If that will hold you back to look after your health, then there are easier choices to make a suicide.
Unlike in your country, my country is not providing free medical help, so no matter where you are looking for it - with private doctor or goverment subsided(that you still have to pay for, unless you are a citizen of different EU country), you still have to pay money to receive medical services.
That is a very good point and I wonder why I have not thought about that. Though I always looked on this as a prediction tool - not for classifying things, as for that I had my own observations.
I would think, that modern astrology is cultural thing, where people self-condition themselves in believing in some of the things, however I can't think of many similarities between me and other people, that would be as the same that I am sharing with my parents(and link to parents is the main in defining my characteristics, even when I do not like that link), so meh.
>>However, I haven’t heard a remotely plausible explanation for the position of celestial objects at the moment of birth having an impact on personality traits.
Well, to be fair Astrology is where IT started and highest Mathematics were involved in Babylonia(my username here is just a mere coincidence). Observable celestial movements here can be regarded as a natural computer of Solar system scale. How that natural computer is used is a different matter.
I'm not really into Astrology(which is mother of Astronomy, btw), but I had interest about this topic... anyway, you must wonder how different is this approach of predicting things in Universe compared to modern AI, that makes predictions from assembled data. If the modern science is regarding a question if mere existence of this world can be compared to hologram, how it is different from observing some parts of hologram to make predictions about smaller parts of it, where humans are living on Earth, that is part of observable Solar system, where other Solar objects affects it and differently on each point of surface?
Besides, this looks like a more reliable mechanism in predicting future(at least for agricultural events), than looking into coffee mug after drinking a coffee or throwing bones...
PS. Despite common misconception, both Western and Chinese astrology take high value on hour of birth - not year. Western astrology can't plot precise charts without knowing time of birth and secret(primary) animal sign of a person in Chinese astrology is based on hour as well.
2019 is really too late for prediction. I was wondering about all the prophets of future and astrology that I was following and there was no one that predicted covid and lockdowns. The closest to predicting covid, lockdowns and other things that I had read were from conspiracy theorists.
I decided to get a bit further and get Sailfish(main reason was because of somewhat closest Nokia succession - the other choices were Pure OS, Ubuntu) compatible phone, because Android Google Play has the same draconic % as Apple store. Though, to be fair there is still a possibility to install apps without using Google Play, but I am not happy, that there are some apps I do not use and they stay in memory and can't be removed permanently.
Also, seems that Windows 10 will go bye bye in 2022 as well and have to decide on which Linux(mandrake seems more user friedly than plain Arch), because W10 disrupts my order of things by consistently rebooting(probably for some small updates) or updating machine during the night, when instead of open apps as I have left them, I have clean log in screen in the morning. Ah, and not going to W11 - not only because of spying, but because I do not wish to spend money for new hardware specifically to Windows, if my old hardware has not been maxed out - in regards to memory.
Well, health is more valuable than any money. But I would not think, that maintaining health and knowledge is cheap. it sure is cheaper than being stupid and ruining lives of other people.
Next gen medicine requires DNA sequencing to understand what you have to look out for and what you actually do not need to care about. Since governments are lagging behind in this(though to be fair, that is planned eventually in some uncertain future date), it is up to you to do DNA sequencing today. Get your DNA sequenced and look on results - maybe you need to worry about something else and not covid.
My thinking is that 90% of people in general DO NOT NEED TO WORRY ABOUT COVID. Actually, worrying about covid and feeling uncertain is making people more stressful and that damages immunity. So, essentially, people who are making other people fear about covid and are INSISTING that everyone should be vaccinated are responsible for some % of the deaths from covid and from other diseases, because their immunity has been damaged from too much stress. Just stap stressing yourself and others.
The solution to this is very simple. If you want someone to be held accountable, you have to sue this person. Good luck in suing someone who is vaccinated and to be fair, I can't see this go well against someone who is not vaccinated. Everything has to be according to the law and law so far restricts someone who knowingly (vaccinated or not!)with covid symptoms contacted others, but can not held accountable for someone who had covid and did not thought of those symptoms as covid related.
Even if it is not clear, from reading about covid cases I would think, that humans are not the only ones who could transfer covid to other humans, but also animals - including birds, might be able to do so as well. There is a conflicting idea, that covid HAS TO JUMP ACROSS SPECIES, which means that it should mutate... well, we do not know if current mutations are results of that, but certainly there is no need to mutate for a covid to infect animal and then the same strain infects human. So, if that is the case(and I am 90% sure, that it might be so), human vaccination(and I am refering here to some vaccine, that actually works in fighting covid, not boosting immunity to fight covid) against covid might not be enough. So, are you going to blame your pet, where you can't get a vaccine for him?
