a harmless exchange, except for one thing. The word “folks” carries a completely different meaning to me. It makes my skin crawl.
While growing up just outside of Chicago, my best friend’s older brother was a member of the Latin Kings, a prominent nationwide gang. He was deep into the gang, which made him a target on the street for rival gangs. The Latin Kings’ main rival was the Folks — or Folk Nation — a loose affiliation of gangs including Gangster Disciples and others.
Around the time my friend’s brother turned twenty, rival Folks snatched him up. They stuck a blade in his gut and cut him from his belly button to his esophagus, like how you’d butcher a farm animal. He survived, but surgeons had to crack his rib cage open to keep him alive. He has a three-finger wide scar that goes up his torso to just above the t-shirt neckline.
Whenever I hear the word Folks, I think back to being a teenager learning how to recognize gang signs of friend and foe. Pitchforks thrown up — one of the Folks’ hand signs — meant danger to me. Pitchforks thrown pointing down in front of the wrong people could start a brawl or get you shot.
The Latin Kings have their own symbols. If you point your hand up to the sky and tuck your middle and ring-finger in — like you’re Spider-Man shooting web — you’re making the Latin Kings gang sign. If you do this with both hands and bring them together just right, you can make their five-pointed crown.

This is a lot of context to squeeze into a 20-word Slack post on what the word “folks” meant to me, but after a few days of mulling it over, I responded to the thread. I’m all for inclusive language, but this single word was significant to me. I felt I should share the backstory, given how an innocent term can vary in meaning. So I crafted a response and hit send.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
After two days of crickets, someone responded. “Wow, thank you for sharing.”
I didn’t expect my colleagues to strike the word folks from their vocabulary. I didn’t expect anyone to change their behavior at all. I merely wished to express a unique perspective among the group and remind them of their assumptions and biases. Even with an educated and diverse set of peers from many backgrounds, language and communication contain edge cases you can’t account for.
I point this out because I’ve spent much of my life parsing through written and spoken words. As a child, I learned basic sign language to communicate with deaf kids in my class. In the military, I was an Arabic linguist who translated thousands of hours of voices during the Iraq War. Now I’m a technologist leveraging natural language processing for human good. Given that I work in artificial intelligence (AI), I’m realizing something far more nefarious happening than a “Guys Bot.” Machines are destroying the way we communicate.
Consider that words are symbols developed to convey meaning. Human minds do this well, and we are seeing near-human performance in AI-powered language tools. Despite humanity’s innate ability to communicate and to build machines that mimic our human communication, we still don’t get it 100% right and often misunderstand people’s intended meaning.
It’s difficult to normalize language to be inclusive, inoffensive, and neutral because we all interpret meaning differently based on lived experiences. Yet this is exactly what we’re asking artificial intelligence to do for us at a billion-person scale. Once these rules are machine-enforced, they’re inescapable and create much bigger issues. AI-powered recommendations let us tab ahead to autocomplete our thoughts in real-time. These functions are now key features in our email, word processors, and browsers. The machines are nudging us into a sterile, common tongue, and we accept it as a matter of convenience. But what’s the cost? We’re trading uniqueness and precision for convenience. We’re also handing the power of acceptable speech to machine-enforced tools, not individuals.
Many people in the tech world are familiar with the story of Timnit Gebru, the ex-Googler ousted over her research on the ethics of large language models. Most people don’t know that the co-author of that paper, Emily Bender, addressed something more poignant about machines eating our language — AI will not capture underrepresented groups and shifts in the social norms of language.
MIT’s Technology Review went so far as to address this in a review of Gebru and Bender’s research.
”… An AI model trained on vast swaths of the internet won’t be attuned to the nuances of this vocabulary and won’t produce or interpret language in line with these new cultural norms.
It will also fail to capture the language and the norms of countries and peoples that have less access to the internet and thus a smaller linguistic footprint online. The result is that AI-generated language will be homogenized, reflecting the practices of the richest countries and communities.”
Because AI needs representation in data and massive scale to fit billions of common combinations, it can reflect only the input data — the language of privilege.
After unpacking this, I find three key points.
First, there is an active desire to only include neutral language in AI-powered tool. While many of us can agree that some language is hateful or offensive, society will always disagree on the margins. The discourse around edge cases is essential for society and shouldn’t be enforced by machines.
Decisions on acceptable language deployed at Google-scale will affect billions of people and could be governed by a small number of people and platforms. This is a significant power dynamic we’re actively living in. Who gets to decide what is acceptable or unacceptable language? I don’t believe this should be the few and the powerful. The dark part of my soul also registers this — excluding abusive language from the digital world doesn’t wipe it from society. In some cases, maybe offensive language should be included in language models.
Second, society is constantly changing. The issue here is that AI relies on scale to register change. Small movements could get squashed by louder voices and normalized, neutered language. If you can’t amass enough gravity to trend in the digital world, movements for change may not rise above the virtual noise floor.
Finally, as pointed out by Bender’s research, small groups with limited access won’t be captured by the algorithm. The poor, the few, and those that spend most of their time in the physical world will not be represented in online language. The Latin Kings in Humboldt Park, the far-removed populations in the Appalachian Highlands, and those with special accessibility considerations will not make it into the AI language blender. We either don’t have the data, won’t get the data, or the data won’t be big enough to make an impact. It will filter these groups out. AI-powered language tools then become exclusive, not inclusive.
In the physical world, people don’t communicate like a Wikipedia article. We use shorthand. Tone and tempo. Humor. Facial expressions. We can make a hilarious joke that — typed-out — would get flagged by every language censor online today. We can tell where people were born based on their accents and phrasing. Humans are truly unique, and our communication is dynamic.
This was evident in my recent conversation with Dr. Chris Tucker, author of the book A Planet of 3 Billion and Chairman of the American Geographical Society. Dr. Tucker is an InQTel alumni and has been in technology and entrepreneurship for a couple of decades. He asked me a fascinating question: “Who’s doing computer vision and AI for sign language?”
I responded, “Sign language isn’t just about recognizing hand gestures, although I have seen some related prototypes.”
Tucker agreed. American Sign Language (ASL) is not just a collection of hand gestures for verbs, nouns, and adjectives. It’s a language embedded in the culture of the Deaf and hard-of-hearing. When this group communicates, they are using the full spectrum of communication. Tone, tempo, body language, facial expressions. Word and symbol combinations that make individual communication uniquely human.
Tucker and I brainstormed on the data points we would have to collect to capture the level of the individuality of people communicating via sign language. Suggesting that we create an AI system that scrubs the uniqueness of Deaf people seemed preposterous. A criminal act.
“Why do we let the machines do it to us hearing people?” I asked Tucker and then recounted the Guys Bot story. Ironically, the one-handed sign for the Latin Kings is also the sign for “I Love You” in ASL.
The truth is we would never accept an AI system that reduces ASL to simple hand symbols. And we shouldn’t. Similarly, we should resist AI tools nibbling around the edges of all our communications. The goal should be to complete the fullest representation of individual communication. Period. This should apply to all communication systems that leverage AI. We should demand AI systems that promote individuality and uniqueness. We should demand transparency in how AI is developed and the data used to build it. Because we all deserve this.
But we’re currently letting an algorithm chomp away our uniqueness like Pac Man gobbling pellets on the screen.


