• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * - 1 votes

Regarding the vaccines, I think this is a question we All should be asking as members of a longevity-promoting website.

coronavirus

  • Please log in to reply
247 replies to this topic

#241 Advocatus Diaboli

  • Guest
  • 390 posts
  • 326
  • Location:Chronosynclastic Infundibulum ( floor Z/p^nZ )
  • NO

Posted Yesterday, 01:14 AM

Re: post #240

 

Sorry, Hip, the onus is on those who discount her work (the specific one in question) to provide cogent reasons for having done so. Hint--ad hominem doesn't refute anything.

 

 


  • Agree x 2
  • Enjoying the show x 1

#242 Hip

  • Guest
  • 1,439 posts
  • -4
  • Location:UK

Posted Yesterday, 01:31 AM

Re: post #240

 

Hint--ad hominem doesn't refute anything.

 

I disagree. We often look at the reputation of a person to judge the quality of their work. If you need to get a tricky complex surgery done, you would be advised to look into the reputation of the surgeon before you go ahead.


Edited by Hip, Yesterday, 01:32 AM.

  • Good Point x 1

#243 Advocatus Diaboli

  • Guest
  • 390 posts
  • 326
  • Location:Chronosynclastic Infundibulum ( floor Z/p^nZ )
  • NO

Posted Yesterday, 01:35 AM

Sorry, Hip. There are only 4 normed division algebras, not 5 as you suggest in post #242.


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 2
  • Agree x 1

#244 Daniel Cooper

  • Member, Moderator
  • 1,980 posts
  • 401
  • Location:USA

Posted Yesterday, 01:37 AM

Re post #238

 

Daniel Cooper, so after your having read the study, what, specifically, were your main objections, if any? And, for your objections, what references of corroboration can you cite?

 

(For those who may be interested, please note that no mention of glyphosate was made in the study.)

 

No, I haven't read that particular study.

 

But I have read a lot of her papers. And after reading the nth one that linked glyphosate yet some other problem, I started to discount her positions.

 

Now, this may be the one paper where she's done valuable work and come to reasonable conclusions, but if so that will be the first. I honestly will go back and read this paper and see what it says.

 

But one of the hallmarks of a medical kook is that they latch onto either one cause, or one solution, and everything can be linked back to their pet cause or solved by their pet solution.  You've got AIDs? Glyphosate. IBS? Glyphosate. Dandruff? Glyphosate. The heartbreak of psoriasis? Glyphosate. Dr. Seneff certainly seems to fall into this camp, even if this paper doesn't call out her favorite boogeyman.

 

The other flavor of kook would look at each of those conditions and suggest that the cure is "colloidal silver" or "miracle mineral solution" or some equally dubious cure all.  After all, why shouldn't one single compound or protocol fix widely divergent medical issues? Isn't that how things work in this world?

 

I think it's proper to be skeptical of someone after you've seen these sorts of long standing patterns.

 

On the other hand, if I see Mercola cite some paper, I don't get to discount it just because he likes it. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut now and then and his support of some otherwise seemingly valid research in no way invalidates it.


  • Agree x 2
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Informative x 1

#245 Hip

  • Guest
  • 1,439 posts
  • -4
  • Location:UK

Posted Yesterday, 02:02 PM

Sorry, Hip. There are only 4 normed division algebras, not 5 as you suggest in post #242.

 

I don't quite follow your mathematics humor, though I did have a passing interest in quaternions years ago when I had a functioning brain. I lost my ability to understand complex mathematics when I developed ME/CFS, a consciousness-reducing disease. It's amazing how higher consciousness is necessary to understand maths, but is not so necessary to understand medical science.

 

I can understand medical and biological concepts, but when my reduced-consciousness brain tries to grapple with concepts from mathematics and physics, it exhausts my brain, it stretches my brain beyond its abilities, and within 5 minutes I am too mentally fatigued to continue reading, so have to put the physics book down. 

