I just told you. You inhaled clouds of snot that were fresh enough that the virus hadn't died yet.
Discussion
Where did that person’s snot get the virus?
From another person's snot. So it goes with the virus mutating all along the way and those mutations are where new viruses come from.
It is no different than saying where did the first human in NYC come from? Or any other larger living thing and place. Slow genetic mutation and travel from a prior living thing all the way back to the first replicator. TLDR, evolution applies at both scales. It actually started on those tiny things and then created bigger ones.
So you’re saying that someone is always carrying a virus all the time even if they’re not sick?
No, but with 7 billion of us someone is always sick somewhere.
Okay so someone somewhere will be sick and then it spreads to everyone. Why doesn’t everyone get sick?
We’re going in circles again. Not everyone gets sick because there are certain factors and conditions that need to be in place. So if the presence of a virus alone cannot be established to create a cause and effect relationship. Then it shouldn’t be considered the cause of illness. It should be those factors and conditions that you talked about like stress, fatigue, and those other things you mentioned.
Ethics aside, if I wanted to make someone sick then I would compromise those factors. I wouldn’t just expose them to the virus. This actually would make more sense because I’ve been told that you are constantly fighting off viruses and bacteria all the time. That they are everywhere.
But again, the variability in the effectiveness of the immune system is already part of contagion theory.
I need a spark and a fuel to make a fire. Both.
Sparks happen in confined spaces with no fuel and no fire happens all the time. Flammable things sit around not catching fire all the time. I'm posting this sitting on a wooden chair.
Sometimes sparks are big or small (virus exposure level, think passing a stranger on the street vs making out with someone) and sometimes they land on fire bricks or gasoline (a strong or weak immune system)
No one who understands contagion theory would argue that the immune system response doesn't vary and massively effect your chances of getting sick.
You are focused entirely on the flammability. I'm not denying that the flammability matters. I'm saying that the can of gasoline in my garage year round for my mower proves that the spark is important too.
We’ve drifted so far past the initial topic of discussion. I’m going to bring it back to the beginning. I asked for a double blind placebo controlled comparative study that shows vaccinated individuals have better health outcomes than unvaccinated individuals. This doesn’t exist. But this is the gold standard in scientific research. Without this, how can one truly attribute causality? You can’t.
You argued about it being unethical to expose people to a virus because it endangers them. But you’ve made this claim without evidence. It hasn’t been established with true science that viruses cause illness. So you’re starting with a presumption that virus causes disease and then you start finding solutions for an unproven premise.
So now they put a vaccine in people. But the vaccine doesn’t impact the other factors we talked about like stress and your immune system. And since viruses and bacteria are everywhere and have been found in our bodies even when healthy, the real causal factors of illness should be those factors like your immune system. Instead of giving vaccines, maybe they should be giving immune boosters.
And my last question, why haven’t they done a comparative study on vaccinated and unvaccinated populations? Just look at the health outcomes. Do they get sick more often? Do they have more health problems? It’s not even an experiment, we just want to know who is generally healthier. We know that exercise is good for you because people who exercise generally have better health outcomes.
A lot of this I already tried to answer as we went.
I will say I looked for an all cause mortality comparison. I can't find it. Disappointing. Search results are all about the covid vaccine and I already said I won't piss on that electric fence.
The best I can do is point to a rise in global life expectancy after the invention of vaccines. A lot of other things changed so I won't declare that to be a final answer. I'm here to share truth backed with real evidence not just say what I think will win the argument for my side.
I think a lot of your misunderstanding comes from wanting a binary yes or no answer to things. Science simply doesn't work that way. Each bit of scientific knowledge has a little imaginary probability attached to it. Higher or lower probability based on the quality of reseach and number of studies that align with that fact.
We're always building that body of knowledge and that means that probability for each "fact" MIPis always changing. If you don't have an intuitive sense that those probabilities are there and what they are for different current scientific beliefs it is rough. You'll never understand why sometimes a challenge to existing science is met with a laugh and sometimes it gets a maybe.
If you do grasp that you can see why I say sure the data isn't gold standard but this model has more data showing how it aligns accurately with observation than any other model for this thing, so we let it ride here.
Once upon a time there was a visualization of this concept rating various supplements by meta analysis of existing studies. 1 axis showed confidence rating of the average study and bubble size showed how many studies there were. I can't find it now but the mental model stuck with me. Also holy shit take Creatine for sure no excuses no other supplement was even close.
I take creatine every day. I’m not sure if I should be taking more than 5 grams though.
Here’s one last thing I’ll post from another study someone shared about this topic. This study mentioned that a majority of the research found a large variance of 0-80%. Maybe I’m not understanding exactly what that means but my initial reaction is to question the reliability of most research findings. Seems like a giant mess to navigate research in general.
nostr:note1ms3cvcylymmr4chr88kgm6ean7wpmxsg7l77dvc6h3u5heql8e6qzcgxwg
Depends on your size and activity level. There is a chart somewhere that shows dose by weight. For men 10g daily is around 220 to 240lbs.
I’m not that big I’ll stick with 5 grams for now
3 times a day. No days off. No pain no gain.
https://video.nostr.build/456d03ebee99e38230a4f8002afdf58abfcaee3a90ba24adc6704dc858fad919.mp4
Maybe you aren't getting your mantras right.
On that note. Time for my fat ass to do some cardio.
You might find this interesting 🤭
I know. I don't actually do cardio to lose weight. I just say stupid things for a laugh.
Low intensity steady state cardio is good for helping your body transition back into a relaxed state. I try to do some every day, just a walk is fine. I can see the difference in my heart statistics in my tracker with only a couple days doing it or skipping it.
The opposing, sort of, view.
Endurance training definitely has its benefits
Do you believe in things like that? Been trying to learn about it and keep an open mind but fuck it just seems so illogical
Sort of but not really.
I like to deadlift to Simon Says by Pharoahe Monch. It changes my mindset that make it easier for me to dig deeper.
Were not talking a huge difference. But in the realm where if you think you can you can and if you think you can't you can't I think it can make it so you can.
That’s kinda where I am right now
If you study a person's snot - and keep the snot at body temperature, humidity, etc - you should be able to find the full virus.
You can. It is just easier if you grow it up to a billion particles instead of the thousand you start with. They were found first, then the process of growing them in cultures to make them easier to find was devised.