lucd

The worst about the SpaceX IPO is Nasdaq changing their inclusion rules for the Nasdaq 100. The index fast-tracked SpaceX stock for inclusion 15 days after the IPO, instead of the normal three-month seasoning period. They also changed its 10% minimum float rule to a 3x weighting boost for low-float stockss. So many people will unwillingly and prematurely invest into SpaceX, before it has any chance to discover its real price. IE: The floating, 5% at launch, could attain 30% end august, if Nasdaq didn't change their rules it would have included SpaceX after this..

https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/nasdaq-che...

Kind of ironic reading this and then finding https://github.com/customer-stories/nytimes, huh?

Wonder how GitHub wasn't able to detect a single token downloading the entire organization's worth of repositories, especially if it's over 6 thousand of them. Surely that's not something that's done regularly? Seems like a pretty massive oversight if anyone can just grab a token and get themselves a full copy of the organization.

"Persons who received the BA.5-containing bivalent booster had better neutralizing activity against all Omicron subvariants (especially against BA.2.75.2, BQ.1.1 and XBB) than those who received 1 or 2 monovalent [original] boosters" https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2214293

I'm not sure I understand you.. Do you deplore that Sinovac and Sputnik aren't available in Australia? Really?

Only purpose of this kind of initiative is to cause trouble.. Marketed by the same trolls who spread medical disinfo, climate negationism, Russian propaganda..

What eliminates social cohesion and trust is * the disease itself * the people instrumentalizing the disease and/or the sanitary measures to partisan ends..

If there was such obvious nefarious and severe effects, pharmacovigilance would have seen it. Malone is one of the worst disinformer https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/08/robert-m...

The vaccine antigen is only a small part of the virus. Furthermore is was modified and is inert. https://cen.acs.org/pharmaceuticals/vaccines/tiny-tweak-behi... Because of international pharmacovigilance we know that ARNm vaccine induce some myocarditis and pericarditis, at a much lower rate than the virus and less severe.

Not peer reviewed, not published, anonymous authors.

This is a fake meta-analysis.

The most important study that weighted in IVM favor was bogus and was retracted some days ago.

Nowhere in the paper I read that ADE was detected in the vaccined. Vaccine-induced ADE is only evocated as a possibility.

That's a letter to the editor.. That's an expert opinion and sits at the bottom of the hierachy of scientific evidence.

Furthermore authors seem to be connected to Raoult..

Tess Lawrie co-wrote a meta-analysis that was crowd-funded, on the premises that ivermectin is working against covid.. That doesn't bode well for its neutrality, does it ?

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-us-get-lifesaving-drug-appro...

Tess Lawrie ? The same Tess Lawrie who wrote a fraudulent pharmacovigilance analysis claiming that covid vaccines are unsafe, based on the arbitrary claim that anything bad happening to vaccinated people can only be caused by the vaccine. An old anti-vaccine trick.

Insufficient scientific data, no rationale After chloroquine, same kind of fallacies are used to push ivermectine..

"Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures. However, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies suggest that achieving the plasma concentrations necessary for the antiviral efficacy detected in vitro would require administration of doses up to 100-fold higher than those approved for use in humans." https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/antiviral-the...

Here is some chart showing vaccination effect on hospitalization for severe forms. Very telling.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/israel-severe-hospitaliza...

The 94% effectiveness isonly reached one week after the second shot. Only 27% got the two shots. Also Israël recently got the UK strain which is far more transmissible.

*NeXT computer

Where was Simone Gold fired from? If you look at her LinkedIn profile she is working as a concierge physician for 9 years, she worked as a congressional fellow.. never worked as an emergency physician. Claiming to have been fired is part of her whistle-blower narrative.. https://www.linkedin.com/in/simone-gold-md-jd-4636a87

Only a fool or someone just looking for confirmation would take an anonymous sham of meta-analysis seriously.

Healthier as less comorbidites..

At least five peer-reviewed RCTs were published, more are on their way..Each of them negative. Science was done.

"scientists express doubts about coronavirus treatment touted as breakthough by Trump " What is the problem with this Washington Post headlines? Didn't scientists express doubts about this treatment? Didn't Trump didn't tout is as breakthrough?

Also see.. FDA Walks Back Claim of Dramatic Benefit From Covid Therapy https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-08-24/fda-trump...

Both-sidism: in evidence-based medecine, a treatment is ineffective until it is proven effective.

Now that some monthes have passed, at least five peer-reviewed RCTs were conducted. In each of them hydroxychloroquine is ineffective.

Please tell me who are the authors of the website you mentioned and tell me what is the methodology they used for selecting the studies and rating them.

A subgroup analysis by self-reported zinc usage was done in the post-exposure prophylaxis RCT . No effect.

https://twitter.com/methodsmanmd/status/1293350242310590464

Yes mean difference −4.5 days,with a low certainty.. They also say: Hydroxychloroquine might increase the risk of adverse events compared with the other interventions And no evidence for reduction in death, except for glucocorticoids.. I would expect an effective treatment to reduce mortality..

Medical misinformation : Malaria is caused by a parasite, not a virus. For Lupus or RA hydroxychloroquine helps through its anti-inflammatory and immunosuppressive properties.

No methodology, anonymous authors, no peer-reviewing, related to the account @covidanalysis, which is known to push pro-hcq propaganda.. Are you kidding? Why should we waste time with this propaganda piece while there are real scientific papers available? No methodology, anonymous authors, no peer-reviewing, related to the account @covidanalysis, which is known to push pro-hcq propaganda.. Are you kidding?

Some smart French guy debunked this site https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1284493669895041024.html And c19trials, another disinformation piece from the same authors.. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1291126570392924160.html

You personal experience, despite being very important to you, isn't significative as scientific proof. The site you mentioned is anonymous, a collection of links with arbitrary ratings. This isn't a scientific paper, this is marketing. Here is a real meta-analysis for the different covid-19 treatments: https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m2980 In 100% of randomized controlled trials, the most significant kind of scientific evidence, hydroxychloroquine is ineffective. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1291068395497062400.html

Group treated with HCQ much younger and healthier..Study published in a paper were the editor-in-chief works for Raoult Institute..more of less self-publishing..

This is an obversational retrospective study.. Hydroxychloroquine is ineffective 100% of peer-reviewed randomized controlled trials,which is much more significative evidence..

This is a collection of links with arbitrary ratings from anonymous authors. A propaganda piece. Here is a real meta-analysis.. https://www.bmj.com/content/370/bmj.m2980

What's next? A fruit name?