Looking on your improper usage of word perfect, that reminds me, that my English is not as native and precise. But I actually meant, that:
NONE of vaccination pushers can(because they have no idea how to do that) explain deaths among people who had vaccines. And this was written in relation to garbage data that @op posted.
>>>This is neither unexpected nor reason to think vaccines are not a good idea.
No, I have exactly the opposite look on this and my opinion is that mass vaccination (of covid) is a terrible idea - not as much idea per se, but the way how it is executed. Because it is never a good idea, when people are fooled and promised a cure of covid, if that is not what is going to happen. We are seeing globally in different countries rise of covid cases, regardless if they have full or partial vactination statuss. So far there is better situation only where there has been no vaccination, as it might sound too cynical, but old and vulnerable have died(and they are dying when vaccinated anyway) and healthy and survivors have acquired long lasting covid immunity, that at this point is better than what vaccinated people have.
As for mentioning Nirvana fallacy, this really explains what vaccination pushers are doing, because nothing of what has been done with covid situation is realistic. Dude, when my fellow countrymen were under lockdown, and were fined, because they went out of their house and were outside having a smoke alone in their own property(!), some of the bureaucrats(or as some call them - guest workers, because they are working for EU and not for their country) were flying to Switzerland to buy watch(and they were not fined for nonessential flight!!!) and this is the way, how spread of covid was happening, getting across the borders new mutations of covid. Vaccination against this type of behavior is impossible. Be real - existing vaccines are already less efficient against covid delta and new variants, than those who has gained natural immunity, that has been acquired by recovering from covid.
IT people are very specific in their terms and biology and medicine terms are not as specific. I feel, that this is the main issue when talking about medicine, that terms are different. Doctors are not gods, they can't save everyone - essentially you should avoid ANY situation, where you are dependant on doctor(besides, they make err themselves, too and can kill completelly healthy person with their decisions - stuff just happens...) and that is the job of your immunity. Your overall immunity is more complicated, than antibodies against covid and where covid vaccination was meant to be quick and dirty and deal with covid quickly(before it starts to mutate) - that did not happen.
Good immunity has main jobs:
1. repel and quickly eliminate invaders(which is general common understanding of what immunity means)
2. realize, when the battle is lost and SURRENDER AND/OR COEXIST with infection and hope, that infection is as "sensible" and does not kill host
Natural immunity in medicine does not mean, that organism can't be infected, but how it can deal with infection AND at the same time not to cause organism to die.
So, with great immunity YOU CAN STILL GET INFECTED AND SPREAD INFECTION!!! This is what vaccination pushers don't understand.
Besides, the natural IMMUNITY here IS NOT A CONCERN OF OTHERS and should not be, but only about host organism. In the small world of genes(as a part of immunity) and viruses there simply is no understanding of the outside world and other hosts.
We all are unique - your immunity will differ from immunity of other people in an unique way. There is no way to make them all the same. That is the main mechanism of survival, where working immunity is bare minimum to survive and those who does not have it are meant to die. When you get older, your immunity gets weaker. This is the way.
Since this data does not speak for itself, here is additional data:
Czech republic has ~60% vaccination rate.
I assume, that how it is with others 99% of deaths are 60+, 90% 65-80+ in both vaccinated and unvaccinated categories.
The vaccination status ends 3-6 months after shot, unless you get a booster shot. Obviously, that booster shot also has term, when it is considered to be vaccinated, so potentially you have to get unlimited boooster shots, unless covid ends or you die.
Also, covid among vaccinated in % provides less people needed to be treated, so overall, where people that had vaccine boosts, had greater % share, that had to be put on ICU. Btw, there is NO DIFFERENCE ON SURVIVAL RATE of people who are put on ICU - the chance of survival for both vaccinated and unvaccinated in my home country was ~60%.
IMO, all of the data in regards to covid should also show how well was their immunity and that is lacking in ALL charts. My gut feeling, is that mostly people who have no wish getting vaccines have some other health issues already - for ecample I have no wish to get vaccination and go through regular complications(with probability that it might cause shock reactions), because I have some other medical issues that I have to deal with. So, if the stupid idea is that miracle cure of vaccine is going to solve all health issues, well - in UK that is not working at all. People who are vaccinated are still dying.
