The Worldwide C0VlD-19 Coronavirus Pandemic Discussion Thread...

[Timmy C]

I'll just leave this here...

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RzFP4yzZzII

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[MTF]

https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...death-was-on-feb-6-a-post-mortem-test-reveals

The first U.S. death known to be from C0VlD-19 occurred on Feb. 6 — nearly three weeks before deaths in Washington state that had been believed to be the country's first from the coronavirus, according to officials in Santa Clara County, Calif. The person died at home and at a time when testing in the U.S. was tightly limited not only by capacity but by federal criteria.

I wonder for how long the virus had been circulating before there was a global panic because it seems it started at least a few weeks earlier (which should now be reflected in models and policies).

 

[Longinus]

Just had to post this:

http://instagr.am/p/B-bAoPOjp_A/ View: https://www.instagram.com/p/B-bAoPOjp_A/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet

 

[Timmy C]

Just had to post this:

http://instagr.am/p/B-bAoPOjp_A/ View: https://www.instagram.com/p/B-bAoPOjp_A/?utm_source=ig_web_button_share_sheet

Oh shit mate i spat my water out.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Contrarian]

https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...death-was-on-feb-6-a-post-mortem-test-reveals

The first U.S. death known to be from C0VlD-19 occurred on Feb. 6 — nearly three weeks before deaths in Washington state that had been believed to be the country's first from the coronavirus, according to officials in Santa Clara County, Calif. The person died at home and at a time when testing in the U.S. was tightly limited not only by capacity but by federal criteria.

I wonder for how long the virus had been circulating before there was a global panic because it seems it started at least a few weeks earlier (which should now be reflected in models and policies).

I know five or six people in the UK who are convinced they had coronavirus as early as January or even December, but at the time figured it was just a really, really, really bad cold.

 

[Kak]

I know five or six people in the UK who are convinced they had coronavirus as early as January or even December, but at the time figured it was just a really, really, really bad cold.

My wife got whatever we got first, she had a cough that lasted 6 weeks. It started in late December. We eventually took her to the doctor thinking she had pneumonia and they said she didn't have it. They gave her a couple of perscriptions and a z-pack of all things, just in case. She got better in about week. So 7 weeks for the cough to be totally 100% gone.

I thought I had some beast of an immune system, because I wasn't getting sick, but it started picking up for me too. Cough was the primary symptom, and it just lingered. The light symptoms lingered for 2 weeks into February, about 6 weeks for me too. I also got a Z-pack and whatever it was seemed to respond, but not knock it out.

Throughout this time, we both had light fever spikes, but never anything that lasted more than a few hours and shortness of breath. Climbing the stairs was a chore. Helping my in-laws move had me laying down in my truck coughing up a lung.

So yeah. I think we had it. I also was a functional person and still got work done. I felt like an unhealthy mess. It wasn't as bad as flu for me, but whatever it was, it was tormentingly long.

I want an antibody test BAD! If it is positive for us both, that means it could have easily been going around in December.

 

[Contrarian]

My wife got whatever we got first, she had a cough that lasted 6 weeks. It started in late December. We eventually took her to the doctor thinking she had pneumonia and they said she didn't have it. They gave her a couple of perscriptions and a z-pack of all things, just in case. She got better in about week. So 7 weeks for the cough to be totally 100% gone.

I thought I had some beast of an immune system, because I wasn't getting sick, but it started picking up for me too. Cough was the primary symptom, and it just lingered. The light symptoms lingered for 2 weeks into February, about 6 weeks for me too. I also got a Z-pack and whatever it was seemed to respond, but not knock it out.

Throughout this time, we both had light fever spikes, but never anything that lasted more than a few hours and shortness of breath. Climbing the stairs was a chore. Helping my in-laws move had me laying down in my truck coughing up a lung.

So yeah. I think we had it. I also was a functional person and still got work done. I felt like an unhealthy mess. It wasn't as bad as flu for me, but whatever it was, it was tormentingly long.

