billy pilgrim

Maybe Trump was on to something with the sanctions? It wasn't exactly an even playing field with China. I'm all for free trade but more-so if all players play ball. The more industry and manufacturing that moves back to America the better.

Yeah, I agree some of what he has to say but not his conclusions. The issue I see is that these enzymes that he's talking about aren't in the vaccine but they could very well be present in your cells - your cell made them etc... see link below how mRNA can interact with your genome. Maybe it's a very small probability that something gets messed up in those processes - and it hopefully won't because nature is redundant* and awesome. But it is also an extremely complex process and not well understood. Now multiply that (unknown now) small probability by thousands(?) of cells in your body affected by billions of people who take this and bad things are going to happen. Maybe not to you, maybe not right now, but there is not zero risk. That is a ridiculous conclusion. The question is are the personal gains worth the risk? Are the community gains worth the risk? I don't know. Who gets to make that choice? You? The government? Your employer? Cheers. *on a species level - which some of the time sucks for the individual. edit for citation, clarification: https://www.quora.com/Can-messenger-RNA-ever-enter-the-nucleus?share=1

Not yet - but pharmaceutical companies are looking into this. Edit citation: https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-next-target-for-mrna-vaccines-after-covid-19-the-flu-11627041601

Okay what definition are you using? Transmits mRNA into your cell (like mRNA viruses do? Because it 100% does) Alter the host DNA sequence? (The COVID shots shouldn't do this from what I understand - but the whole DNA transcription process is so complex... viral DNA ended up in our human genome - 1). I'm just saying that I don't have your level of confidence that we as a species have this all completely figured out yet. So let's not bog on semantics. And you just leave it at that and don't want to talk about any of the other points? It's a lazy rebuttal. I'm curious because I want to know, I'm trying to learn as much as I can about this. And unfortunately I am just getting a single narrative. edit - citation: 1) https://www.cshl.edu/the-non-human-living-inside-of-you/

Does no one else think it's insane this gene therapy is being pushed so hard? Feels creepy. It's never been done before (mRNA vaccine) but researched for at least a decade. But now it's good? 34 deaths out of 222k cases is what I'm tracking for the military (5). If I do the very rough math as an 11F, getting COVID is about the same mortality risk as flying 100 fighter hours. (1 is public, but your safety office has the same data if you're interested for your MWS) No one has any idea what the risk is of the mRNA gene therapy. I mean if I drink alcohol or smoke cigars I know there is a risk with that and alcohol and tobacco have been around along enough that people have been able to figure that out. Same with riding a motorcycle or flying jets. Those stats exist. I remember when I was in high school the human genome was finally sequenced and academics thought it was going to be a boon for medicine. And here we are 20 years or so later and we really don't know how it works. BUT we can manipulate it a little and get a first order effect. Progress. In the 20th century radium powered glow in the dark watches and then factory workers died of cancer. I'm not saying that this is that. But I am saying that no one knows that it isn't that. Like if it takes a year off your life should you take it? Five years? Ten? What's the metric? If my odds of dying of COVID are 1:1000 and I think I'll live to 80 I should take it if (statistically) I think it's going to take leas than a month off my life. That's like zero biological long term impact. I hope that's the case btw for everyone who's gotten it. As far as the transmission aspect. A study in the Lancet (2) set the reduction in risk from getting COVID from .8% with the Pfizer shots (worst) to 1.3% Astra Zenica (best). This doesn't address the mortality, just the transmission. But those numbers are terrible. My main issue is that there is no long term data set on mRNA gene therapy. There will be in 10 or 20 years but there isn't now. And this isn't something I am willing to bet my personal health on. And this is for a disease that has a 99.9X survival rate for me? Something that studies have shown that if you've had it, the vaccine provides no statistically relevant benefit (Pfizer study - still tracking down link but reference 3 for now, same conclusion). A disease that natural immunity provides longer and 6-7x more immunity than the vaccine (Israel study - 3) The drug companies are making BILLIONS and good for them, but the for sure have their lobbyists and what is in Pfizer's best interest is not NECESSARILY in my best interest. If this is so safe, why are they IMMUNE from liability under federal law? Now that it's "FDA approved" do you really think that will change? (6) I like to read a lot and from what I've read about risk (Nassim Taleb anyone? "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence") getting these shots seems to be a lot like investing in something with a very small probable very large return (not dying from COVID) but can absolutely blow up (you dying much younger). Why are medical doctors and PHDs being silenced on social media? Is it for public health? Would we want to hear all professional opinions of people who spend their whole lives studying these subjects? It's been a frustrating year for the whole world and thankfully I live in America and not Australia where COVID has transformed them into a totalitarian society. (4) Edit citations: 1) https://reader.elsevier.com/reader/sd/pii/S2590198220300257?token=A38F0B29502CBFB9FB55366BD133C2D495D38BF73BBD6E103104738607EDBB02A07B7A51F4E964E1876F08236B6184CB&originRegion=us-east-1&originCreation=20210827015944 2) https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext?fbclid=IwAR3cXbFe41uZYKqjESlarmBUoabpw3_w0xT54jRLmnBIRRE9NjrRESextSQ 3) https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/310963 4) https://www.nsw.gov.au/covid-19/rules/greater-sydney 5) https://www.defense.gov/Explore/Spotlight/Coronavirus-DOD-Response/ 6)https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-compensation-lawsuit.html