Here is the MAIN ISSUE that I have with such data, that has been posted from all the sources everywhere:
NONE OF THESE EXPLAIN DEATHS OF FULLY VACCINATED PEOPLE(to be fair, even partly vaccinated people should be under miracle cure of vaccine...) So far NONE of vaccination pushers can explain deaths among people who had vaccines. Btw, in regions, where vaccination has been 100%, right now there has been no SLOWING DOWN of deaths from covid and covid cases, but they are going up. It's some kind of a religion, where zombifioed people are pushing for full vaccination and you sure can't shatter that faith in vaccines, even if VACCINATED PEOPLE ARE DYING!
So far there ONLY seems to be a greater coleration in regards to seasons in year, than vaccination statuss. There has been publications in regards that, but I would like to see ONE ackkkktual proof(without using lingo with - maybe, perhaps, possibly) that vaccination is improving immunity aginst covid for those people, that have strong immunity AND DO NOT NEED VACCINATION and for those people, who have weak immunity, and where vaccination is giving antibody development with much much lower levels(below average) - starting from 10% up to 0% and they fall very flat in very quick time after vaccination shot.
This narrative has nothing to do with reality, because vaccinated people spread covid, too.
The common sense so far has been, that infectious(of any infections - not only covid, which is the worst of the inffection type - as it is airborne infection) people should not walk around and stay at home until they get through their infection. With covid, the issue is that it is not causing any symptoms in most cases and it can stay in organism for months - also without any symptoms. So, esentially any covid infected - vaccinated or not should avoid other people for ~1year, to be really sure that covid is gone.
Also, let's look on this from different perspective - people that has to be protected from covid are minority - ~10% at max. Among them there are higher chance that they will die from complications just from vaccines, so you might think, that by getting vaccine you might be protecting others, but I assure you - the best help that you can do is by not contacting other people, especially vulnerable people. So far, the main narrative is that vaccination helps and they happily go around and infect others - even with new strains... so, the end result is equally stupid.
The modern issue is that most of experts are with very narrow expertise, which is not carrying that great weight as you might think and such expertise also doesn't mean that much in responsibilities.
My mother at 14 after a car accident was considered as lost cause and by opinion of expert she should be dead, but survived only because her relative with much less medical expertise believed in second opinion and got her in different hospital. Sometimes, these stupid parroted ideas about expert opinions can only be proven wrong by personal experience only. But quite many people do not learn from their own mistakes, so, meh - there is no cure for stupid people, who can't think by themselves.
PS Every covid mutation so far has put scientists on alert...
The first one I was working might have been Noritsu, the next one was Fuji photo processing machine. They both had to use at least 3 different chemical containers and photo paper rolls - each for different sizes(and materials - gloss, matt, silk) of photos, so basically if you were making one size of pictures(and same material), you had to do that type of photos first and then swap to other type of paper. Though, some of the swaps had to be done earlier, because of promise for customers to have their pictures in ~1h done.
I think, that people downvoted this because 1990 was not really a time when everyone took color pictures, but more like in late 90s, when photo cameras became cheap and widely available and there was also available reasonably cheap service to develop films and photos in short time on automated machines. So, unless you were able to purchase very expensive equipment, you could not have good color photos to care for what B&W could get you, unless you were paying for professional services.
In 1998(or maybe even 1999) I was working on the first and latest Japanese machines that had digital color screen(where you could adjust colors and crop photos), that was bought from Japanese company as one of the earliest in Europe and that was all the rage, when Kodak was killed off because of them, because of FUJI. In most of the 1990s everyone were making photographies on machines with negative screen(sometimes not even zoomed film frame) - they could not see photos the way they would be before they were printed out. The final peak of color photographies on film coincided when digital cameras started to become "bearable". So, looking on my album, it is 2003(Canon Power Shot A70, which came out in 2003), when I had first digital photos(and their quality IMO were getting close to what you could get from film camera), so actually that company that bought that expensive automatic color photo printer had ~5 years to operate it...
Though, it was a crapy job - I was making on average 3000 photos per day(if it was a late shift, it was going into very late night, so max 12h) in summer and had a junior salary... with that quality of pictures(cropped and color adjustments) I was giving out with that machine, what other operators did not care that much.
