4 ms·

Did a famous doctor's Covid shot make his cancer worse?

10 points by yasp 4y ago

taxicabjesus 4y ago
Almost a year ago I had fun with a poll: Do you find Humanity's lack of science-faith disturbing?". This got a decent number of comments and poll-votes, even though none of you voted it up as a submission: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908797 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908797 Now people like myself feel vindicated. The funny thing is the poll option, "I'm going to skip the COVID-19 vaccine and wait for the COVID-22 version" is not actually an option: you have to get the obsolete COVID-19 jabs to be eligible for the COVID-21 booster. I didn't see that coming. I guess this is what passes as a Science-joke, sorta like how "boosting" is slang for stealing or lying [0]. Why would one want to get boosted for COVID-21, when we're almost to 2023? [0] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Boosting https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Boosting Read a piece by someone who claimed to know about vaccines that really they should have targeted anything on SARS-CoV-2 but the spike protein. Any of the virus' surface proteins would've been better, as the spike is too similar to the body's other proteins. Someone else points out that the spike protein is what does all the damage, so it's rather silly to induce ("boost") bodies to create spike proteins. Whoops. Walter Chesnut [1] is one of those anti-Science™ types who was kicked off twitter for saying not-nice things about the experimental drugs that were pushed on us all. He says stuff about the spike -> cancer connection that I don't understand: In March of this year, I discovered that the Spike Protein mimics radiation in the sense that it causes EXACTLY the same damage to the Endothelium that radiation causes. Initially, I thought this was an explanation for the observed increase in cancers. I still believe that to be true [1] https://substack.com/profile/79603717-walter-m-chesnut https://substack.com/profile/79603717-walter-m-chesnut (one of those substacks I subscribed to but don't actually read, as it's over my head) At what point is Science™ obligated to perform damage-control? edit: typos, mismatched asterisks
- Arnt 4y ago
  Well, since you say "TM" that's simple. You look up the TM in the registry, find the owner, and raise a claim. Expect to lose though. Because the vaccines saved 13.7–15.9 million lives, there'll be a lot to subtract from the amount owed.
  - taxicabjesus 4y ago
    My point was that Science™ has done tremendous damage to its brand. The tragedy of our era is how Medicine™ forgot that oxygen is toxic. How many people would have been saved if Medicine™ used the antidote for oxygen toxicity? ® is Registered Trademark. ™ is for non-registered trademarks. In the US you can claim protection for a non-registered trademark via the common law. “Most countries require formal trademark registration as a precondition for pursuing this type of action. The United States, Canada, and other countries also recognize common law trademark rights, which means action can be taken to protect any unregistered trademark if it is in use. Still, common law trademarks offer to the holder, in general, less legal protection than registered trademarks.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark

10 points by yasp 4y ago

Almost a year ago I had fun with a poll: Do you find Humanity's lack of science-faith disturbing?". This got a decent number of comments and poll-votes, even though none of you voted it up as a submission: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908797 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908797 Now people like myself feel vindicated. The funny thing is the poll option, "I'm going to skip the COVID-19 vaccine and wait for the COVID-22 version" is not actually an option: you have to get the obsolete COVID-19 jabs to be eligible for the COVID-21 booster. I didn't see that coming. I guess this is what passes as a Science-joke, sorta like how "boosting" is slang for stealing or lying [0]. Why would one want to get boosted for COVID-21, when we're almost to 2023? [0] https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Boosting https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Boosting Read a piece by someone who claimed to know about vaccines that really they should have targeted anything on SARS-CoV-2 but the spike protein. Any of the virus' surface proteins would've been better, as the spike is too similar to the body's other proteins. Someone else points out that the spike protein is what does all the damage, so it's rather silly to induce ("boost") bodies to create spike proteins. Whoops. Walter Chesnut [1] is one of those anti-Science™ types who was kicked off twitter for saying not-nice things about the experimental drugs that were pushed on us all. He says stuff about the spike -> cancer connection that I don't understand: In March of this year, I discovered that the Spike Protein mimics radiation in the sense that it causes EXACTLY the same damage to the Endothelium that radiation causes. Initially, I thought this was an explanation for the observed increase in cancers. I still believe that to be true [1] https://substack.com/profile/79603717-walter-m-chesnut https://substack.com/profile/79603717-walter-m-chesnut (one of those substacks I subscribed to but don't actually read, as it's over my head) At what point is Science™ obligated to perform damage-control? edit: typos, mismatched asterisks

Arnt 4y ago
Well, since you say "TM" that's simple. You look up the TM in the registry, find the owner, and raise a claim. Expect to lose though. Because the vaccines saved 13.7–15.9 million lives, there'll be a lot to subtract from the amount owed.
- taxicabjesus 4y ago
  My point was that Science™ has done tremendous damage to its brand. The tragedy of our era is how Medicine™ forgot that oxygen is toxic. How many people would have been saved if Medicine™ used the antidote for oxygen toxicity? ® is Registered Trademark. ™ is for non-registered trademarks. In the US you can claim protection for a non-registered trademark via the common law. “Most countries require formal trademark registration as a precondition for pursuing this type of action. The United States, Canada, and other countries also recognize common law trademark rights, which means action can be taken to protect any unregistered trademark if it is in use. Still, common law trademarks offer to the holder, in general, less legal protection than registered trademarks.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark