Wearing a Mask

Hon33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
806
.... says the person repeating the same junk coming out of the television.
Yea, because I have always based my clinical practice on what I learn from television.
Good Lord above, you people are terminally stupid!
 

Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
3,195
Brainwashed by the medical profession?
I have studied biology and chemistry. I have studied anatomy and physiology and disease processes of individual body systems. I have study cross infection, drugs and so on and so forth.
I have worked in a wide variety of medical settings. I have cared for many, many, many patients. I know how the body works, I can identify when it isn’t working properly, I know how to treat a variety of illnesses and I have seen successful treatment, as well as unsuccessful treatment.
I don’t need someone to brainwash me into believing what happens in science and medicine. For years, I lived and breathed it.
Now of course, there is a possibility that every book I’ve read, every lecture I’ve ever attended, every medical professional I’ve ever worked with and every patient I’ve ever cared for, are all part of some huge conspiracy to deceive me. It’s unlikely. Nevertheless, it is a possibility I’m willing to consider...for a split second...before asking if you’re crazy?
You really cannot believe that every single person who works in the medical profession - apart from those who speak out - are corrupt? Of course, that’s before you consider all the teachers, Uni lecturers, politicians, every one in the entertainment industry, probably all government employees and an endless list of other people!
You can’t expect me to reject the evidence as seen with my own eyes, both as a medical professional and as someone who has recently been through a critical illness themselves?
The benefit of understanding how the body works, is you can look at clinical evidence and figure out for yourself, whether or not it’s legitimate.
I have admitted several times now, that at this point the medical evidence for masks is inconclusive. I have suggested that if there is any possibility wearing one might protect someone else, you should strongly consider doing it. I have ultimately acknowledged your right to choose. I think it’s selfish, but it’s still your right.
Biologists can't even agree on wether viruses are alive or not. Some even think viruses are "robots". And you expect rationally thinking people to take everything they say as gospel? If the evidence behind mask wearing being beneficial is inconclusive then why are they being promoted almost everywhere in the media without question? I remember even the CDC saying healthy people should not wear masks so wtf are you talking about being "selfish" here.
 

polymoog

Superstar
Joined
Jun 17, 2017
Messages
8,207
Yea, because I have always based my clinical practice on what I learn from television.
Good Lord above, you people are terminally stupid!
the fact that you went to college for all of this shows how deep theyve programmed to you accept their information and to trust the AMA, FDA, etc. (whatever the equivalent is in the UK-- ministry of health, etc.) do you actually think these groups are trustworthy and doing real science? theyve been bought and paid for years ago. the people handling those pseudo-science organizations are puppets doing the bidding of Big Pharma. you are naive to think that information is accurate.
if the covid was such a clear-cut case of scientific fact, then why are there so many doctors and medical professionals who completely disagree with the authoritative information? you dont think it strange that social media and YT and facebook try to eliminate through censorship any alternative opinion on the subject? that should immediately make you wonder.
look, i have a university degree. i was brainwashed-- i will freely admit it. had i pursed that field, i wouldve probably been in complete agreement with the official stance on it because it would never occur to me that these organizations would be rigged, as would so many scienfic papers which are funded by large corporations so that the research/data comes out favorably to them.

check this out. im asking you watch only from 53:04 to 56:55, so thats 4 min of your time. i took the time to dig this up because i want you to see what i am talking about:
 

Hon33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
806
Biologists can't even agree on wether viruses are alive or not. Some even think viruses are "robots". And you expect rationally thinking people to take everything they say as gospel? If the evidence behind mask wearing being beneficial is inconclusive then why are they being promoted almost everywhere in the media without question? I remember even the CDC saying healthy people should not wear masks so wtf are you talking about being "selfish" here.
Ah, yes. The debate over whether viruses are alive or dead. Surely even primary school children are aware of that?
I’m not sure it’s strictly true that biologists can’t agree on whether they are dead or alive. It’s more that they don’t fulfil all the criteria of a living thing but they also don’t fill all the criteria of a non-living thing. The general consensus is that while they have some characteristics which identify them as living, like the ability to replicate and adapt, they can also be considered non-living because they can’t maintain homeostasis, produce their own energy or indeed grow - they are born, if you like, fully formed.
I haven’t ever seen anyone say viruses are robots but they might have. I have seen an analogy drawn between viruses and robots - they rely on host cells to be able to replicate and for their energy.Also, they are fully formed from the outset and aren’t capable of growth.
I am not asking you to take anything anyone says as gospel. However, because I understand the biology - albeit at a basic level - I can make up my own mind.
I am not quoting television or websites. This is just stuff I know. Until now, I didn’t have any reason to doubt that this was stuff most people knew.
Incidentally, viruses are the perfect example of how science and medicine are not absolute. They don’t fit clearly into the non-living or living category.
 

