If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
p.s. If your position is that hundreds, if not thousands, of scientists and physicians have been bullied by Big Pharma into being afraid to acknowledge Ivermectin as a miraculous treatment for covid, then your position is ludicrous.
Peter, let me explain why Sid's position on the abilty of Big Pharma is not ludicrous.
This is what I have often seen in my day to day work over the last several years:
Big Pharma sponsors self fulfilling prophecies as 'clinical trials', i.e they compare a group receiving more drugs for more patients for a longer duration to a group receiving nothing (instead of comparing it to a group receiving minimal drugs targeted at selcted patients, till they work (which is usually a short duration). They then have opinion leaders (who are also their paid consultants) go around advocating this success of more drugs for more people for longer durations (hiding the fact that the right question was never asked in the clinical trials), with the audience often being at a posh restaurant busy enjoying a delicious dinner and just putting down the fork and knife momentarily to clap when they hear the opinion leaders say 'this should be practice changing for the welfare of our patients!' Then these same opinion leaders, who are also 'guideline developers', carve the pharma-favoring practice in stone by publishing their guidelines, which is all what many physicians read to help them keep up with the latest developments in practice, and save them from 'malpractice lawsuits'....
Get it? Doctors are as good as any person in the community, but just like many theologicians have mesmerized all the good people in our communities for centuries, so has big pharma mesmerized doctors...
New Canadian two-dose vaccine Covifenz approved. The vaccine's active ingredients consist of particles from plants that “mimic the spike protein of the virus that causes COVID-19.” without containing any of its genetic material - “which makes the person's immune system able to recognize the particles without causing infection.” But not approved for seniors or children.
Hi Dilip. I do have some comments when I get a few moments. Pending that, just want to say thank you for the book you recommended, The Myth of Capitalism. Really enjoyed it; thought-provoking!
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
New Canadian two-dose vaccine Covifenz approved. The vaccine's active ingredients consist of particles from plants that “mimic the spike protein of the virus that causes COVID-19.” without containing any of its genetic material - “which makes the person's immune system able to recognize the particles without causing infection.” But not approved for seniors or children.
Interesting! Good to see tech starting to get a grip on COVID.
Covifenz (love the names of these drugs) clinical trials suggested the vaccine - a two-dose series administered on a 21-day interval - was 71 per cent effective in protecting against COVID-19 infection one week after the second dose authorized for use in people aged 18 to 64,
Scientists released a pair of extensive studies on Saturday that point to a market in Wuhan, China, as the origin of the coronavirus pandemic. The two reports, totaling about 150 pages, have not yet been published in a scientific journal.
The researchers analyzed data from a range of sources to look for clues to how the pandemic arose. They concluded that the coronavirus was present in live mammals sold in the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in late 2019. The research suggests that the virus very likely twice spilled over into people working or shopping at the market. The researchers said they found no support for an alternate hypothesis that the coronavirus escaped from a lab in Wuhan.
Scientists released a pair of extensive studies on Saturday that point to a market in Wuhan, China, as the origin of the coronavirus pandemic. The two reports, totaling about 150 pages, have not yet been published in a scientific journal.
The researchers analyzed data from a range of sources to look for clues to how the pandemic arose. They concluded that the coronavirus was present in live mammals sold in the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in late 2019. The research suggests that the virus very likely twice spilled over into people working or shopping at the market. The researchers said they found no support for an alternate hypothesis that the coronavirus escaped from a lab in Wuhan.
The data utilized by your scumbag source (seriously, Sid, The Daily Exposé is the best you've got???) covers one week. In this particular situation (a 2 year pandemic), how relevant are conclusions based on one week of data? Just in case you're thinking of responding with one of your trademark abusive blasts, this is a legitimate question. If you're going to post The Daily Exposé's analysis then people will of course assume that you're doing so because you think it's somehow supportive of your overall position. If that is the case then you should be able to give a coherent answer to my question.
Another question: if approx. 80% of Canadians are fully vaccinated (2 doses or more), and if for the sake of argument we say that vaccines offer no protection, then why do the data suggest that the death rate for the unvaccinated is higher than their proportion of the data population (50% higher)?
"We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office." - Aesop
"Only the dead have seen the end of war." - Plato
"If once a man indulges himself in murder, very soon he comes to think little of robbing; and from robbing he comes next to drinking and Sabbath-breaking, and from that to incivility and procrastination." - Thomas De Quincey
Why the inflammatory language Peter? This so called "scumbag source "always has direct posted government data to back up its position. The real "scumbag" source is MSM that has suppressed the truth about early interventions and parrot the pharma narrative of vaccines being the only solutution. MSM always pontificate together with talking head Dr's that have never successfully treated a patient. As for your question, the vaccine's effectiveness wears off very quickly hence the most recent week is far more relevant than 6 months ago when few were vaccinated and they had not yet seen mutants replace the original virus they were designed for. The point of the article is that data has to be ferreted out as the pharma does not like that coming out.
The answer to your second question is simple, the unvaccinated population keeps shrinking as they are forced to get vaccinated with threat of job loss etc. Hence as you shrink the population more and more of vaaccinated the proportion becomes greater. The actual risk of them contracting the disease is a separate issue unrelated to a shrinking population in that cohort. We already covered that.
Have you read Brian Peckfords article on his website yet about the Trusted News Initiative? You said you would but based on your comments here I doubt it.
Tweet
Comment