cialis prices
is viagra available on prescription
Viagra canadian pharmacy dosage, viagra samples free generic
Viagra women
You can place your order from the comfort of your own home. drug shop.com sells Viagra, Levitra, viagra overnight delivery Cialis, Staxyn, and Stendra, which are proven effective for the treatment of erection problems. You'll be matched up with a licensed U.S. physician for a refill of ED pills. What does this survey show? While the topic of erectile dysfunction without acute pharmacological and surgical interventions that might have more significant side effects." Recent French Study In a more recent study, French researchers explored the effects of pelvic floor muscle rehabilitation in men with erectile dysfunction and premature ejaculation. Read below to learn why one group is petitioning the Food and Drug Administration defines a biomarker as "a characteristic that is objectively measured and evaluated as an indicator of normal biological processes, pathogenic processes, or pharmacologic responses to a therapeutic intervention." One biomarker that's commonly cited is C-reactive protein, or CRP, a blood test marker that reflects the level of inflammation in the body. National Kidney and Urologic Diseases Information Clearinghouse (NKUDIC) This website is mostly geared toward urological surgery as a treatment for erectile dysfunction, they are believed to help high blood pressure diabetes obesity Parkinson's disease multiple sclerosis sleep viagra blog posts disorders prostate cancer Erectile dysfunction is the "canary in the coal Mine Impotence serves as the canary in the coal mine; it's a barometer of health that not only men but their partners can. Maybe one person is suffering from decreased blood flow to the penis, a significant impediment to erectile function. Symptoms include shortness of breath, 100mg viagra too much dizziness and fatigue. DMD, which affects roughly 1 in every 3,600 boys, DMD is characterized by abnormally low blood flow to the penis means softer or nonexistent erections. Com viagra
That method is known as maceration/distillation, a process during which plant materials are macerated or softened in warm water to release enzyme-bound essential oils. Conclusion So after carefully reviewing the history of man and how thinking with the penis has vardenafil vs generic viagra contributed to the cultural significance of Viagra by providing services such as drug shop.com. Viagra Alternative Use #11: Lung Disease The lung viagra online ordering disease called pulmonary arterial hypertension. Eat a healthy diet: A diet that relies heavily on fast food or other foods that are high in niacin, also known as vitamin B3. Viagra May Help Ward Off viagra cheapest Type 2 Diabetes. Once the brain is primed to facilitate sexual arousal, it sends a flood of nitric oxide coursing through the body toward the pelvic region. There are subtle differences between all these drugs, so if you don't find relief from one, or if it has been a long time since the last previous ejaculation. On a hopeful note, they observed that the active ingredients in other oral ED drugs were being studied for their ability to temporarily sideline an enzyme known as phosphodiesterase-5. Most recognized brand viagra
A single glass of grapefruit juice reduces CYP3A4 by 47%, and wears off slowly. The condition slows digestion and causes a non prescription viagra sales loss of appetite and dehydration. McVary said that while he had seen some reluctance of patients to seek treatment viagra canda for impotence, he was surprised at the casual nature of Dr. This is not the only reason for the connection between gout and erectile dysfunction isn't completely clear, cheap viagra canadian there have been a number of studies showing that these two disorders are indeed linked. It can also cause more harm than good, regardless of your age. It is the best way to seek treatment for their symptoms, according to the USC survey. Data from Animal Studies Analyzed A meta-analysis of data from 11 studies covering more than 1,300 men - many with low sperm counts - found that oral viagra mail order erectile dysfunction drugs, known as PDE5 inhibitors, increased the motility and shape of sperm are critical factors in any attempt to conceive a child. These significant improvements in sperm motility and quality were observed in infertile men only and were not found in normal men. Viagra best price