Aero

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
5,910
Nobody was asking for an absolute guarantee of effectiveness over masks! We just want something, some test, or study that isn't full of holes.

The argument that we should play the mask issue safe can't be supported by the idea that nothing is absolute. The argument basically undermines its own position. Well to be accurate, it undermines every position.
 

Helioform

Star
Joined
Oct 2, 2017
Messages
3,195
Ah, yes. The debate over whether viruses are alive or dead. Surely even primary school children are aware of that?
I’m not sure it’s strictly true that biologists can’t agree on whether they are dead or alive. It’s more that they don’t fulfil all the criteria of a living thing but they also don’t fill all the criteria of a non-living thing. The general consensus is that while they have some characteristics which identify them as living, like the ability to replicate and adapt, they can also be considered non-living because they can’t maintain homeostasis, produce their own energy or indeed grow - they are born, if you like, fully formed.
I haven’t ever seen anyone say viruses are robots but they might have. I have seen an analogy drawn between viruses and robots - they rely on host cells to be able to replicate and for their energy.Also, they are fully formed from the outset and aren’t capable of growth.
I am not asking you to take anything anyone says as gospel. However, because I understand the biology - albeit at a basic level - I can make up my own mind.
I am not quoting television or websites. This is just stuff I know. Until now, I didn’t have any reason to doubt that this was stuff most people knew.
Incidentally, viruses are the perfect example of how science and medicine are not absolute. They don’t fit clearly into the non-living or living category.
Viruses have never been observed to "replicate" as they claim. They have no means of locomotion so they cannot do as they say. This is the example of false science that is being promoted everywhere and blindly accepted by virologists. The exosome theory explains how what we see as viruses are actually genetic material bundled together and extruded from sick/poisoned cells. They can be sick from toxins or general bad health. But it does not fit into the vaccine promotion propaganda so it is ignored by the medical establishment which is supported by big pharma.
 

Hon33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
806
the fact that you went to college for all of this shows how deep theyve programmed to you accept their information and to trust the AMA, FDA, etc. (whatever the equivalent is in the UK-- ministry of health, etc.) do you actually think these groups are trustworthy and doing real science? theyve been bought and paid for years ago. the people handling those pseudo-science organizations are puppets doing the bidding of Big Pharma. you are naive to think that information is accurate.
if the covid was such a clear-cut case of scientific fact, then why are there so many doctors and medical professionals who completely disagree with the authoritative information? you dont think it strange that social media and YT and facebook try to eliminate through censorship any alternative opinion on the subject? that should immediately make you wonder.
look, i have a university degree. i was brainwashed-- i will freely admit it. had i pursed that field, i wouldve probably been in complete agreement with the official stance on it because it would never occur to me that these organizations would be rigged, as would so many scienfic papers which are funded by large corporations so that the research/data comes out favorably to them.

check this out. im asking you watch only from 53:04 to 56:55, so thats 4 min of your time. i took the time to dig this up because i want you to see what i am talking about:
Okay - I’ll watch it, but it’s very late here in the U.K. so it will have be tomorrow
 

Hon33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
806
Nobody was asking for an absolute guarantee of effectiveness over masks! We just want something, some test, or study that isn't full of holes.

The argument that we should play the mask issue safe can't be supported by the idea that nothing is absolute. The argument basically undermines its own position. Well to be accurate, it undermines every position.
I’ve acknowledged from the very outset that, at present, it doesn’t exist?
My whole argument has been based upon the fact that those kind of absolutes don’t exist in science or medicine - at best it’s likely or unlikely.
 

Aero

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
5,910
I’ve acknowledged from the very outset that, at present, it doesn’t exist?
My whole argument has been based upon the fact that those kind of absolutes don’t exist in science or medicine - at best it’s likely or unlikely.
Don't make excuses for your lack of research. There are some studies out there about masks that aren't terrible. You don't know any of them, because you refuse to take an in-depth approach to anything. I'm not here to make your argument for you though, that would be called steel manning. And that would be illogical.