I have never met a general that would voluntarily resign. Those convictions are not how you get to a position like that.

I'm just a pilot like most of the people here commenting. We all deal with risk mitigation every day, as well as policies and rules that are smart and those that are dumb and those that are political. It's nothing new. I am not a doctor but know enough about math to be statistically literate. I do like Nassim Talebs ideas on risk mitigation. Specifically "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." The vaccine might be almost 100% safe. It might have major long term side effects. There is no long term data on mRNA vaccines. There will be in the future because so many people are being vaccinated right now. A huge sampling pool will lead to some very accurate future analysis. I just have no interest in being part of that pool. As a relatively young healthy dude who has probably already had COVID I can see no real upside to getting a vaccine and a lot of downsides. The way I see it, it's little different than investing in options in the market that have a probable gain but might bankrupt you. I did the mortality math a year ago and flying a single fighter training sortie had the same mortality for me as COVID. Why is the government and the media pushing for this so hard? THAT to me is creepy as hell. edit - spelling

Well it was very unprofessional and good riddance!!! - active duty leadership Did anyone back these up because I want to check out out. - me in the ANG

Maybe when it comes to combat capability we as a country can just not look at sex or ethnicity (whatever the hell that means these days) and try a meritocracy. Which would mean just eliminating both from any application. You're not doing anyone any favors if someone gets into a position they shouldn't be in due to race or sex.

Yeah I get that. 2009 4S. Probably close to that 325hp at the wheels.. it feels like it's just getting into its element around 90mph.. much like a fighter accelerating through 400kcas.. my friend says the 911 turbo (996) is similar but happens around 130mph.. I ride sport bikes too, and they are for sure more fun - but the 911 comes pretty close.

Love those riffs... Being a leftist wealth distribution spokesman has yielded Tom Morello a net worth of $30M (according to a quick search of the interwebs) thanks to capitalism and free speech. Let the irony flow through you.

Nice!!! That V8 sounds like America. Every time I hear a car like that I wish it was a bit louder. I just picked up a used 911. Wanted one since I was like 10 years old - less torque than a 60's vette but it's a ton of fun.. Finally makes me understand the MX-5 and S2000 mafia. Sad thing is that new manual, normally aspirated sports cars are becoming exceedingly rare - especially something with no electronic supervision like that old school vette. It's a shame. Its unfortunate but the emissions laws and automation are going to make great drivers cars a thing of the past.

Season 3 is out on Netflix of their formula one show..

Yes.

The solution is to make the FNG Lt the snacko AND the WG/EO officer.