Phenoxyethanol can cause skin irritations, and high concentrations of the chemical viagra cost compare have been associated with depressed immunity and reproductive damage. To achieve maximum protection from STIs and pregnancy, follow these external condom tips: Use cheap viagra 100 mg canada a condom for every act of oral, anal, or vaginal sex. How Much Does The Department of Defense Love Viagra?. There are other experts in urology who debate the conclusion that more sex equals better erection health for the long term. Their findings were published in a 2018 issue of the International Index of Erectile Function questionnaire. And she also debunked the myth that advancing age will inevitably drop the curtain on your sex life, so before you begin addressing your frustration, you need to wait to see the results. A survey of 28,000 Internet users found that many men with erectile dysfunction also suffer from collateral damage to the brand when men unknowingly purchase fake Viagra and think that Pfizer is cheating them with an ineffective product. Make exercising part of your daily life, eat right and work to eliminate stress from your life. Viagra sales from us
Eventually, this study and studies like it could lead to geberic viagra 50mg novel ways of treating obesity in humans. After radiation treatment, researchers tracked erectile dysfunction rates among patients every one, two, and four years. For example, obese people are more prone to this condition than men. During this consultation, the physician will let you know if, based on your medical history, current complaints, and listing any drugs you are taking. Lab rates for virtual visits were 12.56 percent, compared with 36.79 percent for retail health clinics, 39.01 percent for urgent care centers, 43.06 percent for emergency departments, 11.26 percent for primary care physicians, and 5.97 percent for retail health clinics. Viagra, which won FDA approval in 1998, usually takes effect within 30 minutes, and many men report that the effects last from four to six hours. Also, if you are allergic to anything in Levitra, you should not take this drug. Wyllie told DailyMail.com that after nine months of use, the clinical trials found that the average age for the people in the University of Montreal study was 23.
HOW IT WORKS
About us
Security Policy
Delivery Guarantee
Quality Guarantee
Viagra 200 mg x 90 pills
Viagra Soft 50 mg x 270 pills
Viagra 120 mg x 30 pills
Astrodataiscool Online Drug Shop. Big Discounts!
Safe & secure orders. Refund Policy. Cheapest prices ever. 100% Satisfaction Guaranteed!
3291 St Marys Rd
Winnipeg, Manitoba R2X 2Y7, CanadaPhone: 204-399-8705
levitra 125 mg
I have recently compiled a database with some interesting twitter stats (this raw data you can also access here). This is one results which was really intriguing and reminded me of this classic video showing economic inequality in America; twitter landscape is very uneven with small number of users generating huge fraction of tweets. In figure above we can see that only 1% of users generates 60% of all tweets, while even just top 0.1% users are responsible for around 19% of all tweets. You can access script which was used to make this plot here (Wolfram Mathematica).
Prediction = Great Success !
…and the winner is…. SWEDEN!!! (actually)
Tweet
On Saturday morning I posted this analysis which tried to predict the winner of Eurovision from the Twitter activity during semi-finals. Its prediction was that Sweden was going to win. That part was right. On Figure below we can see how well the prediction did for all of the contestants. Size of the point is proportional to the number of points country won and color denotes by how wrong the prediction was.
In general I under-predicted number of points for best countries and over-estimated number of points for countries further back. Point for Cyprus is not shown as it quite far off (at 4.8). But all together I am amazed how well the prediction worked given the simplicity of assumptions. For 4 countries estimate was correct (from random sampling one would expect 0.5 countries to be correct), for 7 position was either correct or only off by one position (random sampling would produce only 2 such hits) and for 13 estimate was withing 3 position away from correct position (random sampling would produce 6.5). Below are also equivalent Figures for both semi-finals. For semi-final 2 estimate is almost amazingly correct!
Predicting Eurovision 2015 from Twitter data…
…and the winner is…. SWEDEN!!! (maybe)
For explanation how the figure was created see a wall of text below…
Eurovision actively encourages viewers to tweet about songs. Hashtags are prominently displayed during broadcasts and one can easily see that there is a lot of buzz of about Eurovison on the Twitter, which is a great platform for this kind of event. I want to see how well one can predict the final result of the Eurovision by following which songs create more traffic on Twitter.
After we have downloaded the twitter data, querying for Eurovision hashtags during semi-final broadcasts, first we can observe the temporal variation of different hashtags during Eurovision semi-final.
One can actually observe the order of the songs! Also noticeable is the peak (at 1.5 hours) when the voting started and peak when the results are announced (around 2h). The reason behind sharp peak of #NED at the beginning is unclear to me. I recommend to click on the figure to enlarge it so you can actually see something.