I appreciate your generalized play it safe approach where you act like if you take a position you are going to get sued. But I'm not some dummy who walked into the hospital over a bruised toe. Basically the redundant doubletalk approach is not going to work on me. If I got sick, I would know that I'm absolutely sick, and with the proper approach, I can be absolutely not sick.
 

Hon33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
806
Viruses have never been observed to "replicate" as they claim. They have no means of locomotion so they cannot do as they say. This is the example of false science that is being promoted everywhere and blindly accepted by virologists. The exosome theory explains how what we see as viruses are actually genetic material bundled together and extruded from sick/poisoned cells. They can be sick from toxins or general bad health. But it does not fit into the vaccine promotion propaganda so it is ignored by the medical establishment which is supported by big pharma.
Viruses have never been observed to replicate? It’s very late here and I’m very tired and a little confused. Perhaps I am not clear about what you are saying.
As regards what you are saying about the exosome theory, I think it is more complex than you describe and is still not completely understood.
 

Hon33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
806
Don't make excuses for your lack of research. There are some studies out there about masks that aren't terrible. You don't know any of them, because you refuse to take an in-depth approach to anything. I'm not here to make your argument for you though, that would be called steel manning. And that would be illogical.

I appreciate your generalized play it safe approach where you act like if you take a position you are going to get sued. But I'm not some dummy who walked into the hospital over a bruised toe. Basically the redundant doubletalk approach is not going to work on me. If I got sick, I would know that I'm absolutely sick, and with the proper approach, I can be absolutely not sick.
You may not be a dummy with a bruised toe. You’re still a dummy though. If the same approach could be used to solve the problem in every person, then everyone would have the same outcome.
I described earlier how both I and another patient had bleeds in the the same areas of our brains. We had exactly the same treatment to the point, where she developed different complications to me, needing further surgery with a much poorer outcome. We’re not talking a bruised toe - we are talking full scale medical emergency where every second counts. Literally.
I’m still pretty unwell at times, as a result of my condition. Compared to her outcome however, I’m amazing. She won’t get better. She will continue to need assistance breathing; she will continue to be tube fed; she will continue to not be able to recognise or communicate with her loved ones. I could go on. 60% of patients with the same bleed, won’t make it to hospital - they won’t get better with the proper approach. 50% of the remaining 40% won’t survive the first 20 days, even though every patient will get the same treatment. Those who remain alive after 20 days will have hugely different outcomes.
No one can predict the outcome because it is impossible to tell the damage which has been done right down to a cellular level and how that will affect individual patients.
The largest percentage of recovery will take place in the first 6 months, but will continue for most, for up to 2 years. Some will recover further after that; some won’t. There is no magic, medical approach to improve the recovery. Yes, they can do things to try to prevent further damage. They can’t make it better.
You seriously have to be a fool, not to be able to understand that? How can you not understand that two people who present with the sane condition, may not have the same outcome, despite receiving the same treatment. In medicine you deal with actual problems and potential problems. Nothing is cut and dried. You constantly anticipate complications and put care in place to anticipate them. Not everyone responds the same way to treatment. If we all did, no one would ever die!
 

Aero

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
5,910
You may not be a dummy with a bruised toe. You’re still a dummy though. If the same approach could be used to solve the problem in every person, then everyone would have the same outcome.
I described earlier how both I and another patient had bleeds in the the same areas of our brains. We had exactly the same treatment to the point, where she developed different complications to me, needing further surgery with a much poorer outcome. We’re not talking a bruised toe - we are talking full scale medical emergency where every second counts. Literally.
I’m still pretty unwell at times, as a result of my condition. Compared to her outcome however, I’m amazing. She won’t get better. She will continue to need assistance breathing; she will continue to be tube fed; she will continue to not be able to recognise or communicate with her loved ones. I could go on. 60% of patients with the same bleed, won’t make it to hospital - they won’t get better with the proper approach. 50% of the remaining 40% won’t survive the first 20 days, even though every patient will get the same treatment. Those who remain alive after 20 days will have hugely different outcomes.
No one can predict the outcome because it is impossible to tell the damage which has been done right down to a cellular level and how that will affect individual patients.
The largest percentage of recovery will take place in the first 6 months, but will continue for most, for up to 2 years. Some will recover further after that; some won’t. There is no magic, medical approach to improve the recovery. Yes, they can do things to try to prevent further damage. They can’t make it better.
You seriously have to be a fool, not to be able to understand that? How can you not understand that two people who present with the sane condition, may not have the same outcome, despite receiving the same treatment. In medicine you deal with actual problems and potential problems. Nothing is cut and dried. You constantly anticipate complications and put care in place to anticipate them. Not everyone responds the same way to treatment. If we all did, no one would ever die!
I never said the same approach will or should work in every case. That is another strawman of yours, to try to deflect from the fact that you didn't really learn anything throughout your ordeal. Plus you constantly bringing up your own personal injury seems more like insecurity rather than knowledge.

