I have the worst #OCD about #COVID.
I wonder if this happened to others before me. I keep thinking I test positive on lateral flow tests when seeing an extremely faint line, only when looking from certain angles from up close with a flash. Looking online ofc it says a faint line means positive.
But, I just noticed that when doing the same to an empty test, before I put any sample in at all - I can still see those lines around both the C and T.
So lost rn. Doctors??
🇳🇱
The faint line you see is the chemical placed there that reacts. You should be able to see it regardless.
what they mean by a faint line is positive they mean if the line is colored pink but light, not if you can see the discoloration at all.
You look good here.
By the way I have had COVID at least 7 confirmed times. It is a serious disease, and be mindful of course. But I wouldnt let it stress you too much. Not the end of the world if you get it.
Thank you I appreciate that. I had it 4 times, I'm not stressed so much about getting sick, I'm stressed about infecting anyone else :/
But with a bit of garlic, plenty of water, and rest, I got over it completely. Got Covid again a few times in the next year or two because of housemates being front-line workers, but thanks to having a functional immune system, the next bouts were successively more mild. Now, I can safely say Covid is completely a non-issue.
What's more troublesome and injurious is the violent public hysteria which continues to persist, in large part thanks to people who refuse to understand that "science" does not trump "ethics", and that big-pharma is demonstrably more interested in protecting their profit margin than they are in protecting public health. They spent over a decade developing that technology which was shown to be next useless, but had to create conditions to recoup their investment. Hence the plandemic. To say nothing of the military bioweapons angle. At this point (arguably from day one) the most dangerous thing about Covid is the NPC useful idiots who continue to shill this mRNA snake oil on behalf of big-pharma corporations and their bought and paid for gov't cronies.
There was no doubt an element of harmful hysteria. But to try to claim it as some evil conspiracy theory to sell some new tech of vaccines is a pretty absurd claim as well, just as bad if not worse than the hysteria.
The true conspiracy was in the response, not in the virus itself.
Less of a conspiracy and more people just acting a fool... But yea, there were plenty of pretty dodgy actions in the response because everyones paranoia was cranked up to 11 with the fear mongering as is usually the case, doubly so when someone becomes political.
So yea, agreed to some extent there.
Aside from not being remotely true, i guess that sounds nice or something.
The reality is most people who support mRNA vaccines as safe are oftne in no way connected with money or in any way being paid to show that support.
Myself being a research scientist who worked on COVID-19 for two years without receiving a penny associaterd with vaccines (my research was unrelated to vaccines) yet I clearly support them.
So you are literally talking to a counter-example that shows your supposed evidence is factually false.
It doesn't bother me that you reached a different conclusion. That's your right. Maybe I'm wrong about the viability of the technology. It's totally possible, as this isn't my field of expertise. But I can smell a load of one-sided bullshit a mile away, and this past several years has absolutely reeked of it.
Now to be fair, I'm also aware that there is an equal amount of bullshit coming from the opposing side. But it's mainly from people who've very rightly lost trust and faith in the establishment medical industry, and otherwise have no academic background by which to judge in any case. I lost that trust and faith long long before Covid was a thing because of my experience both with the incompetence of many of the doctors I've seen for personal health issues, and because of my experience with the natural health (ie. herbal medicine) industry and the ubiquitous regulatory capture involved. That and due to having a penchant for studying history. So much so that I was able to accurately predict that this was going to happen back in 2014 based simply on the social-media narratives which were popping up supposedly spontaneously all over the place misrepresenting and outright gaslighting people who opposed vaccines for whatever reasons. In IT it's called "reputation management" (an industry in it's own right), and was clearly a coordinated effort to lay the foundation for exactly the events which have since occurred. The value of science is it's predictive capacity, and on that basis, I think my claims on the subject are demonstrably as well founded as any of the contrary opinions, to say the least.
Other than wanting to preserve my human rights and those of my fellow citizens against medical/scientific tyranny, I don't have a dog in the race. I was even considering getting the vax to protect the elderly folks and parents/families whom I associate with, but only if it were a traditional vax, and not this experimental mRNA tech. However since then, I frankly won't touch anything to do with the establishment medical industry short of a situation which would place me in the ER. Even then, a large part of me would rather just accept it and let nature take it's course. The status quo medical industry has zero credibility in my view. Their only concern is profit. People who act as apologists to deflect from that reality, are arguably just as dangerous as the people who profit off this directly, and can aptly be characterised as useful idiots, who are at best suffering from an egregious level of conceit and myopia. Scientism is not science. Period.
http://www.catb.org/~esr/halloween/
> The vaxxmaxxers and alarmists who persisted after that initial period despite the mortality data...