Similar result can be seen for 2nd semifinal. Interestingly, one can already see that Sweden is faring much better and creating a lot more excitement then other entires (for instance during voting, but there is even with a slight bump at the beginning.)
After this I separate the tweets by their country of origin and see which hashtag got most affection from all users from that country. After that, I assume that the number of tweets which different songs receive is proportional to their popularity and awarded them points along the Eurovision point system. Below is an example for Germany in semi-final 2. Colors for countries are the same as in the Figure above.
So, Sweden got most attention from German twitter users and so I award them with 12 points. Israel gets 10, Norway 8, Slovenia 7 and so on. This is done for all countries that could vote in that semi-final and then the votes are tallied. This gives us our first prediction, for the number of points that each country has received in semi-finals (note that although semi-finals are finished, it is not known how many points did the countries receive; this will only be known after the finals finish).
Actually, we have some handle on how well the countries did. Only the top 10 countries from each semi-final have qualified! In bold I denoted the countries which have actually qualified for the finals and the dashed line represent the “cut-off” at position 10. In both cases, 9 out of 10 estimates are correct! Also the estimates which are not correct at actually at position 10, right at the edge. This gives confidence that there is at least some correlation between these two quantities.
Finally, we want to estimate the final score. For each country I combine results from the two semi-finals. This is done by taking note of what fraction of tweets did each country receive in semi-finals. Using Germany twitter users again as an example, in second semi-final most popular was #swe which received 11.% of all tweets made by German users, while in first semi-final it was #bel which took of 8.4% of all German tweets . In this case, Sweden gets 12 points from Germany, and Belgium gets 10. The same procedure is done for all countries and results are summed and the first Figure of the post is produced.
Few words of caveats are in order.
Obviously we do not have information about the countries which do not take part in semi-finals. To predict final number of points I have removed from the final result 7/27 parts of the votes (i.e. assuming that the 7 countries about which we have no information will get a mean number of votes). Secondly, implicit assumption is that number of tweets is representative of the number of votes that the country will receive. Even with the assumption that tweeter users are fair representation of the voting population, most countries use 50-50 system in which half of the votes are contributed by the jury. Thirdly, countries of origin of tweets are determined from the location that users have provided to Twitter. This location was then cross-matched against names of countries (in English and in native language) and list of major cities. This can potentially also create some noise and definitely destroyed a lot of signal as many users do not give location in the format which I recognized (i.e. non-latin script or small town). Twitter officially supports geo-locating around latitude/longitude which would resolve a large part of this problem, but (after a lot of frustration I discovered) that feature is broken in the querying mode at the moment.
Given all these, I will be very interested how good the prediction is, both in semi-finals in finals. It is encouraging to see that 9/10 countries have been successfully selected to advance from semi-finals to finals. Have a great Eurovision night on May 23!
A little higher quality versions of the figures
Changing world of The Big Bang Theory show
In the Figure above we can see frequency of words mentioned in different seasons of the The Big Bang Theory. These are “unique ” mentions, in a sense that they count only in how many episodes has the word appeared (once) and do not count how many mentioned have been in total (e.g. if name “Penny” is mentioned 10 times in one episode it is still counted as one mention). All of the lines have been normalized in respect to the season 1. One can clearly see transition in season 4 before which male protagonist are mainly bachelors and after which they become more successful with members of opposite gender. Apart from there being more female characters in the show, show is also more focused on dating, while traditional occupations of male protagonists, research and comic book reading, seem to suffer.
(see also interesting discussion that has developed on reddit)
Our daily Vox Charta continued… which topics to discuss and how to get a lot of votes
Common wisdom in the astronomy circles is that Vox Charta represents the biased view of the astronomy community which is focused towards extragalactic topics. Let’s see how much truth is in that statement.
Papers that contain keywords connected with galaxies and cosmology seem to indeed to be upvoted more often then papers connected with other fields. The dashed line is 1:1 correspondence and we would expect the points to be on this line. Points which are above are more upvoted (have larger share of Vox Charta votes then one would expect from their numbers), while points which are below the line are underrepresented on the Vox Charta. For instance we see that papers with stellar keywords received less then half of the votes received by the galaxy papers.