You project that insecurity when you blame other people for not understanding just what the hell your position is. Apparently it all boils down to there are no absolutes. Except for death if we don't wear the Covid-19 mask? Pretty sure I'm reading you right. Like wow dude, how convenient for you. There are no absolutes except when you want them to be. Or more specifically as proof that you and only you are right.

I've literally never seen such a huge collection of logical fallacies, all in one place. You have moved the goalposts, missed the point, muddied the waters, rigged the game, and contradicted yourself. If there are no absolutes, we might as well not listen to you! And get a second opinion, someone who say, solves problems, not creates them.
 

Frank Badfinger

Superstar
Joined
Aug 4, 2019
Messages
15,775

Hon33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
806
I never said the same approach will or should work in every case. That is another strawman of yours, to try to deflect from the fact that you didn't really learn anything throughout your ordeal. Plus you constantly bringing up your own personal injury seems more like insecurity rather than knowledge.

You project that insecurity when you blame other people for not understanding just what the hell your position is. Apparently it all boils down to there are no absolutes. Except for death if we don't wear the Covid-19 mask? Pretty sure I'm reading you right. Like wow dude, how convenient for you. There are no absolutes except when you want them to be. Or more specifically as proof that you and only you are right.

I've literally never seen such a huge collection of logical fallacies, all in one place. You have moved the goalposts, missed the point, muddied the waters, rigged the game, and contradicted yourself. If there are no absolutes, we might as well not listen to you! And get a second opinion, someone who say, solves problems, not creates them.
You really are quite unbelievable.

You said:
“If I got sick, I would know that I'm absolutely sick, and with the proper approach, I can be absolutely not sick“

Perhaps you could help me, by clarifying what that means?
My own personal injury was used an example of how two different people with the “proper approach” can end up not being “absolutely not sick”! Not everyone who receives “the proper approach” is guaranteed to become absolutely not sick - they can be less sick, more sick, sick in a different way as a result if their illness, not sick or even dead!
I’ve made my position about masks perfectly clear. I’ll say it again. Most of the evidence is inconclusive - it’s never going to be absolute. It can’t be because there are too many independent factors. However, if there is any proof that wearing masks might help, it is worth at least considering doing so. If you don’t want to - fine. That’s your choice. I think the safety and health of others should come above protection of civil liberties. Some people don’t. That’s your choice.
I have never, ever said death was an absolute outcome of not wearing masks? Death is not an absolute outcome of Covid-19, at all. That would be an absolute? How could you read that into anything I have said? This whole argument started because I said there were no absolutes in science and medicine and you have now spent days, unsuccessfully, trying to find absolutes? I keep telling you they don’t exist - in science and medicine. They do in other areas but not science and medicine.
I am the one with the consistent position and you are the one who keeps changing it up.
 

Tidal

Star
Joined
Mar 4, 2020
Messages
3,803
Masks might prevent us inhaling the virus, but the thing can still attach itself to our eyeballs and cause conjunctivitis (gummy irritated red eyes) and try to get into our nose and throat from there.
Glasses or sunglasses might offer some protection, but I wear glasses and still got conjunctivitis and a few other symptoms a couple of weeks ago, all of which seem to have now cleared up.

Net article- "COVID-19 most common symptoms are a fever, coughing, and breathing problems. Rarely, it also can cause an eye infection called conjunctivitis."
 

