Covid-19 Causing Irreversible Lung Fibrosis

[tankasnowgod]

You seem sure about it. You are invested or going to invest in the knowledge you posses?

Well, he's wrong on even some basic concepts. For example, that $2.5 Trillion was a drop in market cap, not necessarily "wealth being transferred." It's simply a calculation of last share traded vs. shares outstanding. The outstanding shares are never all available for purchase. A quick drop simply means that far more sellers than buyers. That gap down might have only taken tens or low hundreds of billions out of the market, possibly even less than that.

He's predicting the cancelling of the NCAA tourney and ZERO (not lower) interest rates on events that happen next week. It will be easy to check how those pan out.

 

[InChristAlone]

@sugarbabe
You refused to engage in argument due to me being educated in a medical discipline makes me entrenched in „establishment“-views.

I’ve already addressed your claims that covid-19 can’t lead to lung fibrosis. I think it can and I consider it proven. I also consider your views as dogmatic in its own right and confused in contrarian conspiracy theory.

Dr Lanka is a fellow German, I’ve loosely followed a court-case where he was involved some years ago because it was in the MSM. I think he is a dangerous quack, at least where his statements about viral diseases are converted

We did not debate what a virus is, that’s what your newest post alludes to. I’ve no stake in that debate. Evolution of viruses and definitin of viruses are a matter of debate even in the mainstream, no serious researcher claims to know. That doesn’t affect my point about how viruses can damage and scar lung tissue via enzymes

If researchers don't even know what a virus is how can you be so positive they produce enzymes to cause lung fibrosis? That's a huge huge leap.

 

[Deleted member 5487]

You seem sure about it. You are invested or going to invest in the knowledge you posses?

I have a few Puts in Place.

However we're now entering a Debt Deflation (Michael Hudson) and Dollar Milkshake theory (Santiago Capital) Scanario.

 

[Deleted member 5487]

Well, he's wrong on even some basic concepts. For example, that $2.5 Trillion was a drop in market cap, not necessarily "wealth being transferred." It's simply a calculation of last share traded vs. shares outstanding. The outstanding shares are never all available for purchase. A quick drop simply means that far more sellers than buyers. That gap down might have only taken tens or low hundreds of billions out of the market, possibly even less than that.

He's predicting the cancelling of the NCAA tourney and ZERO (not lower) interest rates on events that happen next week. It will be easy to check how those pan out.

I'll stand by NCAA Tourney being canceled.
2 year treasury has .50 basis cut baked in, but I suspect a 1 point.

 

[Deleted member 5487]

Well, he's wrong on even some basic concepts. For example, that $2.5 Trillion was a drop in market cap, not necessarily "wealth being transferred." It's simply a calculation of last share traded vs. shares outstanding. The outstanding shares are never all available for purchase. A quick drop simply means that far more sellers than buyers. That gap down might have only taken tens or low hundreds of billions out of the market, possibly even less than that.

He's predicting the cancelling of the NCAA tourney and ZERO (not lower) interest rates on events that happen next week. It will be easy to check how those pan out.

Wealth transfer is what it is. That money was taken out of uneasy to access 401ks into saving investor/banks hands. Go sell your stocks now and tell me how missing out on the 3 years of gains taste.

 

[Deleted member 5487]

I'll stand by NCAA Tourney being canceled.
2 year treasury has .50 basis cut baked in, but I suspect a 1 point.

Damn I was close

This is Smelling Fishy as hell lets collapse all travel

Next Prediction,

They Bailout AA, DELTA and other oligpolies airlines.
The Big Banks will need it too,
can't really let Houston/Midland go under so they might even do Shale oil.

 

[tankasnowgod]

This is Smelling Fishy as hell lets collapse all travel

Next Prediction,

They Bailout AA, DELTA and other oligpolies airlines.

But..... that doesn't make any sense. Why would you crash airline stocks over a fake epidemic, only to "bail them out?" And why would they even need to be bailed out? There is nothing wrong with the companies themselves. It's pure perception.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Wealth transfer is what it is. That money was taken out of uneasy to access 401ks into saving investor/banks hands. Go sell your stocks now and tell me how missing out on the 3 years of gains taste.