So, more or less good color photographies, that were comparable to B&W were only couple of years before first digital cameras appeared(so more like - late 1990s), so it could not be possible, that in 1990 everyone was using color photos. 1990ies were becoming very global very quickly, but at that time, if in Japan everyone had color photos, it did not apply for everyone else outside of Japan for 1-2 years, because market had to catch up(and if you were able to buy equipment and a film, it did not mean, that you were able to develop your film and make photos, if your local photo shop was not able do those). US maybe had shorter time, but by late 1990s it still had a gap what you could get in Japan and what was available in US and here in Europe these things appeared as last.
Unless there is a mix-up about Polaroids, that "everyone used" according to MTV - have not owned them, because they were not cheap and most probably their paper was not on cheap side as well.
People rarely has photo nowadays, because they have phone. So, the whole era of things has gone - that includes calculators, alarms, radios and music players.
Mobile phones killed them all.
They are not digital photos, but from films. Color films require 4 layers for colors. B&W has only one metalic silver layer and because there are no colors, it can be more granulated. I think, that silver crystals were even smaller than what was from color layer crystals, so B&W films had not 4x times more silver "pixels" but even more, compared to what color films had, hence the reason why those color pictures look so blury, compared to so good B&W pictures.
Not to mention, that B&W films and pictures with very good results could develop every amateur and during the development process add various effects - sepia is one of them, but you could get blue tint by mixing some other chemicals.
Exactly, only op does not account, that some Russian[insert the one that at that point is at lowest development capability] module on joining would create space colony quakes and add other hazards... maybe even huge hole in the structure.
But looking on global picture and far in future with satellite internet - that is easily solvable, but technical issues on running those games in Stadia are least things that people are concerned about.
My personal preferences is owning a game library, because not always I play games, that require co-op or connection, but if the future is that you are opening browser and playing game from vast library of games on TV, for wich you pay subscription fee, then Stadia is on the right track. Actually, Stadia would be only one of many services and most probably that would be combined with Microsoft gaming. Looking in retrospect, most of the things are logical from what Microsoft was doing, but the question to me is always about if this is something I want as well. Looking on how automatic updates behaves on my Windows 10, it seems that 2022 is the year, I am abandoning Windows. And Stadia here is least thing I am worried about, because I don't.
Hey, English is not my native language and "getting off the rails" here was meant, that you are leading yourself astray and falling off the cliff. I mean you are losing track of this debate that smoke is causing a cancer.
But to be fair, I can't see sense of following other logic of yours, because I recently lost a relative to a cancer and there was absolutelly nothing to blame for, except that she got into toxic environment, which killed her.
Also, if we come to that - did you know, that in UK there were cases, that spouse was poisoned by chemicals, that causes cancer - are you aware that there are thousands of medical drugs, that has side effect that might cause cancer? How are you going to explain those with your logic? So, apparently person is developing a disease, and in process of treating that disease, person develops a cancer... good luck in explaining that with behavioral impact, like you are trying to do on fixating on HPV, which is only one of thousands viruses that can potentially damage cells and eventually damage cell programming and cause a cancer.
HPV is causing deformations of human cells. That is basically definition of what cancer does, only cancer is caused by wrong cell service programming itself - not by viruses. HPV itself can't cause cancer upon entering human body - there has to be development of mutated cell, that starts to spread cancer. If you think, that HPV causes behaviour, well... hard luck, you can end up by blaming your parents.
Give your kids a vaccine against herpes and HPV and stap worrying about something you can't affect and reading those articles is not going to help, knowing that (constant)stress also causes cancer. Not intended to be rude, but women are more affected by hormones and no sex also can cause cancer. You don't have to be smoker and can eat healthy to get cancer nowadays, but to prevent degradation of cell programming is responsibility of genes.
No, you are getting off the rails here - to prove that cancer causes smoking you have to provide real life example of a non smoker, where after getting cancer, a patient starts to smoke. That patient might be some kind of exception, but this does not work for cancer patients at all. So, cancer akkktually does not cause smoking and there is no way to prove that, unless you are thinking of developing mutation of cancer that carries some mutagen, that as a side effect also causes patients to start smoking, but let's be real...
And it is not smoking that causes cancer, but exposure to chemicals, that causes cancer. And only if that exposure is critical. For the same reason you are able to take x-rays, but not often. So if you are smoking peace pipe ceremonially once per occassion - this is not going to cause you a cancer.
Unlike in your country, my country is not providing free medical help, so no matter where you are looking for it - with private doctor or goverment subsided(that you still have to pay for, unless you are a citizen of different EU country), you still have to pay money to receive medical services.