Hon33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
806
the fact that you went to college for all of this shows how deep theyve programmed to you accept their information and to trust the AMA, FDA, etc. (whatever the equivalent is in the UK-- ministry of health, etc.) do you actually think these groups are trustworthy and doing real science? theyve been bought and paid for years ago. the people handling those pseudo-science organizations are puppets doing the bidding of Big Pharma. you are naive to think that information is accurate.
if the covid was such a clear-cut case of scientific fact, then why are there so many doctors and medical professionals who completely disagree with the authoritative information? you dont think it strange that social media and YT and facebook try to eliminate through censorship any alternative opinion on the subject? that should immediately make you wonder.
look, i have a university degree. i was brainwashed-- i will freely admit it. had i pursed that field, i wouldve probably been in complete agreement with the official stance on it because it would never occur to me that these organizations would be rigged, as would so many scienfic papers which are funded by large corporations so that the research/data comes out favorably to them.

check this out. im asking you watch only from 53:04 to 56:55, so thats 4 min of your time. i took the time to dig this up because i want you to see what i am talking about:
So, I have watched the video and I am going to comment and I would ask you to afford me the same respect, in doing so as I did you by watching it.
First, let me tell you something I saw the other day that shocked me - just to try to show you where I’m coming from. One of my daughters watches a few Utah Mormon family vloggers. She is interested in Mormonism and is about to undertake a theology dissertation on Mormonism. Anyway, that’s besides the point. One of the dads on these families was having pain in his leg, at the site where he had had a fracture pinned. He couldn’t schedule an appointment quickly enough with his own surgeon - it was like a 3 week wait. He went to see someone else who offered him an appointment immediately. The xrays of showed no immediate reason for the pain. However, the surgeon booked him for surgery there and then to remove the pins, more or less just to see if that would help. This scenario simply would not happen in the UK. I was shocked how quickly surgery was proposed as an option.
Now, I don’t know if it’s because you have a private health care system in the US, that interim measures are not taken. I do know however, in the UK, surgical intervention is always a last resort - unless of course, it’s a life-threatening emergency. Orthopaedic surgery is particularly a last resort, because the potential for infection of bone is very great and very serious.
With health care being free at the point of delivery in the U.K., there is no value for medics to jump in with the most expensive and not necessarily most effective intervention - especially when it carries the biggest potential for risk. Does that make sense? Before deciding to operate on someone’s leg, all other conservative options for treatment would be explored first. I’m just taking the example of this guy’s leg to demonstrate it. Here, the likely course of action would first be gait analysis (orthotics in shoes), physio for strengthening, maybe something like acupuncture or ultrasound therapy for pain relief, as well as simple analgae like simple paracetamol and iceing. If none of that helped, they might offer a CT or MRI to see further what is going on. They will continue to offer conservative treatment and only when all conservative treatment is exhausted would they even begin to talk surgery. You might not even see an orthopaedic surgeon until the last stages of treatment. It can take about a year to get an appointment. You are a likely to be trusted first by a physio, who will decide what needs to be done.
Drug treatment is also not a first resort here. Most doctors will only prescribe drugs when they are required. I don’t know if you have heard of NICE - National Institute for Health and Care Excellence - who are responsible for overseeing policies in health care including drug pathways. Drugs have to be approved here before being available for prescription and people are often frustrated if certain drugs don’t receive approval.
However there are drugs approved, which are controversial.
My own personal view of drugs is that you should look very carefully at what you are being prescribed and make an informed choice about whether or not you should take it, before you do. I have spoken about being ill here. When I became ill, I had to start taking an anti-seizure medication because I had several seizures. I had no choice in that. It began while I was still ventilated. Even so, I would have been foolish not to accept it in the circumstances.
However, that drug has a lot of side effects. My rehab consultant, looking at all the evidence from my brain scans etc, identified what he thought was the right time to start reducing it and eliminate it. It’s been six months already since, I started to reduce it, and I have another three weeks to go before I’m finished. I will have to wait another six months to be declared seizure free. I could have chosen to stay on the drug and not take the risk of having a seizure. It was deemed unlikely that reducing the drugs, would cause a seizure, but it wasn’t guaranteed. To be free of the drug, was worth the risk of a seizure, for both me and my doctor.
I spent months before reducing the seizure drug, reducing another one and eliminating it.
I am not a huge fan of taking drugs where it is not needed and I firmly believe that there is a place in medicine for alternative treatments.
I have used acupuncture successfully over the years, for a variety of painful conditions and it is very, very effective.
I see the validity of what the video you sowed me is saying - in the short clip I watched - I absolutely do. The pharmaceutical industry is huge and it does have a hugely beneficial role to play in health care. However, doctors need to exercise caution in what they prescribe and individuals need to be cautious about what they take. Some drugs will be life saving though. We can’t dismiss that.
Where there is mainly private health care, the system has to be more open to abuse.
Sorry for the overly long response.
 