I want an antibody test BAD! If it is positive for us both, that means it could have easily been going around in December.

Damn, sure sounds like you both had it.

Too dangerous to let you have an antibody test. Can't have you being the victim of them there price gougers. It's for your own good.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[GIlman]

I'll just leave this here...

View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RzFP4yzZzII

Vaccines are medical treatments, all treatments including vaccines have risks. The question is how many people have side effects or die from the vaccine vs long term health effects or death from the disease, that MIGHT influence how much risk is acceptable in a vaccine.

For example, say you had a highly contagious common illness with a death rate of 10%, someone had an 80% chance of contracting the illness over 5-10 years, would it be acceptable if a vaccine had a 0.1% death rate. Without vaccination 80/1000 would die over 5-10 years with vaccine 1 would die from vaccination. Is that acceptable risk for someone to choose to be vaxinated??

Sometimes I think it’s easy to ignore the risk of the actual disease. This is the thing many anti-vaxers have learned. They choose not to have their child vaxinated due to real or perceived risks, then their child contracts a bad infection. Look at the measles outbreak in Disneyland several years ago.

The problem with the anti-vac movement is that there is low risk to the unvaxinated as long as the vast majority of people are vaxinated. The herd immunity somewhat protects the unvaxinated because the illness is rarely circulating in the highly immunized society. As increasing numbers are not vaxinated, the risk goes up rapidly, and an outbreak like at Disney occurs.

For Coronavirus it may make sense statistically to vaccinate older people, say >65, because risk of death is much higher, which may make some risk from the vaccine more tolerable.

Of course, they might not get public buyin to take the vaccine unless the risk is very very low. Even if statistically people are better off getting the vaccine, emotionally people may reject it. I think that’s fine, that’s their right, no one should be forced to vaccinat

Somewhere buried in the comments I had written about vaccine development, and why a good vaccine needed rigorous study, and why the process can only be rushed to a point. I also brought up the issue of dengue fever vaccine increasing risk of actual infection. With a novel virus we don’t have a developed platform, we don’t know what has safely been targeted in the past, so there is more work and testing to create a safe effective vaccine.

At the end of the day, would I take an insufficient tested, rushed to market vaccine. NO!!

I wouldn’t be first inline for sure. In my age group with no pre-existing conditions the risk is quite low, the risk from unknown effects of an insufficiently tester vaccine to me would outweigh the risk of disease in my specific situation. If I was 70+ at high risk because of pre-existing conditions my calculation and willingness to accept more risk from a vaccine would increase.

I’m not against vaccines at all, I’ve taken many over the years, but everyone needs to look at their own situation and determine acceptable risk vs benefit if we have a rushed to market vaccine.

 

[Kak]

Opinion | The Bearer of Good Coronavirus News

Stanford scientist John Ioannidis finds himself under attack for questioning the prevailing wisdom about lockdowns.

www.wsj.com

I bolded some of my favorite points made below.

Defenders of coronavirus lockdown mandates keep talking about science. “We are going to do the right thing, not judge by politics, not judge by protests, but by science,” California’s Gov. Gavin Newsom said this week. Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer defended an order that, among other things, banned the sale of paint and vegetable seeds but not liquor or lottery tickets. “Each action has been informed by the best science and epidemiology counsel there is,” she wrote in an op-ed.


But scientists are almost never unanimous, and many appeals to “science” are transparently political or ideological. Consider the story of John Ioannidis, a professor at Stanford’s School of Medicine. His expertise is wide-ranging—he juggles appointments in statistics, biomedical data, prevention research and health research and policy. Google Scholar ranks him among the world’s 100 most-cited scientists. He has published more than 1,000 papers, many of them meta-analyses—reviews of other studies. Yet he’s now found himself pilloried because he dissents from the theories behind the lockdowns—because he’s looked at the data and found good news.