That is NOT a wealth transfer. That's you missing out on paper or potential gains. If you buy a stock at $100, see it rise to $800, watch it go down to $300 and sell, you didn't lose anything. In fact, by every single accounting measure, you made $200. People can beat themselves up emotionally for not selling sooner or higher and this or that, but the fact remains they would be angry over tripling their money. Your emotional reaction to what happened is irrelevant to the actual accounting (although emotion is the primary thing that moves markets).

Now, someone who buys at $750 and sells at $600? That's a real loss. And they may be thrilled they got out of a bad trade with a small (ish) loss. But again, the emotion is irrelevant to the accounting.

 

[tara]

Better headline: "COVID seems to be capable of the same kind of lung damage as the seasonal flu"

Higher fatality rate, though.

Do you think that the covid-19 Virus opportunisticaly settles pre-diseased lungs?

Exactly. Bechamp said germs live in a diseased body.

Given that a lot of people have preexisting weaknesses, I'd like to limit their exposure to infectious agents that may tip them over the edge to severe harm.

Pathogenic organisms may be able to gain access to the body when the state of the body allows it, but it does not mean they cannot be harmful once they are there, in order to remain.

+1

Germ theory is just a theory ...

Gravity is a theory too. It does what it does whether you believe it or not.

That's unfortunate if you follow Ray Peat.

I thought Peat was explicit about saying he thought this outbreak/epidemic should be contained. I expect that's because he believes there is an infectious component to it. I've learned a lot from Peat; I think he has a lot of learning and wisdom, kindness. Doesn't mean I'd take his lead on every subject. This forum isn't a religion.

I never said bacteria or viral proteins don't exist, I said it is the terrain.

We can't always fix the terrain. Many people have vulnerable terrain - that's not going to change, even with the best info in the world. Different vulnerabilities make one susceptible to different harms. Many/most people are vulnerable to harm from some infectious agents in the terrain they have.

Viral proteins are created inside the body.

AIUI, yes, this is how viruses work - they get the body to reproduce them. They can't reproduce on their own outside of living cells.

Everything is a trade-of, a negotiation and struggle of living cells and their environment.

+1

"There is serious scientific debate over whether a virus is even alive.

Yes. AIUI, some definitions of life require being able to reproduce independently. Viruses don't seem to do that. That's not necessarily a controversy about the facts - scientists are not all settled on the same definition of alive.
A relevant part for COVID-19 and other viral pathogens like rhinoviruses, chicken pox, etc, is that viruses can get themselves reproduced in some circumstances when they succeed in infecting a host, and this can result in transmission to other hosts - ie spread of infection.

 

[Deleted member 5487]

That is NOT a wealth transfer. That's you missing out on paper or potential gains. If you buy a stock at $100, see it rise to $800, watch it go down to $300 and sell, you didn't lose anything. In fact, by every single accounting measure, you made $200. People can beat themselves up emotionally for not selling sooner or higher and this or that, but the fact remains they would be angry over tripling their money. Your emotional reaction to what happened is irrelevant to the actual accounting (although emotion is the primary thing that moves markets).

Now, someone who buys at $750 and sells at $600? That's a real loss. And they may be thrilled they got out of a bad trade with a small (ish) loss. But again, the emotion is irrelevant to the accounting.

This is assuming the person buys at the bottom, loses a little bit and then sell. Yes they are still in the green.

401ks dollar cost average. So this is wealth transfer, as time went on the paper asset was bid up now the person is holding on to an asset with 2016 level prices, in defacto they had errased the last 4 years of gain, while the people. Sharks and Banks sold at the top and skimmed off the last 4 years of gains.

Dude I don't know who I am dealing with nor do I feel like trying to explain these things to a Prole over the internet.

 

[Deleted member 5487]

But..... that doesn't make any sense. Why would you crash airline stocks over a fake epidemic, only to "bail them out?" And why would they even need to be bailed out? There is nothing wrong with the companies themselves. It's pure perception.

Check the balanced sheets. Nothing has to make sense. You don't understand the control structure, nor the inverted corportacracy.

I'll come back to this forum when they announced the bails outs.

Airlines
Cruise
Shale I believe will be folded and bought on fire sale by the big 4.

Best of luck in the times ahead.

