Sorry for the poor posting habits this summer. I had two big personal projects that sucked much of my free time. I can talk about one of them now. The other is still under way.
First, let’s look at a workout plan for the fall. As the weather gets less predictable, I’ll be a little more boring. Lately I’ve been doing something like this and it’s been nice:
Swing / Push-ups: every 1:30, 10 swings, 10 push-ups, 10 rounds (15 minutes). Light and fast.
Heavy press: 1L+1R every 1:00 for 20 minutes. Press as heavy as possible for singles
Heavy swings: 5 very heavy swings every minute for 10 minutes
Heavy snatches: 3-5 heavy snatches every minute for 15 minutes
Clean+Squat+Press: we’ve been doing this for over a year now as our Friday workout, one clean, one squat, one press. I do doubles, but it doesn’t matter. Go heavy for 20 minutes at your own pace.
It’s a boring pattern, but it’s nice.
Personal Project
Now on to the personal project…
This summer I was referred to a doctor who needed a statistician to help him with a paper. I always say I’m not a statistician, just a physicist who knows enough stats to get myself into trouble, but that was fine for this project. It actually turned out that we needed some modelling and simulation which is what I do best anyway!
We wrote this paper: COVID-19 Vaccines: The Impact on Pregnancy Outcomes and Menstrual Function. It’s finally been accepted by a preprint server, so I can share it. Of all of the papers I’ve written, I think this is the most important. Most people don’t care about the non-adiabatic quantum dynamics of hydrogen-halides, but they do care if they can’t have kids or grand kids - this paper is a little more important to society than my others.
I hate that we had to go with an open access journal, and I think the story of trying to get this published is as important as the paper itself. We submitted to The British Medical Journal and a few other pretty important medical journals and we were denied within hours after the submission. That means no one read it for content or correctness, they just denied it after reading the conclusion. It’s all narrative control!
When I’ve reviewed articles, it take at a minimum a day or so and if I deny it, I give a long list of what’s wrong, and what analyses need to be done to make it correct. We didn’t get any of that. Just got a bland we won’t publish this.
Anyway, it’s now at least on the internet and hopefully we can get some coverage of it.