dablweb

Remote.com also compete in this space, and they have a pretty good UI and customer service.

Not cheap, but worth it for sure considering how much time they save you.

This is an incredibly bad and short-sighted take.

This is not at all the same situation, and this sort of hubris is what causes public health disasters such as the Vioxx, Thalidomide or Dengvaxia scandals.

This is artificially created genetic material ending up in newborns after the manufacturer assured the public that was not possible.

I consider this incredibly serious.

From what I understand, yes.

Natural mRNA is too unstable to reliably transport into the cell via injection. Part of the reason mRNA gene treatments spent so long in development without a single approved product.

The two technologies that facilitate this techonology are:

1. Base-modified mRNA (modRNA or :( mRNA), where they substitue uridine.

2. Nano-technology which protects the payload in a bubble of fat, lipid-nano-particles (LNPs).

While LNPs on their own are capable of their own side effects, the modRNA is particularly worrying because of its extended lifetime. IIRC some studies claim to have found it intact many weeks after injection, which would be astounding were we talking of natural mRNA.

Bret Weinstein said of this situation "if a fiberglass tree falls in the forest", which illustrates that most biologists and medical professionals could estimate how long a tree would take to decompose in a forest, however, their estimates would be wildly incorrect if you omitted to tell them the tree was made of fiberglass.

The podcast where he discusses this is here: https://open.spotify.com/episode/5Qyhu8A4wuCPkvCXM0KLut

Ah that's where the small print is important.

This isn't "mRNA" this is modified-mRNA (where the name Moderna comes from). Unfortunately they are allowed to abbreviate it as mRNA, which IMO is extremely problematic.

Modified-mRNA uses pseudouridine in some of its base pairs. As such, it is able to remain stable for orders of magnitude more time in many chemical situations.

This practice is incredibly deceptive and lead many in the medical profession to disregard some pretty serious safety issues.

Ironic that nature publishes this despite being guilty of constantly promoting it.

That's not really the case here. Gain of function research can not be justified using this argument.

There are so many potential mutations that putting specific evolutionary pressure on a virus in order to "prevent" only those specific effects has such low efficacy considering the size of the problem space.

GOF research has provided very little in terms of benefits, and many argue it's simply been a way to disguise bioweapons research after the Geneva convention.

Maybe a fractional reserve banking system that allows banks to create money out of nothing through mortgage contracts and funnel it straight into the housing market, causing inflation and soaring debt, was a colossal mistake.

There, I fixed it for you.

Banks create money out of nothing when they give you a mortgage. It's called fractional reserve banking. They're not "lending" you anything... your house becomes the collateral they use to create money from the mortgage contract itself.

This means a large amount of inflation gets funneled directly into the housing market. This skews economic signals and turns housing into a financial asset for the wealthy. The wealthy don't complain, because they are already on the property ladder.

So our entire financial system is fundamentally broken and this brokenness manifests most visibly in the housing market.

It's interesting that we're not allowed to debate the existence of the crisis in the first place... it's just accepted as an a priori fact and anyone who provides even the slightest push-back is ridiculed and silenced.

> As long as vaccine side effects cause less deaths and less harm than the virus, vaccination is still the way to go.

No.

This is the wrong criteria to judge by. Right now it takes ~30,000 injections to prevent one hospitalization from COVID, according to recent studies.

So the real criteria is, if there are severe side effects in more than 1/30k they should be pulled.

In Pfizer's own RCT more people died in the vaccinated cohort. They had ~4x the amount of cardiac arrest. There was no proven effect on all-cause mortality from the start. Anyone paying attention and not blindly listening to politicians and the sycophantic media knew this long ago.

"mistakes"

> only be given if the government's gotten a name / SSN / real-life identity to associate with that address

A.K.A. biometric vaccine passport

Fasting.

You can train yourself to go from 8 hours (sleep) to 16 hours pretty easily.

Once you get to a point where you can one-meal-a-day comfortably, then extending this to a 48hr fast once a week becomes relatively easy too.

Sites like Reddit, Facebook and Twitter can very easily become a political tool for manufacturing artificial consensus.

A large portion of the population do not go to specific news sites directly but instead rely on a link aggregator, Reddit being the most popular in the world (I believe).

If a political entity were to gain significant control of the censorship mechanisms, you would have a massive societal risk IMO. I have been following the censorship problem on Reddit for a while now and I think this has now become the case.

I can't say which entities are operating here, but it seems resoundingly clear something very inorganic is happening in Reddit's systems.

You might be able to go to reveddit.com and run your profile through it?

It shows banned and shadow-banned content.

Subreddits are banning people for simply participating in blacklisted topics / subreddits.

Reddit's censorship has gotten so bad I think it's a real societal risk considering how prevalent it is.

It's not just privacy we need to be worried about. It's the manipulation of public consciousness which I believe is the most alarming.

Just head over to reveddit.com and look at a few controversial subreddits without the shadow-banning. It's truly terrifying to see the true scale of censorship and ghost-banning in big tech right now.

You'd think so, but in doing so you've just imagined the world's most terrifying propaganda tool.

We were promised this wouldn't happen by our governments last year right?

It feels like the public are building their own prisons. Why are private companies stuck policing these absurd policies?

It's astonishing that the majority of people can look at this situation and not recoil.

The whole "mix and match" narrative is just so misguided.

I do wonder if it's being pushed as a way to dilute possible lawsuits.

Wouldn't mixing significantly reduce your chance at legal recourse should you have a severe reaction?

Can't tell if sarcastic...

Do you have any source for the claim that myocarditis is less severe after the vaccine than after infection? I was under the impression it was the opposite due to most infections remaining in the airways.

Uh, we don't really have a control group anymore. This whole rollout has been rife with callous disregard for the usual protocols.

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/02/19/9691430...

The severity of vaccine-induced myocarditis is far worse than virus-induced too. You have to have a very severe infection for the spike protein to accumulate in your heart, whereas the LNP delivery system gravitates to the heart due to its fat content. We have seen this in various biodistribution studies.

I think they make a decent point, and contributed to this conversation. Calm down.

Uh, didn't we know this like... more than a year ago?

Not not mention the smear campaign that was instantly retracted when put under the slightest scrutiny.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

You're not wrong. We NEED large scale trials for this ASAP.

I don't understand your knee-jerk negativity here though.

There are plenty of non-double-blind studies that show significant potency of these treatments. Not only this, it is a cheap and proven safe treatment that we have used for decades. This is a very low risk treatment with a huge potential upside.

Why would you be anything but positive about this news? Whose payroll you on buddy?

Your argument is sound. It is however, built on one glaring assumption: the people in charge of the publicly funded healthcare systems are primarily incentivized to find cheap and safe treatments for the illness.

I think when you look at the selective medicare payments, the ventilator contracts, and the price of the 'recommended' patent-drugs like Remdisivir... it quickly becomes apparent that our public incentive structure is profoundly broken.

Just be careful with your state file when upgrading!