Aero

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
5,910
You really are quite unbelievable.

You said:
“If I got sick, I would know that I'm absolutely sick, and with the proper approach, I can be absolutely not sick“

Perhaps you could help me, by clarifying what that means?
My own personal injury was used an example of how two different people with the “proper approach” can end up not being “absolutely not sick”! Not everyone who receives “the proper approach” is guaranteed to become absolutely not sick - they can be less sick, more sick, sick in a different way as a result if their illness, not sick or even dead!
I’ve made my position about masks perfectly clear. I’ll say it again. Most of the evidence is inconclusive - it’s never going to be absolute. It can’t be because there are too many independent factors. However, if there is any proof that wearing masks might help, it is worth at least considering doing so. If you don’t want to - fine. That’s your choice. I think the safety and health of others should come above protection of civil liberties. Some people don’t. That’s your choice.
I have never, ever said death was an absolute outcome of not wearing masks? Death is not an absolute outcome of Covid-19, at all. That would be an absolute? How could you read that into anything I have said? This whole argument started because I said there were no absolutes in science and medicine and you have now spent days, unsuccessfully, trying to find absolutes? I keep telling you they don’t exist - in science and medicine. They do in other areas but not science and medicine.
I am the one with the consistent position and you are the one who keeps changing it up.
Dude, if 2 people go into the hospital with a vitamin C deficiency. The treatment of administering vitamin C will absolutely work to fix the problem. Stop projecting your lack of knowledge and depth when it comes to good health.

Obviously 1 size doesn't fit all, nobody ever said that. The point I've been making, which you conveniently ignore is If no studies are absolute, how in the hell do we have treatments that work? How do people go into the hospital and walk out healthy? Is it just a stroke of luck or something?

You have most certainly been alluding to the idea of death being the only absolute. Just not from walking through fire apparently. There are no absolutes about a person walking through fire because of x,y,z is something like your position. You even told me a person can walk through fire and not die. You also claimed to be a medical professional but ignored my question about what field you are actually in.

It turns out you are not a medical professional. At best you did some temporary internship or took a few college courses. That seems accurate given your lack of knowledge here. You are making excuses because you don't know anything about good medicine. You can't factor in the outcomes of common diseases and injuries because they don't exist in your twisted world.
 

Hon33

Veteran
Joined
Jan 5, 2020
Messages
806
Dude, if 2 people go into the hospital with a vitamin C deficiency. The treatment of administering vitamin C will absolutely work to fix the problem. Stop projecting your lack of knowledge and depth when it comes to good health.

Obviously 1 size doesn't fit all, nobody ever said that. The point I've been making, which you conveniently ignore is If no studies are absolute, how in the hell do we have treatments that work? How do people go into the hospital and walk out healthy? Is it just a stroke of luck or something?

You have most certainly been alluding to the idea of death being the only absolute. Just not from walking through fire apparently. There are no absolutes about a person walking through fire because of x,y,z is something like your position. You even told me a person can walk through fire and not die. You also claimed to be a medical professional but ignored my question about what field you are actually in.

It turns out you are not a medical professional. At best you did some temporary internship or took a few college courses. That seems accurate given your lack of knowledge here. You are making excuses because you don't know anything about good medicine. You can't factor in the outcomes of common diseases and injuries because they don't exist in your twisted world.
I told you before I’m a nurse? Right back at the very start of this, somewhere.
Of course someone can walk into a fire and not die - firefighters do it everyday? If you don’t want firefighters wearing protective clothing to factor in your hypothesis, be more specific. Stop making sweeping statements.
You need to qualify your statement further. What do you not understand about that? If I walk into a fire in say, a waste paper bin. My feet are likely to get burnt. I’m unlikely to die. If I walk into a house fire, I am much more likely to die. I cannot guarantee with you any certainty that a person will die if they walk into a fire - I can tell you it’s highly likely but I can’t completely rule out the fact they might live. There are other independent factors which will influence the outcome. Then you have to consider, was it the fire that killed them or was it smoke inhalation or something else?
It’s just not as simple as you want it to be.
I have never said I wasn’t a medical professional. I outlined the individual things I studied as apart of my nursing training. I have been a nurse for 30 years!
I have cared for 100s of patients, some of whom have responded exactly how you would expect to treatment and others who have not.