In a March article for Stat News, Dr. Ioannidis argued that C0VlD-19 is far less deadly than modelers were assuming. He considered the experience of the Diamond Princess cruise ship, which was quarantined Feb. 4 in Japan. Eight of 700 infected passengers and crew died. Based on the demographics of the ship’s population, Dr. Ioannidis estimated that the U.S. fatality rate could be as low as 0.025% to 0.625% and put the upper bound at 0.05% to 1%—comparable to that of seasonal flu.


“If that is the true rate,” he wrote, “locking down the world with potentially tremendous social and financial consequences may be totally irrational. It’s like an elephant being attacked by a house cat. Frustrated and trying to avoid the cat, the elephant accidentally jumps off a cliff and dies.”
...

He cautions against drawing broad conclusions about the efficacy of lockdowns based on national infection and fatality rates. “It’s not that we have randomized 10 countries to go into lockdown and another 10 countries to remain relatively open and see what happens, and do that randomly. Different prime ministers, different presidents, different task forces make decisions, they implement them in different sequences, at different times, in different phases of the epidemic. And then people start looking at this data and they say, ‘Oh look at that, this place did very well. Why? Oh, because of this measure.’ This is completely, completely opinion-based.”


People are making “big statements about ‘lockdowns save the world.’ I think that they’re immature. They’re tremendously immature. They may have worked in some cases, they may have had no effect in others, and they may have been damaging still in others.”


Most disagreements among scientists, he notes, reflect differences in perspective, not facts. Some find the Stanford study worrisome because it suggests the virus is more easily transmitted, while others are hopeful because it suggests the virus is far less lethal. “It’s basically an issue of whether you’re an optimist or a pessimist. Even scientists can be optimists and pessimists. Probably usually I’m a pessimist, but in this case, I’m probably an optimist.”

 

[GIlman]

Also, before even considering getting the CV vaccine, people should seriously consider getting an antibody test for CV. If someone has already developed immunity to CV the utility of a vaccine is likely low or non-existent.

Actually the flip side is also true, if people believe they previously got CV because of prior illness (@Kak and everyone else) make sure to get the antibody test to prove it before rejecting the possibility of vaccination. This includes myself - I was seriously ill at the beginning of Feb with symptoms like people with CV. There are simply too many respiratory illnesses out there with similar symptoms. Without absolute proof I won’t assume I am immune.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Matt Sun]

I am extremely skeptical of this guys claims. He makes very broad sweeping claims with big words and a microscope about covid, but there isn’t really evidence to support his claims.

1) Covid has to be able to get through the cell membrane, research has shown that this happens by the virus binding to ACE2 Receptors and using a vacuole protease system to enter the cell. Red blood cells are basically bags of hemoglobin, all the cellular machinery and DNA is essentially stripped out as they mature. First RBC are not classically listed as cells with ACE2 receptor. Second RBC lack vacuoles and other cellular machinery. So there it’s Hard to imagine how the virus would get into the cell.

COVID-19:Attacks the 1-Beta Chain of Hemoglobin and Captures the Porphyrin to Inhibit Human Heme Metabolism

The novel coronavirus pneumonia (C0VlD-19) is an infectious acute respiratory caused by the novel coronavirus. The virus is the positive-strand RNA one with high homology to bat coronavirus. The pathogenic mechanism of the new coronavirus is still unclear, which is a significant obstacle to the...

chemrxiv.org

2) As far as I can tell the theory of covid binding to hemoglobin is based on the paper above. This is the only research reference I can find even addressing this, and the paper provides no references of prior papers to substantiate their findings. This paper is entirely based on computer modeling of proteins. I guess we could call it in-computero, not even in vitro, so the binding of covid to hemoglobin has apparently never been molecularly demonstrated.

3) Even if it was true that covid could enter RBC, there are a huge number of hemoglobin molecules, since there is no intracellular machinery in a RBC, I’m not sure how the virus would be able to replicate. Meaning that you would have to have a huge number of virus particles produced in other cells then enter into RBC to bind up all the hemoglobin and have a significant effect.

