It’s possible but very unlikely. In my experience, people who suffer from OCD almost never say things like “sorry I have an ocd need to do X”, since people who have OCD know the true depth of OCD is not in the compulsions but rather the obsessions and intrusive/distorted thoughts that lead to them. The mainstream view that OCD is primarily characterized by things like “I need to arrange things according to a certain way” is not accurate. (Hence the comment in the first place)
Or use the word “trigger” to mean mere annoyance. It is tragic that people with a hatred of people living with conditions like PTSD and epilepsy have turned that word into a joke. (I guess most people who use that word now are unaware of this history.) I know people who experience actual triggers and it's a very painful thing.
> Or use the word “trigger” to mean mere annoyance
To be clear, the people that took away meaning from this word were the people that added "trigger warnings" to the most trivial of things. "trigger warning: meat eating." "trigger warning: bad words."
> It is tragic that people with a hatred of people living with conditions like PTSD and epilepsy have turned that word into a joke
> To be clear, the people that took away meaning from this word were the people that added "trigger warnings" to the most trivial of things
I would object to this on two grounds.
Firstly, seemingly insignificant things can be triggers. It doesn't have to be something people without PTSD consider a big deal, because by definition it isn't them who are affected. I have seen this first-hand. The source of the trauma and the thing that is the trigger can even be totally disparate. (Nice use of “bad words” to describe racial and other slurs by the way. That isn't trivial for the people affected.)
Secondly, in communities that centred around mocking people who (among other things) used trigger warnings, there was a self-perpetuating cycle of creating fake posts to reinforce collectively held biases. They began by ridiculing real content and ended up ridiculing fake content because they did not understand what was real.
In any case, it is a choice to decide “people I don't like use trigger warnings excessively” means that you can use the entire concept as a joke and ruin it for the vulnerable group it is useful for.
> That's really not what's happening.
I've seen it play out. There are definitely malicious actors, even if not everyone is.
If you were thinking of some other “bad words” then I'm happy to be corrected. My experience led me to think those must be the “bad words” you were speaking of.
I think digital currency in the CBDC (central bank digital) sense is that its "programmable money." For example my understanding is that the beta testers (my term) for the e-yuan literally have 30 days to spend the currency through alipay or whatever they're using or it disappears forever. I'm sort of looking at it as a combo of regular money and smart contracts but thats just me.
Interestingly Jim Bianco (who you may see regularly on old-financial media) argues that all of these currencies will fail in favor of the defi stuff that's already being spun up. For example by the time fed coin is even being tested (2025) the technologies behind cryptos will be so mature that the tech the us fed is using (from 2015) will be dead on arrival
In 2015 or so, I was really surprised to hear that the Australian Stock Exchange was going full-steam ahead with a blockchain-based settlement platform. From memory, they were targeting 2020 or so for a full rollout.
Just checked and this has now been pushed back to 2023.
I know that there's been a lot of improvement since then, but once you reach a certain size, things just move very slowly. It's less about the tech, and more about the pace at which stakeholders get on board.
as far as I can tell this is what inx.co is doing and they are about to launch. interesting company sounds like they have lofty plans and an executive board that has some interesting people (former nyse and tsx execs). both a platform for 'traditional' crypto but also building an exchange for fully regulated 'digital assets' a la digital representations of stocks etc
Same story for me, also went keto for approx. six months and experienced the same benefits but once I started carbs again, those seemingly great benefits loose against the ease of just being able to eat "normally".
Same. I'm not a fully qualified sys admin but I do have access to a number of our servers (I'm more of a full stack generalist than an expert at anything) and I immediately go to netdata when one of my services isn't acting right. For me its a nice 'system at a glance' where I can check on the host and then alert someone more knowledgeable than myself if there's something that looks off
> Woke crazies try to impose their ideology on others by complaining and shaming on the Internet.
I would argue that what ebay is doing is simply a permutation of this idea. Woke companies deciding what is and what is not suitable for you to spend your money on (shaming you for not spending your earned value on something 'worthy'). Meanwhile they don't seem to have a problem with mein kempf or however its spelled.
One interesting statistic is that more people dropped below the poverty line in the united states this year than any other year recorded to date.
Much like occupy wallstreet didn't really kick off until well after the 2008 financial crises, the impact of what is happening now in the economy will not be clear for several more years
There were human trials, but they skipped Longitudinal trials (long term effects) and they also didn't do challenge responses (exposing those people with the vaccine to COVID in a controlled manner), correct?
I find it fascinating how we submit batteries of tests to code as software engineers. Yet when it comes to our own health as a species, the rigor suddenly falls.
It'd be fine back when Jenner created the first vaccine over 185 years ago. There were no ethics boards back then. A lot of people died from snake oil treatments too.
It's not lack of rigor, it's ethics. We don't want to intentionally expose people to something that might kill them. Instead, we perform a trial on a large group and allow them to naturally avoid or be exposed to the virus as they will. Then, with full mathematical and statistical rigor (the best kind of rigor) we determine whether the vaccine has a demonstrated benefit.
We test code. We don't do destructive code tests in production.