 

I would say though that if you come from a mathematical or physics background (which was my first degree), it can take time to adapt to medical science, which operates in a different way to the hard science of physics and the pure logic of mathematics.

 

It took me many years to adapt to reading medical science, instead of reading my favorite subjects of mathematics, physics, and the the philosophy thereof.

 

 

There is much more black and white certainty when it comes to mathematics, because the logic which underpins mathematics is such a solid framework, and the number of parameters or variables involved in a given equation or theorem are small. 

 

Whereas with medical science, you are trying to understand biological systems which have thousands if not millions of parameters (genes, messenger molecules, epigenetic factors, external factors such as toxins, pathogens, gestational conditions, etc), and there is no equation which can encompass all of these. So when you try to sift truth from falsity in the medical or biological sciences, it often relies on a sort of intuition that you develop over the years.

 

As you know, mathematicians develop intuition over time, and this helps mathematicians solve the great unproven theorems. But intuition in medical or biological sciences is different type of intuition.

 

I would much prefer to discuss mathematics and physics, but (a) I no longer have the ability, and (b) I have had to switch to medical science in order to try to treat the disease I have.


Edited by Hip, Yesterday, 02:06 PM.


#246 Gal220

  • Guest
  • 798 posts
  • 401
  • Location:United States

Posted Today, 12:25 AM

More testimony from DoD whistle blowers on increases in cancer, miscarriages, and neurological conditions - LINK

 

Taken from the recent Senate testimony - LINK

 

Really sick to hear of data being deleted out the DoD databases(5:09:39)


  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Informative x 1

#247 DanCG

  • Guest
  • 190 posts
  • 115
  • Location:USA

Posted Today, 02:52 AM

 

 

. So when you try to sift truth from falsity in the medical or biological sciences, it often relies on a sort of intuition that you develop over the years.

 

 

There is much truth to this. It would be nice if we always had clear data to provide a definitive answer to every question, but we don’t, and we never will. So, yes, intuition has its place in how we evaluate information. It is also true that our intuitions can mislead us. We also have to humbly recognize that others have also developed intuitions over the years. From the outside, it is hard to tell an informed intuition from a bias. This distinction is hard to make even with deep introspection. It would be arrogant to say, “I have intuitions that are usually right, whereas others only have biases, which are usually wrong.”


  • like x 1

#248 Hip

  • Guest
  • 1,439 posts
  • -4
  • Location:UK

Posted Today, 03:20 AM

We also have to humbly recognize that others have also developed intuitions over the years. From the outside, it is hard to tell an informed intuition from a bias. This distinction is hard to make even with deep introspection. It would be arrogant to say, “I have intuitions that are usually right, whereas others only have biases, which are usually wrong.”

 

People may have developed and honed their intuitions if they have spent many years or decades studying a subject, or having deep interest in a subject. If they have not been focused on that subject, then they will have neither knowledge of it or intuition. That of course is just stating the obvious.

 

When it comes to this COVID pandemic, the areas of study pertaining to this pandemic are: virology, immunology, chronic disease, and mathematical modeling. 

 

I spent the last 15 years reading medical science related to my virally-triggered, immunologically-mediated chronic disease of ME/CFS. So I can say that I have a bit of knowledge and some intuition in these fields. Prior to that, I was rather ignorant about medical science.

 

Now I know that these areas are not of much interest to the average Longecity reader, because most longevity enthusiasts do not really appreciate how viruses and the immune system likely play a key role in lifespan and healthspan. So virology and immunology are not a natural areas of interest on this forum (they should be, but they are not). Thus there is not much expertise on Longecity in the subjects relevant to the COVID pandemic.

 

In spite of the lack of expertise, and the lack of a developed intuition, I see people on this forum with very strong opinions on pandemic matter. Well, it's never a good thing when people who know little about a subject are so opinionated. But that seems to be the story with the whole of the pandemic: people with strong and often angry opinions, yet not knowing the first thing about the subjects on which they opine.

 

 


Edited by Hip, Today, 03:28 AM.

  • Good Point x 1





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: coronavirus

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Bing (1)