 

[Deleted member 5487]

This is assuming the person buys at the bottom, loses a little bit and then sell. Yes they are still in the green.

401ks dollar cost average. So this is wealth transfer, as time went on the paper asset was bid up now the person is holding on to an asset with 2016 level prices, in defacto they had errased the last 4 years of gain, while the people. Sharks and Banks sold at the top and skimmed off the last 4 years of gains.

Dude I don't know who I am dealing with nor do I feel like trying to explain these things to a Prole over the internet.

I'm not trying to frustrate people, just spreading a little bit of knowledge and to be on the lookout. Might blow over most, but the smart ones will pick it up and position accordingly.

 

[tankasnowgod]

This is assuming the person buys at the bottom, loses a little bit and then sell. Yes they are still in the green.

401ks dollar cost average. So this is wealth transfer, as time went on the paper asset was bid up now the person is holding on to an asset with 2016 level prices, in defacto they had errased the last 4 years of gain, while the people. Sharks and Banks sold at the top and skimmed off the last 4 years of gains.

Dude I don't know who I am dealing with nor do I feel like trying to explain these things to a Prole over the internet.

My example was buying lower, selling higher, not necessarily buying a bottom, and certainly wasn't selling a top.

I question whether you have looked a chart, as you keep on saying "wiped out four years of gains." But if you look at a chart, it's at the same point is was back in January 2019, which is only 13 months, not 4 years ago. Back in December 2018, it was actually lower-

https://www.tradingview.com/x/gyBdm6Bz/

As the chart points out, we have been at this level 6 times since November 2017. Four years ago, the DJI was 5,000 points lower. So your analysis just doesn't hold up.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Check the balanced sheets. Nothing has to make sense. You don't understand the control structure, nor the inverted corportacracy.

I have certainly learned a lot about the power structure of the world over the past four years, and it is certainly incomplete, but I'm sure your understanding (whatever it is) has flaws as well. At the same time, you have made statements of fact that are provably false (like the "wiped out four years of trading" comment), and easily checked with historical charting data. If you can't get those basic facts right, I question your deeper understanding as well.

 

[InChristAlone]

Higher fatality rate, though.


Given that a lot of people have preexisting weaknesses, I'd like to limit their exposure to infectious agents that may tip them over the edge to severe harm.

+1

Gravity is a theory too. It does what it does whether you believe it or not.

I thought Peat was explicit about saying he thought this outbreak/epidemic should be contained. I expect that's because he believes there is an infectious component to it. I've learned a lot from Peat; I think he has a lot of learning and wisdom, kindness. Doesn't mean I'd take his lead on every subject. This forum isn't a religion.

We can't always fix the terrain. Many people have vulnerable terrain - that's not going to change, even with the best info in the world. Different vulnerabilities make one susceptible to different harms. Many/most people are vulnerable to harm from some infectious agents in the terrain they have.

AIUI, yes, this is how viruses work - they get the body to reproduce them. They can't reproduce on their own outside of living cells.

+1

Yes. AIUI, some definitions of life require being able to reproduce independently. Viruses don't seem to do that. That's not necessarily a controversy about the facts - scientists are not all settled on the same definition of alive.
A relevant part for COVID-19 and other viral pathogens like rhinoviruses, chicken pox, etc, is that viruses can get themselves reproduced in some circumstances when they succeed in infecting a host, and this can result in transmission to other hosts - ie spread of infection.

I'm surprised to see you going at me Tara. Especially with your comment on gravity which was a red herring. Germs are only germs if they cause disease in someone, you have to prove that they are germs by giving people the germ and seeing if they cause the same disease in everyone. If people are given a germ and don't get the disease then it's NOT a germ. This is why I said more study is needed. No one has tried to refute the pleomorphism video either. That's okay, this information is not going to be taken lightly. I get the sense that Peat is not afraid of viruses, and this forum has really lapped up the hysteria surrounding coronovirus so I thought it necessary to calm the chaos.

 

[InChristAlone]

Jason Prall just posted this:
"Germ Theory:

The false premise that just won’t die...despite Pasteur admitting he was wrong in the 1800s.

Over the last 120 years, scientific research has overwhelmingly favored the ideas of Bernard and Béchamp..

Yes, germ theory is over 120 years old.