LOL, dont tell me you you bought into that conspiracy theory nonsense about the vaccines being dangerous and there being meaningful "mortality data"? Please tell me I am just misreading what you said...
Orn it just means i have nothing of interest or note to say about your main point.
I wasnt aware the subject was fixed and had to be maintained at the cost of all other conversation. That seems like a rather strange way to operate, I usually prefer conversations to evolve naturally and discuss the points of interest, particularly if the point of your statement has nothing worth pointing out in its own right.
A donkey raped me on my way to the pinnacle to watch the sunset. Once I got there it was a beautiful deep red sunset....
So we cant point out the donkey raping you because the point of the statement was to mention the sunset? We have to force ourselves to remark on the less interesting sunset that doesnt seem to have much value discussing rather than the donkey raping you, which may be of actual interest to me?
@freemo Haha fair enough
With the vaxx stuff, I’m kinda fuzzy on it. I don’t know if there have been a lot of large-scale studies on connections between the #mRNA #COVID19 vaccines and myocarditis, blood clots, etc., but from what I can tell, there are some undisclosed risks of dangerous blood clots for healthy people who get the vaccines. I don’t know what level that risk is, which is why I don’t call them dangerous (I call them “experimental”, as launching #mRNA vaccines of this scale is unheard of and unprecedented).
Undisclosed? How so? Those risks are all perfectly disclosed, well identified, real, and known. They are extremely rare, but real, and the people who are at highest risk are no longer given the vaccine and other vaccines are preferred. All handled exactly how it should have been, nothing undisclosed about it. They literally changed the administration protocols just to be even more safe than they needed to be.
@freemo I didn’t know that studies had come out quantifying all the risks (there might be a study about #myocarditis I forget), but then again it’s been a year or two since I’ve studied any #COVID19 data seriously. It doesn’t really matter much anymore since the virus has mutated into something far weaker at this point.
What is the quantified risk of blood clots from #mRNA vaccines?
There have been studies on the risks you mentioned for years now. It was studies done by the scientific community and the changes in protocol made that is how we know about it at all. Do you think the conspiracy theorists figured it out and scientists went "oh we should study this thing the flat earthers all keep saying about our vaccines"... lol... nah, the scientists found it on their own, announced it, did studies, changed protocols, all on a very very low risk event out of an abundance of caution.. then the conspiracy theoriests took it and went "seeeeeeeeeee its not safe after all!".
@freemo What is the rate of risk? Where are the studies?
These studies existing for years is news to me.
It varies depending on vaccine, but fir mRNA COVID-19 vaccine here is a more recent study with fairly accurate numbers.
The mycarditis and bloodclots first showed up in studies much earlier however.
> The incidence is reported to be around 1 per 100,000 to 250,000 vaccine recipients,
As for it existing for years... Pfizer for example announced the first risks in this regard April 2021, so about 3 years since they **announced** it. Of course you have to do studies first, so studies suggesting the risk were already availible sometimes before that, months to years.
So yea we can safely say this stuff has been public for 3-4+ years now in studies and even admitted and published by Pfizer directly for at least 3 years.
These numbers show extremely safe vaccines... one person out of a quarter million is insanely safe... Literally tylenol is many orders of magnitude more dangerous than numbers like this.
Why wouldnt they parade around numbers that show such an extreme level of safety as these?
@freemo That’s a good question, but the #MSM repeatedly saying “the vaccines are safe” would probably stick better with the public than “there’s a 4 in 1 million chance that you’ll get #Thrombosis” lol
> The vaccines are safe” would probably stick better with the public than “there’s a 4 in 1 million chance that you’ll get #Thrombosis”
Sure, but both these statements are just different phrasings of the same statement. They are just two different ways of saying it is safe. The reason the second one is less likely to be used is because most people wont understand what it means or that it is equivelant to saying its safe.
To put it in to perspective your chance of being struck by lightening in your life time is 16x higher than your chance of getting myocarditis from a covid vaccine. It would literally make more sense to never leave your home again for fear it isnt safe from lightening than it would be to get the vaccine.
@freemo Well, it cites something that debunks conspiracy theories. That’s kind of important to me. There is validity and weight to citing science and studies that just doesn’t exist when it comes to stating their conclusion without the underlying evidence.
There is no supported evidence of weakened mutation, rather those must susceptible have usually already been adversely impacted and whether through viral infection or vaccination (or both) antibodies have led to reduced rates of severity in the remaining population. Yet COVID remains many times more likely to cause severe illness or long-term health outcomes than flu (even if mild cases are often far milder).
