Beer Virus V

[NKBJ]

Whoa, whoa, whoa! Hold on right there. Holy Goalpost-Moving, Batman!

You didn't say, "unapproved and trials not done." You said, "untested."

(By the way, a bit of insider information. Initial market release is unofficially considered the phase-four clinical trial. Because no matter how wide-spread the Phase 3 trial, it's not really known how a drug will impact the market at-large until market release. That's why pharmacovigilance is part of market authorization - just as heightened pharmacovigilance is part of EUA.)



That's not how this works. The basic, biological understanding of mRNA is just as I described. It doesn't go back into the nucleus. For you to claim otherwise puts the burden of proof on you, not on me, to prove how mRNA gets back into the nucleus.

You might as well be asking me to prove that fecal matter doesn't move backward through the digestive track and into the stomach - or to prove how a differentiated cell can't convert itself back into a stem cell.

The trials aren't completed. The tests aren't completed. Untested. Unapproved.
How many more times do you want to play word games? Don't bother answering because I won't.

For the next semantic antic, no. I'm not buying that zero is valid. And there's no point in you arguing zero based upon how the mechanisms are supposed to work. Thinking about it, us even having the conversation is goofy because we actually don't know what has been synthesized in vaccines' production, the synthetic mRNA bits in the vaccines being how this downhill slide began.

Hope you enjoyed this. I've been polite. I've been answering you for the sake of politeness but now, no.
No more.

 

[chipbennett]

The trials aren't completed. The tests aren't completed. Untested. Unapproved.
How many more times do you want to play word games? Don't bother answering because I won't.

Well, there is certainly one of us playing word games, but it isn't me. Tens of thousands of people were part of clinical trials prior to the EUA. That's testing. You're welcome to disagree, but you'd be wrong - no matter how far you move the goalposts to try to make your statement correct.

For the next semantic antic, no. I'm not buying that zero is valid. And there's no point in you arguing zero based upon how the mechanisms are supposed to work. Thinking about it, us even having the conversation is goofy because we actually don't know what has been synthesized in vaccines' production, the synthetic mRNA bits in the vaccines being how this downhill slide began.

So, what you're saying is that you don't have any logical explanation for how mRNA can get from the cytoplasm into the nucleus? Duly noted. I can't refute or dispute proposed mechanisms that you can't even explain or even suggest. So, yes; us having this conversation is, indeed goofy. I'm talking about known science and you're talking unfounded theory.

Hope you enjoyed this. I've been polite. I've been answering you for the sake of politeness but now, no.
No more.

Fair enough. I can only lead you to the water; I can't make you drink it.

 

[Flingarrows]

It almost felt like the covid shot injected a pea-sized bolus into my arm, and the shingles shot injected something the size of a golf ball.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

If any of you military types ever had the gamagobulin (sp) shot in the butt on the way to Saudi or Iraq for desert storm, you know what a golf ball sized injection of refrigerated thick liquid feels like


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[JCSR]

What the hell?

 

[NKBJ]

What the hell?

Isn't that bad for his lungs?

 

[JCSR]

Isn't that bad for his lungs?

He dead already with the Rona!

 

[ghuns]

He dead already with the Rona!

Smoking is that hard to quit.

 

[NKBJ]

And decades later (if you aren't bagged yet) an emotion can trigger the urge to light up. We have a strange and marvelous presence experiencing these dimensions.

 

[T.Lex]

So, I've been watching the MSM go hair-on-fire about rising rates, but the actual reported numbers didn't really seem to support it.

Totally not sure if the tail is wagging the dog, but it does look like the last couple days show an increase in serious/critical numbers. That has in the past signaled an increase in the other numbers over subsequent weeks.

So, we'll see. Sometimes it is good for leaders to show some emotion, but the teary-eyed "impending doom" bit was unhelpful, IMHO.

 

[JettaKnight]

So, I've been watching the MSM go hair-on-fire about rising rates, but the actual reported numbers didn't really seem to support it.

Totally not sure if the tail is wagging the dog, but it does look like the last couple days show an increase in serious/critical numbers. That has in the past signaled an increase in the other numbers over subsequent weeks.

