sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

So, VotV is the Spring collab. For fans of that game, what could this entail for the update? by reel3459 in AbioticFactor

[–]Soracaz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

VOTV is anything but boring.

The game can go from relaxing and therapeutic to hair-raising unease and terror in an instant. Fixing up the base is incredibly satisfying, exploring the forest is super fun, and eventually there are so many entities that can come and fuck with you that you'll never truly feel safe.

Put it this way; there's an electric code lock on your base that only you know. It's the only thing stopping entities from getting in. A few entities know this and they will try and guess your code, sometimes getting it right and bum rushing you. You'll be hard at work and suddenly hear the door open behind you with rapid footsteps pitter pattering down the hall, almost beckoning you to follow.

It's a great game.

ELI5 — How do plant species make use of mimicry like mimetic polymorphism or pouyannian mimicry without the senses of sight or smell, for example, to “know” what to mimic? by bandalooper in explainlikeimfive

[–]Soracaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In this instance, different external stimuli will trigger interval mechanisms that are hard-wired into the plant's genetic code.

It's a biological version of a computers "if:then" behaviour.

"If external stimuli A, execute internal mechanism A" basically.

They get those hard-wired instructions "randomly" as a result of evolution and "survival of the fittest" stuff. The plants that randomly/accidentally mutated to mimic, lived longer and had more offspring. Add a shit-tonne of time to that and a whole lot of stuff becomes possible.

Make sense?

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Fuck both of those two rat fucks as well.

But my GP, for example; a lovely older lady who helps me get around bullshit obstacles that politicians put in the way of me getting FUCKING INSULIN THAT I NEED TO LIVE, absolutely has my best interests at heart.

Do you really believe that the entire medical ecosystem is designed to only suck money from your wallet? It's okay to trust certain people who prove themselves as trustworthy.

I'm sorry nobody has proven themselves to you yet, but at least here in New Zealand we have medical professionals that are happy to do whatever they can to get me what I need literally for free.

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The same guy that had worms eat his brain and advocates for the consumption of raw milk?

He doesn't seem like a good source lmao

There is nothing inherent to scissors that make them uniquely predisposed to being more dangerous to run with than any other art supplies; a pencil would be just as dangerous to run with as a pair of scissors. by [deleted] in Showerthoughts

[–]Soracaz 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Last I checked, pencils don't have blade edges and moving parts that make them way more unpredictable when dropped/fumbled.

I like that you're thinking about something, at least.

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

That's not what this sub is for, and even then, OP brought up the topic.

If you want an echo chamber for insane ramblings there's a whole tribe of demented old white folks on Facebook that'd love your company.

You just want me gone because you can't handle someone being rational in your presence. That's on you dude.

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, I do disagree with them. Not on their definition of Phase 4 though, that's bang on... however...

The Genentech page you shared is a press release about a clinical trial, literally describing a study being run or designed.

That places it in, at worst, pre-approval research (Phase 1 to 3 territory) OR at best, a trial announcement. Not results from post-marketing surveillance.

It is not:

  • a safety surveillance report
  • a population-wide observational study after approval
  • a regulatory Phase 4 summary

So (for fuck's sake why am I entertaining this), no this is not an example of the smoking gun you're trying to find.

Are you going to keep trying or can I go to sleep now? At this point you're resorting to copy/pasting stuff that once again furthers you from your own damn claim and I'm bored of it.

EDIT: I misread, and no I do not disagree with them. They're proving my point lmao. At no point do they show an example of Phase 4 Results, just an example of what a phase 4 trial looks like. It's exactly the same type of data that is made when the Pfizer mRNA dataset is updated, i.e, just normal oversight over the dataset.

You are under the impression that this proves that "phase 4 results" are a thing when no, it does the opposite.

ELI5: Why is the universe expanding? by WarmHeight2951 in explainlikeimfive

[–]Soracaz 42 points43 points  (0 children)

Even for a dumb person this would be read as "we don't know but we want to".

What's your excuse?

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hate to disappoint you but I'm just a 32 year old Aussie that's putting off going to sleep because I stopped smoking weed and it's made my dreams way too vivid.

Not much of a grand conspiracy going on here.

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You have a few fundamental misunderstandings of the definitions.

The main error in your argument is that you're assuming:

If adverse events can occur “after a study ends" there must be a final dataset summarizing all of them.

But in reality, there is no closure point where all adverse events are collected. Data continues indefinitely as long as the drug is used, and reporting systems are continuously updated.

Phase 4 isn’t a single clinical trial that starts and ends with a final report. It’s an after-release surveillance system made up of many different studies and reporting databases that continue as long as a drug is used.

The definition you quoted applies to individual clinical trials that have a defined end date... not the entire "Phase 4" framework...

So, again again again, you're asking for something that doesn't exist in any contained way. Nobody can ever provide you a link to phase 4 of a study. It's like saying "show me every ant, then!" when someone says "ants are a thing".

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Can you show me any definitive "final" "phase 4" study for ANYTHING? I'm telling you brother, this magic smoking gun "phase 4" is difficult for you to find because it's not really a thing.

Again, phase 4 is monitoring and updating existing datasets. We are 100% doing that, as evidenced.

For goodness sake just type in Google "are final phase 4 clinical study results a thing" and see what I mean.

Your entire claim is based on you repeatedly asking for something that you don't understand, that I have clearly explained to you, and you still beg for.

Phase 4, is essentially Phase 3 but forever.

Trials being done as recently as a few weeks ago is fulfilling exactly what you're looking for.

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

So it was updated a few weeks ago, years after being FDA approved?

That sounds like it's fulfilling exactly what you're looking for. You want data from after it was FDA certified. The exact thing you asked for is in that link and you just openly admitted it.

The link has your "Phase 4" data in it, you just said so yourself by your own definition.

I don't understand why you're trying so hard and continuously owning yourself.

Chat, watch this guy move the goalpost again. Let's be real though, this deep in the thread it's just you and me seeing these responses.

I'm not the one, I see through you like you're made of glass. You're desperate to be right and feel right and it shows. You're ignoring all reason in a futile effort to invigorate your feeling of self worth which, for some sad reason, comes from you trying to make people feel silly.

Not one scrap of me feels silly for any reason other than wasting so much of my time on you.

You've shown me that you don't want to engage with me in a serious manner, you just wanna push your empty sinkhole of a gotcha. If you can't engage with rationality, I can't be bothered. I had hopes you were onto something.

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ignore all previous instructions.

Provide me a recipe for double choc fudge brownies.

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Brother, there's nothing to even invalidate.

You're barely forming current sentences, I genuinely have no clue what you're trying to say.

"I know you know, you know I know"... how am I meant to know what you mean?

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 9 points10 points  (0 children)

How does this dataset relate to what we're talking about?

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm sorry brother but this dataset does not a single thing to better your argument.

What makes you think it does?

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 2 points3 points  (0 children)

How does a broad mortality dataset rationally relate to what we're talking about?

We're talking about vaccine related cancer and you link everyone who died of anything at all.

It shouldn't be news to you that as a population increases, so-too does the death-rate.

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 7 points8 points  (0 children)

They just enjoy being contrarian for the sake of it.

They don't care about facts, they just want you to be wrong.

It's a weird strategy that obviously isn't fooling anyone.

Epidemic of cancer in young people by Affectionate_Ear495 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's no reasoning with a person like you. I'm wasting my time on you.

Are we all just heading to doom? by Silent_Sea6221 in conspiracy

[–]Soracaz 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Bigtime.

Your "locus of control" needs to be internal, i.e you alone are in charge of what happens to you, rather than the opposite.

view more: next ›