qsera

13 ms·

331.
by qsera 3mo ago
>I am clearly talking about both positive and negative effects of drugs. Then you are answering to a point that was not raised. > most lovely features in an environment of complete information, which this is not. The more the informat
332.
by qsera 3mo ago
Not sure, I was just talking about the efficacy, not long term side effects. The parent comment was also talking about showing efficacy... >Literally one of the dumbest ideas I've ever heard. It is capitalism 101. Not sure if that
333.
by qsera 3mo ago
So if both the standard of care as well as the drug being trials have the same side effects, would they be included in the package insert/drug literature? Because the incidence rate of it would be same for both the groups?
334.
by qsera 3mo ago
>There would be virtually no incentive for anyone to make an actual drug. Dumb question: Wouldn't the market discover what works and what does not automatically, like any other product?
335.
by qsera 3mo ago
> The increasing availability of large datasets should make this an especially good time to reconsider observational evidence in many fields. This is not happening. > I was surprised to find that they usually discard papers based on o
336.
by qsera 3mo ago
>I think this is overstating it and makes me wonder how familiar the author is with literature and music... I can vouch for that statement. I have written poetry. And often searching for a right word or expression is often akin to search
337.
by qsera 3mo ago
>Careful you don't "it's just a text predictor" yourself into unemployment . Says the guy who is "I-can-now-just-push-buttons-and-get-paid-forever"-ing into not only into unemployment, but also being totally
338.
by qsera 4mo ago
Isn't that obvious? What we perceive as "present" is just our latest memory.
339.
by qsera 4mo ago
> I'm going to look into starting this as a startup. I dare you, I double dare you... >it's not worth my time trying to educate.. Exactly why I am not spending too much time to educate you... The flaw in your reasoning is he
340.
by qsera 4mo ago
Obviously I am talking about insurances for the general population.. Why don't you stick to answering the point that I am raising, instead of responding with some...arbitrary thing... The question is why is there no insurance that a pe
341.
by qsera 4mo ago
> Tell me: Why haven't insurers – who spend all day every day understanding cost/risk/benefit tradeoffs of different drugs - detected this? They have. That is why they don't sell an insurance against vaccine injuries.
342.
by qsera 4mo ago
He he...it is very funny that you just assume that I trust the FDA. I mean, the thought "May be this guy does not trust FDA" does not seem to have even cross your mind...
343.
by qsera 4mo ago
I would not use individual IQs. Instead I would look at how smart/dumb the general population behaves.
344.
by qsera 4mo ago
local hard drives..
345.
by qsera 4mo ago
I am not distrusting the method. I am distrusting the person that claims to follow it, behind closed doors and comes out with only a result.
346.
by qsera 4mo ago
>correctly used it is statistically analysed to investigate whether tens of thousands of reported events after a vaccine application differ in frequency Yes, then that report is rejected because it used data from VAERS..
347.
by qsera 4mo ago
I have come to the realisation that I don't need 10,000 photos. I probably need < 100. I will print them and keep them in a paper album... Which I am yet to do...
348.
by qsera 4mo ago
>a slightly elevated death rate due to covid Is that a fact? Do we now have a higher all cause mortality rate from pre-covid era?
349.
by qsera 4mo ago
Being curious does not help much if you are easily satisfied by bullshit answers, like "It works because I said so!"
350.
by qsera 4mo ago
This is exactly why I stick to programming computers and building "things" using it.
351.
by qsera 4mo ago
>I work in clinical trials. I know how they work. You do not. Ah, that makes perfect sense. It is hard for a man to understand something when their salary depends on them not understanding it.
352.
by qsera 4mo ago
> We have effective statistical certainty in the results. Only if you blindly trust the entities that is doing the studies. Seriously, I am not sure how anyone with a couple of brain cells between their ears can do that. >Tell me: how
353.
by qsera 4mo ago
If it is not good enough, then it does not matter if it is the best available. Nature does not give a damn what the best solution humanity can come up with at some arbitrary point in time.
354.
by qsera 4mo ago
Please provide credible link to the interview. Just curious...
355.
by qsera 4mo ago
I mean, if the people in the unvaccinated group got vaccinated, then they are not really unvaccinated, right? So I am wondering if the study only consider "unvaccinated death" if the person was unvaccinated at the time of their de
356.
by qsera 4mo ago
> They said that if they knew their kid will die without vaccine, they would still skip vaccine to protect the kid from bigger harm.. They probably didn't. Because what is "bigger harm" than death? >You can do that only
357.
by qsera 4mo ago
In that study are you aware if they looked at the vaccination status of the expired members in the unvaccinated group during their death?
358.
by qsera 4mo ago
>VAERS When you got your vaccine, were you told to report at VAERS if you have any problems? Most people does not even know such a thing exists. Even then the reports from that database is not really considered trust worthy. It is often
359.
by qsera 4mo ago
>They would change nothing.. But by this logic, this is exactly what pro-vax people advocate as well. If a child die right after vaccination, they will still advice people to vaccinate their other kids, because this was just an anomaly?
360.
by qsera 4mo ago
First step would be to collect data that is trust worthy regarding potential adverse reactions. And for that the barriers that stigmatize such reporting should be removed. Basically, for starters, doctors should be free to report the events

More ›