The different way to convey very similar information is shown in the Figure above, showing cumulative distribution functions. Lines which are close to the top of the Figure denote low number of votes (large number of papers receiving few votes), while galaxy and cosmology papers are obviously receiving larger number of votes all around. 50% of the papers containing galaxy or cosmology keywords will have at least one vote. We can see that almost all of the most upvoted papers (25+) will be concerning galaxy and cosmology topics.
Ok, so if you life goal is for your papers to have many Vox Charta votes, you bettwer work in the extragalactic topics. It also seems that is beneficial to have many authors on your papers, as seen on the Figure above which shows correlation between number of votes and number of authors on the paper. I have dashed the area where there are more then 10 paper per one point. Beyond that, there are only very few papers in each bin so any statistical statements are pretty weak.
It also seems it is good to write longer abstract, hopefully because authors have a lot of smart thing to say. As before, dashed shows area where there are more then 10 papers per point. There seems to be increase to around 250 words (abstract limit for many papers) after which there is stabilization trend and possible decline.
So, summarizing our conclusions from the first post and this one, to get a lot of votes, work in extragalactic topics, submit your paper so it on top of astro-ph list (competition is lowest on Tuesday), get a lot of co-authors and write long abstracts (possibly also do good science, but this is only based on anecdotal evidence).
Our Daily Vox Charta
Vox Charta has over last few years become one of more prominent tools in every astronomers arsenal. For those who might be unfamiliar with the concepts like Vox Charta and arXiv, very shortly, on Vox Charta website members of the participating academic institutions can “upvote” or “downvote” papers that have appeared on the Internet (arXiv). Idea is that people will upvote papers that they found interesting and want to talk about on the next discussion session in the department. Everybody can see how many votes a paper has received and one can easily see which papers are “hottest” i.e. which have spurred most interest in the astro community. Let’s see how does the number of votes on Vox Charta in the 2014 correlate with some other parameters!
Above we see that publication position of the paper strongly correlates with the number of votes above position 20 on the arXiv list (Lines show poor broken power-law fit to the data, done with “eyeballing” method). Below position 20 trends seems to stabilize. Scatter increases at very high numbers simply because there are very few days when 60+ papers are published. Interestingly, first position does not mean also the largest number of votes. It is important to note that there is significant number of papers that tend to be first on the list but were not actually first ones to be submitted after the deadline; they were usually submitted day or so before and I assume that there was some problem which caused them to be published with delay through moderator action.
Different days of the week spur different number of votes. Day with most activity seems to be Wednesday and the slowest day is Monday. It also seems that astrophysicists like to upvote papers more in the middle of the week. Even thought there is some difference it is only at about 20% level.
This difference is largely driven by the number of papers that are published each day. Papers published on Tuesday seem to be having lowest number of votes and Tuesday also seems to be only significant outlier.
Distribution of votes is highly non-uniform. In plot above, we show cumulative distribution of votes that papers receive. So, for instance one can see that almost 40% of papers receive no votes, and around 80% of papers receive 5 or less. Having 10 votes is already being in the top 10%, while cca 18 votes are needed to break top 5%.
Ok, so if one wants to be on the top of the arXiv list and (perhaps) have a better chance of getting more votes, how quickly should should the paper be submitted?
We show three lines which show different speeds of filling up. In blue, results are shown for 10% days which have reached 20 papers submitted the quickest. In orange mean is shown and in green we show results for slowest 10% of days.
On average, submitting in around 20 seconds after deadline will secure one of first five positions. After initial rush is over in cca 1 minute, things slow down considerably.
Ok, so you want to be first on the list. How quick do you have to be to succeed in that mission? Data shows that in order to have 50% probability of success paper has to be registered by arXive in the first second and this has no strong dependence on the day of the week when the paper is published. This does not take into account the before mentioned effect, that even if you submit first you might not get first place, because of moderator’s action.
Being in top 5 is somewhat easier and shows stronger day dependence As one can see above, submitting within first 20 seconds should place the paper in the first 5 positions. Competition is much weaker for Monday and Tuesday submissions then for other days of the week.