There are other reasons in addition to these, but it appears highly implausible that covid has any effect on hemoglobin to begin with so the rest of his claims for treating covid are highly suspect.

For the record, I have no pony in this race, hydroxychloquine is cheap and generally available. It appears hopeful still that it has good utility but not perfect. ClO2 is also presumably cheap, and if it works I would applaud its use. But I want this scientist to show me real reproducible evidence, I don’t see this at all, it appears to me an attempt to appeal to people that don’t have experience in the medical sciences. At least that’s how his presentation and explanations comes off to me.

Hi, Gilman. I appreciate the reply, thank you. I can't comment on covid and RBC works, since i don't have facts or studies to comment on. But you asked about replicable evidence. So there is this study that says that CLO2 completely inactivates Covid (in waste water). That is replicable.

Study on the resistance of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus

In this study, the persistence of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV) was observed in feces, urine and water. In addit…

www.sciencedirect.com

"Free residue chlorine over 0.5 mg/L for chlorine or 2.19 mg/L for chlorine dioxide in wastewater ensures complete inactivation of SARS-CoV while it does not inactivate completely E. coli and f2 phage."

Sure I would love to have clinical double blind studies to discuss this. But we know those are quite expensive, and with something as cheap and non patentable as CLO2 there is just not the incentive to do it.
Yet, there is evidence that it can work, it is safe, and could be widely available fast. One could ask why don't we look further into this ? Why are the FDA and WHO on a jihad against it ?

 

[Mbc]

Hi, Gilman. I appreciate the reply, thank you. I can't comment on covid and RBC works, since i don't have facts or studies to comment on. But you asked about replicable evidence. So there is this study that says that CLO2 completely inactivates Covid (in waste water). That is replicable.

Study on the resistance of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus

In this study, the persistence of severe acute respiratory syndrome-associated coronavirus (SARS-CoV) was observed in feces, urine and water. In addit…

www.sciencedirect.com

"Free residue chlorine over 0.5 mg/L for chlorine or 2.19 mg/L for chlorine dioxide in wastewater ensures complete inactivation of SARS-CoV while it does not inactivate completely E. coli and f2 phage."

Sure I would love to have clinical double blind studies to discuss this. But we know those are quite expensive, and with something as cheap and non patentable as CLO2 there is just not the incentive to do it.
Yet, there is evidence that it can work, it is safe, and could be widely available fast. One could ask why don't we look further into this ? Why are the FDA and WHO on a jihad against it ?

What do you expect to do with that information?
Most people would assume chlorine would kill C0VlD-19...so does soap.

This is why we use chlorine to treat water and purposefully leave chlorine residuals so that it keeps "disinfecting" water as it travels to your taps.

As far as I know nobody is worried about getting the virus from their tap water though.

 

[ChrisV]

Vaccines are medical treatments, all treatments including vaccines have risks. The question is how many people have side effects or die from the vaccine vs long term health effects or death from the disease, that MIGHT influence how much risk is acceptable in a vaccine.

This is a good non-sensationalist overview of the pros/cons of vaccines:

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Matt Sun]

What do you expect to do with that information?
Most people would assume chlorine would kill C0VlD-19...so does soap.

This is why we use chlorine to treat water and purposefully leave chlorine residuals so that it keeps "disinfecting" water as it travels to your taps.

As far as I know nobody is worried about getting the virus from their tap water though.

Chlorine is a diferent compound than Chlorine Dioxide (CLO2). It's not the same.
CLO2 can be used to treat many illnesses by puting it in a glass of water and drinking it. Among those is covid.
To note that drinking it is not something crazy I come up with, here are amazon water purification tables that are used all the time by people:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01LY89T00/?tag=tff-amazonparser-20

Our bodies are 80% water, so in a way by drinking it, we would be potabilazing our own water.