Просмотров 181  

 

Купите капсулы Энзалутамида онлайн у индийского экспортера Letsmeds по оптовой цене. Xtandi Энзалутамид 40 мг Капсулы ASP9785 Оптовый торговец Letsmeds специализируется на предоставлении вам дженериков по более низкой цене. Мы являемся одним из ведущих фармацевтических дистрибьюторов и розничных торговцев, предлагающих высококачественные лекарства по самым конкурентоспособным ценам. Точно так же, если у вас нет времени стоять в очереди у аптеки, эта онлайн-аптека - идеальный результат для вас. Звоните / WhatsApp / Signal / Viber: +91-7428091874 для заказа Капсул дженериков Энзалутамида 40 мг брендов и капсул Xtandi производства Astellas Pharma с доставкой в такие страны, как США, Гонконг, Китай, Австралия, Великобритания, ОАЭ, Иордания, Саудовская Аравия, Пакистан, Малайзия, Сингапур, Украина, Россия, Вьетнам, Филиппины, Польша, Венесуэла, Румыния, Венгрия, Тайвань, Новая Зеландия, Эквадор, Таиланд, Камбоджа, Беларусь, Латвия, Зимбабве, Фиджи, Лаос, Кения, Ливан, Ливия, Люксембург и многие другие страны.

Обзор лекарств от дженерика Энзалутамида в капсулах по 40 мг:

Фирменное наименование: Glenza
Состав соли: Капсулы Энзалутамида
Международное фирменное наименование: Xtandi
Производитель: Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Сила: 40 мг и 80 мг
Упаковка: 4 блистера по 28 капсул
Доставка: По всему миру

Применение индийских капсул Энзалутамида:

Энзалутамид в капсуле по 40 мг используется при лечении рака предстательной железы. Он может быть широко использован для лечения различных состояний, как это было решено с помощью врача. Он работает, блокируя действие мужских гормонов, таких как тестостерон.

