you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I read into both sides now for some bit. I can't speak about the chemistry but about the statistics involved here. I also assume that when you operate a lab, you keep it somewhat professional. This seemingly is not always the case.

Still: The problem is only less the virus itself but the consequences drawn by most "deciders" from it. If we could get our deciders to diversify the consequences more, so more or less to actually do responsible legislation instead of just listening to plans on or two corporate advisors with conflicting interests set into their head:

I'd have considered this als real progress.

[–]FlippyKing 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

If you run a lab you adhere to the standards and follow protocols set across the industry by an agency or regulatory body, this way the results re consistent across labs as much as possible. The lab does not determine if a test is valid. You pay for a specific analysis and you get it. If those that set the standard are wrong, that's not on the lab.

I think the biggest problems are that the deciders are not the people who may or may not be sick from something, or the doctors who often have to follow protocols handed to them by hospitals or insurance companies, and also that no one knows how deficient they are in all the nutrients shows to stave this stupid thing off. So many things help fight this off, Vitamins A, B1, C, D (in alphabetical order not in effectiveness), Zinc, L-Lysine, gargling and nasal swabs with 5% Iodine, and safe medicines like Ivermectin that can be given and taken at home even before symptoms or at their onset. This is the most disgusting cash grab possibly ever.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Ok, Argument nr. one i didn't know about in this clear follow-through state.

Argument nr. two i did know and that is mostly the reason i never had "problems" with this infection while on the other hand half my closest family died though mostly through psychological implications through the ongoing, intermitting lockdown phases.

From my pov public standards are a blessing and a curse at the same time.

On the one hand:

Clearly i ain't a person that closely adheres to them otherwise the killcount in our family could be higher. But this is personal and what i e.g. did when i was hospitalized for a long time in fact only did affect myself. To the better or to the worse, idk but i tend to keep some parts of my autonomy in controlled environments like hospitals or wards mostly because i'm very used to this state of existence. I won't offer a calculation (that fits my standards) here but a good estimate of my time on this planet living in these "controlled" environments made about a third of my childhood (four years in total), about a year in my adolescence and young adulthood. And lately i started to summarize this: Since i am an adult, i was over two years in environments whose rules are controlled by other people and other rules.

The point here being: There is a very thin between genius and insane. But there is a possibly clear line what makes you a criminal defined by mostly bean-counters who are able to memorize books of case-law when at the same these people (who rule our "western" societies as far as i can see) aren't able to remember just one proof for the theorem of Pythagoras.

One the other hand:

Real intellect is mostly prospecting, not judging, i believe. (Even though now we could accept this for a statistical fact)

I actually polished up my organic chemistry very well when i was in voluntary "custody". The point on this:

Any experiment i do on myself is my thing. But i agree: Doing labour work on other human beings what else than standards could you stick to ?

I couldn't derive a pattern here.

[–]FlippyKing 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I may have misread your original comment. But I do not think people do lab work on humans, but on samples collected.

I think I agree with much of the above.