 

[Mbc]

Chlorine is a diferent compound than Chlorine Dioxide (CLO2). It's not the same.
CLO2 can be used to treat many illnesses by puting it in a glass of water and drinking it. Among those is covid.
To note that drinking it is not something crazy I come up with, here are amazon water purification tables that are used all the time by people:

Amazon.com : Potable Aqua Chlorine Dioxide Water Purification Tablets - 20 Count : Camping Chemical Water Treaters : Sports & Outdoors

Our bodies are 80% water, so in a way by drinking it, we would be potabilazing our own water.

Those are used to purify water before drinking it. "Potable Aqua products provide time-tested, simple-to-use water treatment options for campers, backpackers and other outdoor enthusiasts. No aftertaste-improves the taste and odor of water. "

When people say Chlorine treatment of water they don't mean pure Cl. Water is treated with CLO2. Your drinking water, right now, is most likely treated with CLO2 and still contains some residual amounts (along with other Cl compounds).

No you cannot treat illnesses by drinking swimming pool water (which also can be CLO2 even though people just say chlorine). It literally is something crazy you just came up with...well you're probably not the first. But it's nonsense.

 

[GIlman]

Opinion | The Bearer of Good Coronavirus News

Stanford scientist John Ioannidis finds himself under attack for questioning the prevailing wisdom about lockdowns.

www.wsj.com

I bolded some of my favorite points made below.

Chlorine is a diferent compound than Chlorine Dioxide (CLO2). It's not the same.
CLO2 can be used to treat many illnesses by puting it in a glass of water and drinking it. Among those is covid.
To note that drinking it is not something crazy I come up with, here are amazon water purification tables that are used all the time by people:

Robot Check

Our bodies are 80% water, so in a way by drinking it, we would be potabilazing our own water.

For any treatment there needs to be two things to be useful, safety and efficacy (effectiveness).

Safety of anything is first off dose dependent. In medicine we talk about an LD50, which is the lethal dose at which 50% of the study population dies. Even water, pure H2O, has an LD50, it’s just extremely high. Even things that are extremely toxic, say cyanide, has an LD50, and if you wanted to could figure out a “safe” dose that was tiny enough it didn’t kill anyone. Side effects, which also make up safety, can be hard to determine.

Efficacy is a whole different ballgame. With efficacy, just like LD50, it is dose dependent. You have to achieve a high enough dose to be effective. Thats assuming that the substance actually has a desired medically useful effect. The game then is to give someone enough to be medically useful but not so much to cause toxicity or death.

Part of the difficulty in medicine is that there is placebo effect. Just the act of people taking something improves symptoms in a certain percentage of people, ironically even if you tell them it’s a placebo. The question though is did the underlying cause of symptom itself improve or the perception of the symptom itself. Almost certainly just the perception.

I have no knowledge of ClO2, I’ve never even heard of it, so everything I’m saying is general not specific to that agent. Of course it COULd work, the question is DOES it. Yes double blind clinical studies are expensive, but they are also rigorous and eliminate issues with Placebo effect and many other forms of bias. These studies allow examination of both efficacy and safety.

The cost of these studies IS a problem. Certainly there are many many substances on earth that are cheap to produce and readily available. In fact quite honestly probably the production costs of most medications is minimal, fractions of a cent per pill. Almost all the cost is related to the time, effort, and work in identifying candidate drugs and testing them. Realize the vast majority of hopeful medications die along the way. A company may start out with 10,000 substances, which fail at different stages of evaluation and testing, and end up with 1 actual marketable drug.

Even though ClO2 MAY have some sort of clinical effect against covid, the fact is that no study has been done, there hasn’t even been time to conduct a valid study. Therefore it’s purely conjecture on his part that it has any effect.

I’m also extremely skeptical whenever anyone is touting a wonder drug that has many many many very different uses. That’s almost always a huge redflag that something is being peddled more as snake oil then genuine treatment. I’m aware of no medication that can treat 15-20 fundamentally different ailments.