Побочные эффекты капсул Энзалутамида Гленмарка:

Большинство вторичных эффектов не требуют клинического рассмотрения и исчезают по мере того, как ваше тело приспосабливается к

лекарству. Проконсультируйтесь со своим лечащим врачом в том случае, если они продолжатся, или снова предположим, что вы испытываете стресс из-за них

Общие побочные эффекты капсул Xtandi:

Головная боль
Горячие вспышки
Слабость
Высокое кровяное давление
Усталость

Преимущества капсул Glenza:

При раке предстательной железы

Предстательная железа - это небольшая железа размером с грецкий орех, которая вырабатывает жидкость, известную как семенная жидкость, которая питает и транспортирует сперматозоиды у мужчин. Наиболее распространенным симптомом большинства видов рака предстательной железы является проблема с мочеиспусканием, однако очень часто никаких признаков и симптомов вообще нет. Капсула Glenza уменьшает или останавливает рост раковых клеток за счет уменьшения количества тестостерона (естественного гормона у мужчин) у мужчин. Это дополнительно облегчает проблемы с мочеиспусканием и облегчает процесс мочеиспускания.

Альтернатива капсулам Энзалутамида Glenza 40 мг:

Капсулы Энзиликса Энзалутамида Селона
Капсулы Bdenza Энзалутамида от BDR Pharmaceuticals
Капсулы Гленза Энзалутамида Glenmark Pharmaceutical от Glenza
Капсулы Азел Энзалутамида доктора Редди
Капсулы Энзута Энзалутамида Emcure от Enzuta
Капсулы Энзалутамида Capmide от Cipla Pharmaceutical в капсулах
Капсулы Cipla Pharmaceutical с ксилутидом Энзалутамидом
Капсулы Инденза Энзалутамида от Aprazer Pharmaceutical
Капсулы Энзана Энзалутамида от Hetero Pharmaceutical
Капсулы Энзалутамида Obnyx от Zydus Pharmaceutical
Капсулы Энзамида Энзалутамида от Intas Pharmaceutical

Как работает капсула Glenza 40 мг?

Капсула Glenza 40 мг - это антиандроген. Он работает посредством блокирования движения растительных мужских гормонов на уровне клеток предстательной железы. Большинству видов рака предстательной железы для роста требуются мужские гормоны. Эти гормоны называются андрогенами. Тестостерон является одним из основных гормонов и вырабатывается яичками и надпочечниками.

Энзалутамид действует как средство предотвращения образования андрогенов, таких как тестостерон. Это делается путем блокирования рецепторов андрогенов на поверхности клеток рака предстательной железы. Поскольку гормоны не могут прикрепляться к рецептору, раковые клетки не могут расти, независимо от того, где они находятся в организме.

Что делать, если вы пропустите дозу Энзалутамида в капсуле 40 мг?

Если вы пропустили дозу капсулы Glenza 40 мг, примите ее как можно быстрее. Однако, пока еще не пришло время для следующей дозы, пропустите проигнорированную дозу и вернитесь к своему обычному расписанию. Не увеличивайте дозу вдвое.

Где купить Капсулу Энзалутамида 40 мг?

Индийская аптека LetsMeds - динамичный и профессиональный глобальный экспортер фармацевтической продукции. Мы служим желаниям мирового рынка. Мы экспортируем фирменные и генерические препараты всемирно известных фармацевтических компаний, таких как Cipla, Glenmark, Aprazer, Natco, Ajanta Pharma, Intas, BDR и других. Мы предлагаем первоклассные качественные, 100% оригинальные лекарства по чрезвычайно конкурентоспособным ценам. Наша корпоративная реакция быстрая, а наши корпоративные практики являются этичными, прозрачными и ориентированными на клиента.

Мы отправляем нашу продукцию в Китай, Россию, Гонконг, Великобританию, США, Румынию, Вьетнам, Малайзию, Украину, Сингапур, Филиппины, Кыргызстан, Казахстан, Таиланд, Нигерию, ОАЭ, Индонезию, Зимбабве, Японию, Австралию, Уругвай, Новую Зеландию, Венесуэлу, Саудовскую Аравию, Узбекистан, Конго, Перу, Италию, Боливию, Польшу, Мальту, Бруней, Марокко, Кению, Мальдивы, Гвинею, Либерию, Ливию и другие страны.

Свяжитесь с нами LetsMeds:

Электронная почта: letsmeds@gmail.com ,
Звоните / WhatsApp / Signal/ Viber: +91-7428091874,
WeChat/Skype: Letsmeds
Веб-сайт: www.letsmeds.com.


Просмотров 277  

партнеры
Работа в интернете
 


партнеры
Мастер текстовой рекламы АРКАДИЙ ПОГОДА и предлагает следующие услуги по раскрутке ваших сайтов:
• написание продающих текстов;
• наполнение сайтов и блогов интересной тематикой;
• подбор качественных картинок и фото по нужной теме;
• подбор клипов и видео в тему.
Размещаем материалы на наших сайтах с включением «вечной» ссылки на ваш сайт.
Текстовый материал также может быть передан вам для применения на ваше усмотрение

Писать: pogoda.ar@yandex.ru
 

:a:d:v:.


Яндекс.Метрика


Администрация::email::admin(сабака)2uha.net::ICQ::778898
Создан rere