You said I am unable to factor in outcomes of diseases and injuries. However, you don’t even seem to understand that disease processes vary from individual to individual. Take your basic example of the Vitamin C deficiency. Yes, you are right - in theory anyway - that administering Vitamin C or Ascorbic acid might correct that deficiency.
However, for a certain percentage of patients, the Vitamin C deficiency is a symptom of some other disease process - drug addicts, alcoholics, people with gastrointestinal disorders such as Crohns or Ulcerative Colitis etc. To correct it, you ultimately have to treat the underlying condition. If you administer Vitamin C without treating the condition, the Vitamin C deficiency will not be improved. Even then a degree of deficiency may remain.
Take Vitamin B12, another vitamin which is often deficient. In theory, it can be corrected by a vitamin B complex supplement or eating foods rich in B12. However, in the case of pernicious anaemia - an auto-immune condition where sufferers do not produce intrinsic factor which enables them to synthesise dietary B12 - they require injections of B12 intramuscularly to bypass absorption in the stomach, which doesn’t work.
Yea, I’m unable to factor in outcomes of common diseases and injuries! :rolleyes: Pal, with all due respect, I’ve probably forgotten more about common diseases and injuries, than you’ll ever know.
Don’t try to pit your knowledge which is clearly lacking in substance, against mine! Your brain doesn’t have the capacity to understand it.
For every single patient I encounter, I need to know about their disease process and/or injury - not just their current one but their co-morbid ones, as well. I need to know about their drugs and how they interact with the normal human condition, as well as the diseased one. I need to be able to recognise new disease processes. I need to know how to avoid cross-contamination. I need to know how to control infection risk. I need to know about nutrition, hydration...Do you want me to go on?
You can insult me whatever way you like, but you’re not going to change the knowledge I have. You can’t even understand the argument. You have proven time and again that you don’t understand - you can’t even come up with a rational hypothesis in trying to establish an absolute. You have no idea what the concept even means.
Give it up now. I’m not going to engage with this any further. I hope you never have to find out how wrong you are about your black and white approach to the world of medicine. You don’t even understand the most basic of concepts.
Good luck - you’re going to need it!
 

A.J.

Star
Joined
Mar 14, 2017
Messages
1,249
Elites referencing their painful proposals from a decade earlier....



THE ROCKEFELLER CONNECTION, LOCK STEP, AND EVENT 201

...The Rockefeller Foundation imagined a similar scenario in 2010 as part of their document, “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development.” This document includes a scenario called “Lockstep”, which describes a pandemic sweeping the world and resulting in more authoritarian control from governments in developed countries. The document also describes the response to the pandemic as follows:

In the imagined scenario the Rockefeller foundation predicts that “scanners using advanced functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) technology become the norm at airports and other public areas to detect abnormal behavior that may indicate “antisocial intent.”Interestingly, the Transportation Security Administration recently announced plans to check temperatures at American airports. The document goes on to describe how, eventually, the people of the world tire of the control and civil unrest would begin:

While it might be convenient to dismiss Event 201 and Lock Step as a coincidence, it would be short-sighted to ignore them considering the Gates and Rockefeller Foundations are heavily involved in funding the global health industry. While theories abound over whether the COVID-19 pandemic was planned or engineered in someway, as if to mimic the plans discussed in Event 201 and Lock Step, hard evidence if currently lacking. Still, we should not dismiss them completely.
REDUCING THE POPULATION VIA EUGENICS
The Gates and Rockefeller dynasties are also united by their common interest in eugenics, the debunked science which promoted the idea that people of “good birth” should be encouraged to reproduce while those with “bad genes” should be discouraged from breeding or sterilized altogether. The science was developed by Francis Galton as a strategy for improving the human race. The idea was extremely popular in America before the Nazis embraced the doctrine and took it to the extreme.
Eugenics was also extremely popular with the Rockefeller family. A report from the Hudson Institute notes, “the first American foundations were deeply immersed in eugenics the effort to promote the reproduction of the fit and to suppress the reproduction of the unfit.” The report states that the Rockefellers and other early American philanthropists believed in “philanthropic eugenics,” the idea that they could use their money to create foundations which would promote the philosophy of eugenics.
The Rockefeller Foundation and family helped fund researchers at the Kaiser Wilhelm Institutes in Germany who were involved in the Nazi sterilization programs, funded the Eugenics Records Office, and many other programs promoting population control. In 1952, after the Nazis eugenics experiments were widely known, John D. Rockefeller III helped created the Population Council to promote eugenics without the baggage of the term.
In his book, Showing Up for Life, Bill Gates’ father, William H. Gates II, wrote about his admiration for the Rockefeller’s and their philanthropy....
 