Yes some can treat the symptom of many different diseases, such as Tylenol helping relieve pain regardless of if it’s source e.g. from a bruise, broken bone, headache, toothache, etc. But Tylenol cannot make the bone heal faster, bruise disappear quicker, infection from tooth be beat, and whatever is causing headache to not happen.

So I guess as far as I’m concerned, there is neither positive or negative evidence that it is effective or not. For instance his microscope demonstration is interesting, but what does it really mean. What is microscopically happening, is it even a useful thing. All you can tell is red cells are changing shape. That really means noting other than being able to say they changed shape. So it’s not something I would personally take.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[ChrisV]

I’m also extremely skeptical whenever anyone is touting a wonder drug that has many many many very different uses. That’s almost always a huge redflag that something is being peddled more as snake oil then genuine treatment. I’m aware of no medication that can treat 15-20 fundamentally different ailments.

Diet & exercise

 

[GIlman]

Diet & exercise

Lol, that’s not a single wonder chemical. Its a highly complex variable set of conditions.

What about someone that is super fit and eats only cheeseburgers? Maybe they keep their calories at 2K, they will be skinny and fit.

 

[ChrisV]

Lol, that’s not a single wonder chemical. Its a highly complex variable set of conditions.

What about someone that is super fit and eats only cheeseburgers? Maybe they keep their calories at 2K, they will be skinny and fit.

Well when I say 'diet' I mean 'a nutritious diet'



But I'm being tongue-in-cheek anyway.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[MTF]

YouTube's CEO suggested content that 'goes against' WHO guidance on the coronavirus will get banned

CEO Susan Wojcicki says YouTube will "remove information that is problematic."

www.businessinsider.com

Wow this is just disgusting.

YouTube Susan Wojcicki has suggested that the video platform will remove content that contradicts the World Health Organization's advice on C0VlD-19.

In an interview with CNN published Sunday, Wojcicki said YouTube would be "removing information that is problematic" including "anything that is medically unsubstantiated."

For example, she said, content that claimed vitamin C or turmeric would cure people of C0VlD-19 would be "a violation of our policy" and removed accordingly.

She continued: "Anything that goes against WHO recommendations would be a violation of our policy and so remove is another really important part of our policy."

So you want to tell me that anything that goes against recommendations of the most incompetent and corrupt international organization in history should be removed?

Wow, just wow. Vitamin C and turmeric to cure the virus are BS but there's a huge difference between this and anything that is against WHO recommendations.

 

[Matt Sun]

For any treatment there needs to be two things to be useful, safety and efficacy (effectiveness).


I’m also extremely skeptical whenever anyone is touting a wonder drug that has many many many very different uses. That’s almost always a huge redflag that something is being peddled more as snake oil then genuine treatment. I’m aware of no medication that can treat 15-20 fundamentally different ailments.

There are drugs that are good for many different uses.
You heard about cannabis Oil ? It can stop epilepsy, improves autism, useful in glaucoma, cancer, diabetes, and many more.

FDA says still is a schedule 1 drug, with no medical use. How is that right there NOT a red flag on the FDA/WHO? There is solid science on it since 50 years ago (scientist Raphael Mechoulam from Hebrew university, Israel).

Clo2 tough is not so much of a drug as is a desinfectant . It kills many diferent viruses and bacteria so it helps with many diseases. It's like sope, you don't need a specific one to wash your hand from each virus/bacteria.
Just yesterday Trump spoke of curing covid with an internally used desinfectant. We'll see what comes out of it.
If you are really intersted I suggest you hear more of what Andreas Kalcker says about it. He has many videos both for professionals of health and for the common public as well.

 

[ChrisV]

I was partly being tongue in cheek with my last post, but there is actual truth to it.

A nutritious diet and proper exercise improves immune function, which heps your ability to fight disease.