So, we'll see. Sometimes it is good for leaders to show some emotion, but the teary-eyed "impending doom" bit was unhelpful, IMHO.

I heard that on ATC Monday night. Who was that woman? I discounted here as soon as she started with, "I get this feeling like..." then I started gag when she went on, "As a mother, as a wife, as a daughter..."

 

[T.Lex]

I heard that on ATC Monday night. Who was that woman? I discounted here as soon as she started with, "I get this feeling like..." then I started gag when she went on, "As a mother, as a wife, as a daughter..."

hahaha

She's the director of the CDC. The replacement for Birx, I think.

 

[jamil]

So, I've been watching the MSM go hair-on-fire about rising rates, but the actual reported numbers didn't really seem to support it.

Totally not sure if the tail is wagging the dog, but it does look like the last couple days show an increase in serious/critical numbers. That has in the past signaled an increase in the other numbers over subsequent weeks.

So, we'll see. Sometimes it is good for leaders to show some emotion, but the teary-eyed "impending doom" bit was unhelpful, IMHO.

You day-trade stocks based on technical analysis, don't you.

 

[T.Lex]

You day-trade stocks based on technical analysis, don't you.

hahaha

No.

Actually, the opposite. I got good advice a long time ago about investing, from someone who was very good at it.

Basically: start small, start early, and stay long.

Day trading might as well be Vegas (IMHO).

Now, I have seen some VERY interesting items regarding algorithmic trading that piques my curiosity.

 

[jamil]

hahaha

No.

Actually, the opposite. I got good advice a long time ago about investing, from someone who was very good at it.

Basically: start small, start early, and stay long.

Day trading might as well be Vegas (IMHO).

Now, I have seen some VERY interesting items regarding algorithmic trading that piques my curiosity.

Stay away from technicals. It's voodoo. Behavior/AI driven algorithms are probably worth looking at though. But that's not the same thing as mathematically analyzing trends and thinking the trend today implies something reliable about the trend tomorrow. That **** is nonsense.

 

[T.Lex]

Stay away from technicals. It's voodoo. Behavior/AI driven algorithms are probably worth looking at though.

Back in the day, I got pretty deep into heuristics and A* pathfinding, so there's a comfort level to the AI stuff for me.

No where NEAR ready to think about trusting money to it. Saw the AI make REALLY BAD decisions too often!

 

[nonobaddog]

AI says - buy low, sell high.

 

[BugI02]

it does look like the last couple days show an increase in serious/critical numbers. That has in the past signaled an increase in the other numbers over subsequent weeks.

I thought increased serious/critical was downstream from increased case numbers, at least during the discussions of the declining worldometers derived CFR late last year. One poster was always insisting on a, ultimately variable, lag between rising case numbers and rising fatalities. If rising fatalities now signal eventual rising case numbers, what has changed in order to provoke such an inversion?

 

[BugI02]

Day trading might as well be Vegas (IMHO).

D'Accord!

 

[BugI02]

Stay away from technicals. It's voodoo. Behavior/AI driven algorithms are probably worth looking at though. But that's not the same thing as mathematically analyzing trends and thinking the trend today implies something reliable about the trend tomorrow. That **** is nonsense.

You're not worried that a sufficiently granular knowledge of the code used to create and/or train AI could allow spoofing of the algorithms to move markets to profit the few?

If you don't understand the fundamentals, how can you judge the quality of the advice either a meat bag or an AI might be giving

 

[Ingomike]

Stay away from technicals. It's voodoo. Behavior/AI driven algorithms are probably worth looking at though. But that's not the same thing as mathematically analyzing trends and thinking the trend today implies something reliable about the trend tomorrow. That **** is nonsense.

Some of the most financially conservatives I know are day traders. They have a well researched market segment they work in and know if X happens one day there is a probability y happens after. They have researched the timing and the stocks, getting in just before the change and right back out after. They do not share info with outsiders so I have no idea even the segment, but he does well with it...

Not all day trading is crazy Vegas style trading that so many envision when it comes up...