Concern yourself not with the pathogen, focus on the terrain, as both Bernard and Béchamp proclaimed.

And “Koch’s postulates” spark an interesting question.

How do scientists identify that an exogenous “virus” is causing a pathology (symptoms)?

I have yet to hear any explanation from any scientist, epidemiologist, or virologist of HOW to know if a virus is causing symptoms.

If one houses a “virus” in the body, does one always experience symptoms?

Hurdle #1 — Identify a “virus” exists in a person.

Hurdle # 2 — Determining that the “virus” is creating pathology.

I am not aware of a single instance of anybody demonstrating they have jumped over both hurdles.

If anybody knows of an instance, please direct me to such examples. I’m genuinely curious, as I looked into viral theory of disease for many years now and have come to a dead end on this front.

Much love and take care of your terrain, y’all!

P.S. the reverse transcriptase identification method is notoriously flawed due to impure samples. Montagnier acknowledged this reality.

P.P.S. Western blot, PCR, and Elisa tests, even if we assume they are valid, have no way to demonstrate pathology...only “supposed” presence of a pathogen; again, if we believe they are legitimate tests. And presence of “pathogen” has been shown in non-pathological and asymptomatic cases."

 

[InChristAlone]

A comparison of the theories of Louis Pasteur and Antoine Bechamp

 

[Summer]

I'm not trying to frustrate people, just spreading a little bit of knowledge and to be on the lookout. Might blow over most, but the smart ones will pick it up and position accordingly.

I must be slow because all I’m getting out of your messages is doom. What position is there to take when you’re claiming everything is going to crash?

 

[tara]

I'm surprised to see you going at me Tara

I'm not aiming to get at you personally, so sorry if I came across that way.
I agree with you on many other things, and think you contribute lots of good things to the forum, whether or not I share all your ideas.
I am arguing about some of the points you are making in this thread on this issue.
That line about something or other is 'just a theory' is one used by others in other contexts to justify faith-based beliefs that fly in the face of science. By people promoting flat earth nonsense and trying to exclude science from schools, for instance. To me it doesn't seem like any kind of argument or evidence against the validity of a theory. I was surprised that you'd use a line like that.

you have to prove that they are germs by giving people the germ and seeing if they cause the same disease in everyone.

I'm not sure why you consider this the criteria for germs. I don't know if this is a view held by any scientists in the field. I don't see where the contradiction would be in having infectious agents like viruses and bacteria ('germs'), and some people but not everybody getting sick when exposed to them.

this forum has really lapped up the hysteria surrounding coronovirus so I thought it necessary to calm the chaos

I'd prefer to distinguish hysteria/panic from curiosity and preparedness. Wanting to talk about the risks and ways to address them doesn't mean everyone is hysterical.
I personally never find it calming when people try claim that there is no problem in the face of obvious evidence. Maybe US news media are more prone to extremes and hype than where I am, and that is affecting our differing views.
COVID is unlikely to be the end of the human race, or to decimate the population, or to destroy civilisation. But it is already killing thousands of people, and likely to be many more. If we can't face and discuss this one, how will we realistically face and navigate more serious threats to come?

Your points about the terrain being important, and that there are things we can sometimes do to improve that, make sense to me.
I would be very pleased to see more effective research done and published about how to do this well.

Neither Bernard nor Beauchamp nor Peat denied that viruses exist and cause trouble. Until everyone in the world has a way to optimise their terrain, many people will be susceptible to viruses and bacteria. There's a lot we don't know yet about that, and a lot that is very difficult to do even when we understand it because pollution is becoming so ubiquitous, and society is largely organised on other priorities than the health of people and environment.
Even if we were all doing everything right, pathogens can and do evolve.

 

[JDreamer]

This is assuming the person buys at the bottom, loses a little bit and then sell. Yes they are still in the green.

401ks dollar cost average. So this is wealth transfer, as time went on the paper asset was bid up now the person is holding on to an asset with 2016 level prices, in defacto they had errased the last 4 years of gain, while the people. Sharks and Banks sold at the top and skimmed off the last 4 years of gains.

Dude I don't know who I am dealing with nor do I feel like trying to explain these things to a Prole over the internet.

That's a pretty dense statement to believe all banks/sharks sold at the top.