Ways to Boost Your Immune System

Are you doing all you can to strengthen your immune system? WebMD tells you which habits might be costing you immunity – and ways you can fight back.

www.webmd.com

https://thehill.com/opinion/healthc...d-medicine-for-C0VlD-19-and-national-security

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Kak]

YouTube's CEO suggested content that 'goes against' WHO guidance on the coronavirus will get banned

CEO Susan Wojcicki says YouTube will "remove information that is problematic."

www.businessinsider.com

Wow this is just disgusting.

YouTube Susan Wojcicki has suggested that the video platform will remove content that contradicts the World Health Organization's advice on C0VlD-19.

In an interview with CNN published Sunday, Wojcicki said YouTube would be "removing information that is problematic" including "anything that is medically unsubstantiated."

For example, she said, content that claimed vitamin C or turmeric would cure people of C0VlD-19 would be "a violation of our policy" and removed accordingly.

She continued: "Anything that goes against WHO recommendations would be a violation of our policy and so remove is another really important part of our policy."

So you want to tell me that anything that goes against recommendations of the most incompetent and corrupt international organization in history should be removed?

Wow, just wow. Vitamin C and turmeric to cure the virus are BS but there's a huge difference between this and anything that is against WHO recommendations.

They can do whatever they want, they own the platform. They will have outraged customers/users to answer to. Every time one of the giants does something like this, they create opportunity for smaller players.

View: https://youtu.be/AM0uIEfaNLw

 

[Matt Sun]

Those are used to purify water before drinking it. "Potable Aqua products provide time-tested, simple-to-use water treatment options for campers, backpackers and other outdoor enthusiasts. No aftertaste-improves the taste and odor of water. "

When people say Chlorine treatment of water they don't mean pure Cl. Water is treated with CLO2. Your drinking water, right now, is most likely treated with CLO2 and still contains some residual amounts (along with other Cl compounds).

No you cannot treat illnesses by drinking swimming pool water (which also can be CLO2 even though people just say chlorine). It literally is something crazy you just came up with...well you're probably not the first. But it's nonsense.

You are right, i'm not the first on thinking this, for example this fellow already patented it for cancer

https://patents.google.com/patent/US10105389B1/en

"The present invention relates to the use of chlorine dioxide compositions for treating cancerous tumors. The present invention relates to compositions and methods for treating cancerous tumors, including naïve, metastatic and recurrent cancers."

I wonder if Trump is going to disclose this, he talked about inyecting desinfectants for C0VlD-19.

 

[MTF]

https://www.thelocal.no/20200423/if-we-had-followed-sweden-we-would-have-higher-immunity-epidemiologist/amp

'If we had followed Sweden, we would have higher immunity': Norway Prof

One of Norway's most eminent epidemiologists has questioned Norway's decision to impose a heavy lockdown, arguing that the country might have been better adopting a strategy closer to that of Sweden.

"There is a weakness in the strategy," Eiliv Lund, emeritus professor at the University of Tromsø, told the VG newspaper. "If we had done what the Swedes have done, we would have had a higher infection rate, and thus a higher immunity."

The Norwegian Institute of Public Health on Tuesday said in a briefing note that its research indicated that only 1% of Norwegians had been infected with coronavirus, underlining the impressive success of the country's measures in reducing the rate of infection.

But Lund, who is renowned for his research into cancer in women, argued this was a problem.

"The government had a lot of faith in this hard line of 'knocking down' the virus," he told the newspaper. "It has been believed that if we can lock down for long enough it would disappear, but we cannot prevent it from coming in from the outside.

"Then you have to wait for a vaccine or a drug treatment, but if this doesn't come, it will be very costly for society. We are pushing the problem out in front of us."

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[James Klymus]

My wife got whatever we got first, she had a cough that lasted 6 weeks.

Had a cough like that from christmas to valentines day. There were times where I had to stop what I was doing just to go cough up a lung.

I'm 95% sure I've had it too.

