PLOS ONE
Article
PLOS ONE is a recurring publication in the Astral Codex Ten archive, appearing 6 times across 6 issues between August 25, 2021 and August 14, 2025. The archive places it in contexts such as “https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231105”; “big peer-reviewed journals like PLOS One”; ”- https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0049676”. It most often appears alongside Google, United States, FDA.
Metadata
- Category: Publications
- Mention count: 6
- Issue count: 6
- First seen: August 25, 2021
- Last seen: August 14, 2025
Appears In
- Carbon Costs Quantified
- Your Book Review: Making Nature
- Highlights From The Comments On Supplement Labeling
- Prediction Market FAQ
- ACX Grants 1-3 Year Updates
- In Defense Of The Amyloid Hypothesis
Related Pages
-
- Google (4 shared issues)
-
- United States (4 shared issues)
-
- FDA (3 shared issues)
-
- Nature (3 shared issues)
-
- Scott (3 shared issues)
-
- The Guardian (3 shared issues)
-
- AI Safety (2 shared issues)
-
- biorxiv (2 shared issues)
-
- Bloomberg (2 shared issues)
-
- Britain (2 shared issues)
-
- Cell (2 shared issues)
-
- Chicago (2 shared issues)
External Links
Source Context
Recovered passages from the original issue text. When the raw archive preserved outbound links inside the source passage, they are listed directly under the quote.
I can see reasons you might want to think that way, but I can see much better reasons you wouldn't want to think that way, so I will be trying to figure out the actual amount of carbon produced by an actual child in an actual year. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0231105 suggests households with children produce about 1500 lbs more carbon than those without. Each child-having household has on average two children, so even though it's probably not completely linear let's say 750 lbs/kid. Americans produce about 3x as much carbon as Swedes, so assuming this stays constant I would expect US children to produce 2250 lbs. That matches the numbers on the graph at https://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/10/if-you-act-your-age-whats-your-carbon-footprint/ . So I think the amount of carbon emitted by a child is around 2250 lbs on average.
The world of scientific publishing is organized as a hierarchy of status, much like the hierarchy of angels in the Abrahamic religions. At the bottom are the non-peer-reviewed blog posts and Twitter threads. Slightly above are the preprint servers like arXiv, and then big peer-reviewed journals like PLOS One. Above those are all the field-specific journals, some with higher reputation than others. And at the top, near the divine presence, are the CNS journals: Cell, Nature, and Science.
No direct inline source block was recovered for this mention.
If we decide to redo Study #2, will we get the same results? …and so on. Obviously the market can’t be sure how studies will turn out - otherwise we wouldn’t need scientists or experiments! But this acts as a force multiplier, letting you get predictions about 100 studies even if you can only do one - and might guide which one you redo. Predicting replicability—Analysis of survey and prediction market data from large-scale forecasting projects, published in PLoS One, attempted this and found the markets were pretty accurate - 73% was their headline finding, but read the study for more. One participant wrote about his experience: How I Made $10K Predicting Which Studies Will Replicate. You can learn more about this project at replicationmarkets.com Eliezer Yudkowsky once wrote a story about a civilization that settled legal questions this way. They had a few truly brilliant legal experts - the equivalent of US Supreme Court Justices - but not enough to answer every possible question that might come up. So for each question they made a prediction market: If we submit Question #1 to the Supreme Court, will they rule in favor?
This project has now concluded with the publication of a paper in PLOS ONE titled “Ethical Acceptability of Human Challenge Trials: Consultation with the US Public and with Research Personnel.” The authors conducted an online survey to assess overall support or opposition to HCTs, as well as the key factors influencing perceptions of their ethical acceptability. The findings suggest broad support among both the US public and research personnel for the use of HCTs in developing vaccines, treatments, and advancing scientific knowledge. The two most influential factors in determining ethical acceptability were the level of risk to participants and their understanding of that risk.
Inline links: Ethical Acceptability of Human Challenge Trials: Consultation with the US Public and with Research Personnel
We raised Tenebtio molitor larvae “mealworms” on wheat bran diets mixed with polyethylene (PE) or polystyrene (PS) for three generations, then harvested the gut bacteria living inside the insects. After growing those microbes in the lab, we tested whether the bacteria could oxidize microscopic plastic beads by watching for a color change in 96 well plates containing redox dye. We were able to isolate twenty bacteria capable of oxidizing plastic and fourteen of these (14) were from the PE-fed mealworms. We also profiled the entire gut community using 16s gene sequencing. Firmicutes was the most abundant phylum in each treatment (parental: 83%, control: 88%, PE: 97%, PS: 89%) with Bacilli being the most prevalent class (parental: 84%, control: 76%, PE: 93%, PS: 64%). Plastic addition seems to favor strains capable of biodegradation. The full pre-print is available here: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.10.16.618709v1. The manuscript is currently in revision. It was submitted to PLoS ONE, however the reviewers requested more wet lab work, specifically gravimetric mass loss and/or Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy. We cannot complete these assays within the time frame allotted for revisions. We plan to use the publication fees to carry out the requested wet lab work for a future publication. We will add some life history and immunology data we collected to the current manuscript and resubmit to another journal.
[38] L. Liu et al., “Trans-Synaptic Spread of Tau Pathology In Vivo,” PLOS ONE, vol. 7, no. 2, p. e31302, Feb. 2012, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031302.
Inline links: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031302
[120] S. J. Soscia et al., “The Alzheimer’s Disease-Associated Amyloid β-Protein Is an Antimicrobial Peptide,” PLOS ONE, vol. 5, no. 3, p. e9505, Mar. 2010, doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009505.
Inline links: 10.1371/journal.pone.0009505