Aero

Superstar
Joined
Mar 13, 2017
Messages
5,910
I told you before I’m a nurse? Right back at the very start of this, somewhere.
Of course someone can walk into a fire and not die - firefighters do it everyday? If you don’t want firefighters wearing protective clothing to factor in your hypothesis, be more specific. Stop making sweeping statements.
You need to qualify your statement further. What do you not understand about that? If I walk into a fire in say, a waste paper bin. My feet are likely to get burnt. I’m unlikely to die. If I walk into a house fire, I am much more likely to die. I cannot guarantee with you any certainty that a person will die if they walk into a fire - I can tell you it’s highly likely but I can’t completely rule out the fact they might live. There are other independent factors which will influence the outcome. Then you have to consider, was it the fire that killed them or was it smoke inhalation or something else?
It’s just not as simple as you want it to be.
I have never said I wasn’t a medical professional. I outlined the individual things I studied as apart of my nursing training. I have been a nurse for 30 years!
I have cared for 100s of patients, some of whom have responded exactly how you would expect to treatment and others who have not.

You said I am unable to factor in outcomes of diseases and injuries. However, you don’t even seem to understand that disease processes vary from individual to individual. Take your basic example of the Vitamin C deficiency. Yes, you are right - in theory anyway - that administering Vitamin C or Ascorbic acid might correct that deficiency.
However, for a certain percentage of patients, the Vitamin C deficiency is a symptom of some other disease process - drug addicts, alcoholics, people with gastrointestinal disorders such as Crohns or Ulcerative Colitis etc. To correct it, you ultimately have to treat the underlying condition. If you administer Vitamin C without treating the condition, the Vitamin C deficiency will not be improved. Even then a degree of deficiency may remain.
Take Vitamin B12, another vitamin which is often deficient. In theory, it can be corrected by a vitamin B complex supplement or eating foods rich in B12. However, in the case of pernicious anaemia - an auto-immune condition where sufferers do not produce intrinsic factor which enables them to synthesise dietary B12 - they require injections of B12 intramuscularly to bypass absorption in the stomach, which doesn’t work.
Yea, I’m unable to factor in outcomes of common diseases and injuries! :rolleyes: Pal, with all due respect, I’ve probably forgotten more about common diseases and injuries, than you’ll ever know.
Don’t try to pit your knowledge which is clearly lacking in substance, against mine! Your brain doesn’t have the capacity to understand it.
For every single patient I encounter, I need to know about their disease process and/or injury - not just their current one but their co-morbid ones, as well. I need to know about their drugs and how they interact with the normal human condition, as well as the diseased one. I need to be able to recognise new disease processes. I need to know how to avoid cross-contamination. I need to know how to control infection risk. I need to know about nutrition, hydration...Do you want me to go on?
You can insult me whatever way you like, but you’re not going to change the knowledge I have. You can’t even understand the argument. You have proven time and again that you don’t understand - you can’t even come up with a rational hypothesis in trying to establish an absolute. You have no idea what the concept even means.
Give it up now. I’m not going to engage with this any further. I hope you never have to find out how wrong you are about your black and white approach to the world of medicine. You don’t even understand the most basic of concepts.
Good luck - you’re going to need it!
Yeah, I can't find where you mentioned being a nurse specifically. I did find where you basically boiled down your personal treatment experience to "luck" though. And you still don't see why that's problematic from any perspective.

The nurse factor still highlights just how out of your depth you actually are though. As I've said before, I appreciate your generalized, play it safe approach to medicine. But let's be frank here, you are the only one being condescending. Which is especially ironic coming from someone who didn't get further than being a nurse.

You take your own liberties to add whatever complexity you want and insist that someone can't just walk into a hospital with a simple vitamin C deficiency. It's not possible in your mind, because that would be an absolute right? What you are doing is called "Proving too much" which is a logical fallacy. In this case, you are clearly doing it because you can't admit your missing the fundamentals of a holistic approach to medicine.

A broken finger, can't just be a broken finger with you, can it? You will find some random complication to add because you insist on supporting the absurd notion that everything medical or scientific boils down to luck.
 
Top