Normal vaccine trials is like normal software testing. Challenge testing is like running dangerous tests in production. Its faster at detecting a problem than normal tests, but ultimately not needed and can blow up badly. The argument for doing it during covid is that time was of the essence and its faster than normal testing procedures. Instead we opted for the safer slower normal testing procedure.
They didn't just decide to "skip" long term effect studies. Long term effects can be studied only over a long term. No one wants to wait five or more years with the world in disarray.
Do longitudinal studies ever happen before a vaccine is released? Every longitudinal study I can find uses data from after a vaccine has been released to the general public. Stage 4 studies happen after the vaccine is in use by the general public.
“Even after the vaccine is approved and licensed, regulatory agencies stay involved, continuing to monitor production; inspecting manufacturing facilities; and testing vaccines for potency, safety and purity.
The FDA also monitors adverse events that may occur related to receiving the vaccine, including through its Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and Phase 4 clinical trials—optional studies pharmaceutical companies may be required to perform after a vaccine is licensed to continue to monitor safety and effectiveness.” [0]
How long were the trials? I recall a famous drug that was given in the 70s and it produced birth malformations. Took years for doctors to realize the cause and ban its use in pregnant women. Is there a possibility of unforeseen consequences from using RNA? What if someone has for XYZ reason more reverse transcriptase than usual? Will his-her DNA be altered?
Of course there's a possibility. The problem with long-term effects is that if a problem takes 70 years to show up, then by definition we won't know about it for 70 years.
This applies not just to any drug you take, but also to the ingredients in the food you eat and the particles in the air we breath. We've come to such realizations before, and we will again.
But we also know for sure that COVID-19 is killing people right now.
The risk of long term effects is actually very small - almost insignificant. Long term effects tend to be an issue for drugs that are taken over the long term. With a vaccine that is only taken twice, the vaccine itself and its direct byproducts (ie the spike proteins) are only in the body for a limited period. After that it's only the immune response that remains. There's no realistic mechanism for a previously unseen effect to show up from it years down the line.
There is a small possibility that there could be detrimental effects to a fetus, which is why the vaccines are not currently recommended for pregnant women. It's not expected that there would be a negative effect; it just hasn't yet been tested. (Fortunately pregnancy is not a chronic condition, so people can still be vaccinated after giving birth.)
I'm not an expert myself, but I've done a lot of reading. I don't have a specific source at hand, but this is the consensus I've gotten from any interviews of vaccinologists or epidemiologists I've read or heard. Essentially that any side effects from vaccinations show up within a few weeks—that there just isn't a mechanism for them to appear years down the line if they haven't already been seen sooner, for the reason I described.
Now again it is possible that side effects could still be discovered in patients with complicating factors that weren't represented in the trials (like pregnancy or other known or unknown pre-existing conditions). Or just because the effects were too rare to show up significantly in the trials. But again these would be expected to show up quickly as widespread vaccination begins, as did the few severe allergic reactions that have occurred.
Of course as with anything, especially as charged an issue as vaccines, if one goes looking for it one can find plenty of purported evidence that long-term side-effects (by which I mean here side effects that don't show up until long after the vaccine is taken) are possible or even common. But the expert consensus based on the totality of evidence appears to be that this is not a serious concern.
The main difference is that the way the mRNA vaccine works is much better understood. Maybe better understood,on a molecular level, than many other medications.
My wife and I are trying to conceive and it's such a tough call whether or not she should get vaccinated. I try to read everything, even though I know the answer is "nobody knows." While we wait for more evidence we'll continue to quarantine and stay safe. We're hoping there's a bit more evidence by the time the vaccine is available to us.
I wish you weren’t downvoted, this is a valid, rational, and interesting question devoid of any kind of message or blanket statement like “all vaccines cause autism” or what have you.
There were also all the issues with the 1970s Swine Flu vaccine that turned out to not even be all that effective. 60 Minutes did a piece on it, and it's getting more and more difficult to search for on YouTube:
> it's getting more and more difficult to search for on YouTube
Just to be clear, since this sounds conspiratorial - it is most likely difficult to search because 60 minutes is a copyrighted show and they have an official YT channel but only carries segments of their episodes. So, I suspect it is quite difficult to find any full episode.
Could be, but several months ago it was very easy to find and now it's buried further and further down. Considering everything YouTube and Twitter have been doing over the past few months to control the narrative, it's also equally likely they're intentionally burying it.
I assume you're referring to the very slight increase in cases of GBS in people who had that particular swine flu vaccine? It's interesting to note that the CDC says that having the flu is more likely to cause GBS than getting the vaccine. Both of those risks are extremely slight.
Two U.S. pharmaceutical giants, Pfizer and Moderna, are in the final phase of coronavirus vaccine development, and Oxford University is expected to start large-scale human trials of its vaccine in the U.S. this month.
The initial numbers look awesome: Pfizer: 8/18,198 vaccine, 162/18,325 placebo; Moderna: 5/13,934 vaccine, 90/13,883 placebo for 7 and 14 days respectively after the second dose.
Most apartments I've lived in have their own HVAC system that's separated from any other apartment's system. Though things like central corridors are probably still a problem and need some kind of decontamination system.
More like quarantining people outside of a facility equipped to handle it is a bad idea. You really need a negative pressure room[0] to contain an airborne pathogen like this.