 

[Trevor Kuntz]

Had a cough like that from christmas to valentines day. There were times where I had to stop what I was doing just to go cough up a lung.

I'm 95% sure I've had it too.

The shitty thing is that you might not have gotten it. I have had three friends who got really sick in March (aka during the testing period) and all three tested negative. Three people in completely different places with really bad symptoms and no connections to each other. All were completely convinced that they had C0VlD-19 until they got tested using the old test (back of throat and back of nostril) and came back negative. Of course, false negatives are possible, but I felt bad for them because they were just getting over being super sick, hoping to be immune and none of them tested positive in the end.

I'm sure they are also eager to get tested for antibodies, as am I.

 

[Bigguns50]

Concerning the "political compass test" 9 out 10 questions on that thing are loaded. It has extreme bias.

"All people have their rights, but it is better for all of us that different sorts of people should keep to their own kind. "

"People with serious inheritable disabilities should not be allowed to reproduce."

"The most important thing for children to learn is to accept discipline."

"First-generation immigrants can never be fully integrated within their new country."

"Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, only wrongdoers need to be worried."

"Mothers may have careers, but their first duty is to be homemakers. "

I am assuming that agreeing to this malarkey makes you a conservative.

@ChrisV this thing is a JOKE

WOW...some of the worse questions I've ever read. Trump put out a questionaire just as bad.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[ChrisV]

WOW...some of the worse questions I've ever read. Trump put out a questionaire just as bad.

Yea lol, some of those questions were a little weird. There was one that said something like "If globalisation is inevitable, it should serve humanity rather than the interests of corporations." and it's like "wait, serving the interests of corperations isn't serving the interest of humanity?"

But there are other ones too. I generally rank similiarly no matter which I take:

The Political Compass Test | Daniel J. Mitchell

"…the social dimension is also important in politics. That’s the one that the mere left-right scale doesn’t adequately address. So we’ve added one, ranging in positions from extreme authoritarian to extreme libertarian."

fee.org

 

[WillHurtDontCare]

What about "Right to peaceable assembly" I would consider that violated. FIRST AMENDMENT!

The the FIRST, SECOND, FOURTH, FIFTH, SIXTH, EIGHTH, NINTH, FOURTEENTH, and I could even make an argument for THIRTEENTH, amendments have also been violated amidst this "SHITSHOW."

Who needs toilet paper when everyone just wants to use the constitution? The reason our bill of rights is there in the first place is to list rights that should never be violated by government. Violations are usually challenged judicially. We have seen NONE of this.

These affirmations of rights and limits on government are literally the foundation that separates the USA from becoming an authoritarian country like China.

@ChrisV you are someone I consider a very good friend, but, I vehemently disagree with nearly everything you are posting in this thread. It seems you take the analysis of government employed experts with their moment of spotlight, grasping at their 15 minutes of fame for dear life, as fact.

I don't blame you, it is what we are taught (indoctrinated) to do, but if you broaden your thought process, outside of government lackeys, instead of dismissing everyone that isn't operating in an "official government capacity" as a conspiracy theorist, you might start to see where we are coming from.

inter arma enim silent leges - "in time of war, the law falls silent"

-Cicero

You should be cynical about politics. How many politicians have most people met? I'd say zero. Think of what that means - it means that they have no idea what your interests are. So why would the act in them?

Also, check the funding on any study. If there is any sign of money come from political or business interests, then the results of that study serve a political or business end.

Governments & business generally have the shared goal of keeping the economy going. Beyond that the main goal of politicians is simply getting re-elected. You only matter in terms of how much you can help those ends. And good luck to you if you get in the way.

Government studies:

C.I.A. Says It Has Found No Link Between Itself and Crack Trade (Published 1997)

CIA concludes, after interviewing nearly 400 people on four continents, that its officers had nothing to do with explosion of crack cocaine in US, as charged by some blacks; secret report finds no evidence that CIA coordinated or condoned drug trafficking, although separate probe continues into...

www.nytimes.com