Quote from Curbina

The metaphor is good in the sense that when you depend on sun, wind or even hydro power you lack much more control than when you have a fueled power source. Barring mechanical failures (which can always be minimized with proper maintenance) you have much more control (at least in a short term) when you depend on fuels.

That is incorrect. Modern weather prediction is now so good, the wind can be predicted a week in advance better than it could be a day in advance in the 1990s. For that reason, you can now know ahead of time how much power a wind farm will produce, with considerable accuracy. You can schedule maintenance for days when there will not be much wind. Alternatively, when you know there will a lot of wind, you can schedule maintenance on a fossil fuel or a nuclear plant, knowing the wind farm will substitute for the lost power.

Furthermore, wind farms produce power in blocks of ~1 MW each (one tower). When you do maintenance, you take one tower out of service at a time. With a coal gas fired plant, you have to take hundreds of megawatts off line for several days. To refuel a nuclear plant, you have to take a gigawatt off line. Not only that, but nuclear plants sometimes go down with an emergency SCRAM event without notice. That is not often a dire or life-threatening event. It is usually caused by a plumbing problem, such as a storm at sea that causes kelp to clog up the inlet water cooling pipe. But it brings down the whole nuclear plant. Bang, 1 gigawatt gone. That never happens with a wind farm. It goes off a little at a time, in ways you can predict a week in advance. From that point of view, it is actually more reliable and predictable than fossil fuel or a nuke.

Quote from JedRothwell

Here is some good advice about the vaccine:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/0…ine-side-effects-faq.html

Is the Second Dose Bad? If I Feel OK, Is It Working? Can I Take Tylenol?

It's not exactly related . . . Okay, it isn't related at all . . . but now that we have answered those questions, you may have other questions about cicada brood X, now coming out of the ground. See:

https://www.washingtonpost.com…as-come-out-2021-brood-x/

Bonus question: Why do cicadas come out in prime numbers of years? Anyone??? (Answer: to avoid predators. Look it up.)

Quote from Toffoli

3,964 Dead 162,610 Injuries: European Database of Adverse Drug Reactions for COVID-19 “Vaccines”

This 100% pure, unadulterated bullshit. It is an outrageous lie, apparently intended to frighten people. I suppose in order to enhance the political power of this website, even at the cost of killing people. In short, this is evil. The correct number of people killed and seriously injured worldwide by the COVID-19 vaccines is: 0 (zero). That is what you expect from a modern vaccine.

Anyone who believes this garbage is an idiot. Anyone who posts it, spreading the lie, contributes to the destruction and misery these people want to spread. You are part of the anti-science death cult.

If even 100 people had been killed, or even 10, that would be headline news worldwide in every mainstream news source. There is no chance it would be covered up. Right-wing news sources in particular such as Fox News would jump on it, because they have been fighting against the vaccine and other public health measures from the start. Some of their top talent such as Tucker Carlson are starring members of the death cult. Carlson has promoted the lie that the vaccine caused deaths, but the rest of Fox has not gone along. Even Trump recommended that people get the vaccine.

See:

https://www.vanityfair.com/new…id-vaccine-story-straight

Here is some good advice about the vaccine:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/0…ine-side-effects-faq.html

Is the Second Dose Bad? If I Feel OK, Is It Working? Can I Take Tylenol?

The most common questions about vaccination side effects, answered. . . .

Q: I’ve heard the Covid vaccine side effects, especially after the second dose, can be really bad. Should I be worried?

Short-lived side effects like fatigue, headache, muscle aches and fever are more common after the second dose of both the Pfizer-BioNTech and the Moderna vaccines, which each require two shots. (The Johnson & Johnson vaccine requires only a single shot.) Patients who experience unpleasant side effects after the second dose often describe feeling as if they have a bad flu and use phrases like “it flattened me” or “I was useless for two days.” . . .

Q: I didn’t have any side effects. Does that mean my immune system didn’t respond and the vaccine isn’t working?

Side effects get all the attention, but if you look at the data from vaccine clinical trials and the real world, you’ll see that many people don’t experience any side effects beyond a sore arm. . . .

Q: Will the vaccines work against the new variants that have emerged around the world?

The vaccines appear to be effective against a new variant that originated in Britain and is quickly becoming dominant in the United States. But some variants of the coronavirus, particularly one first identified in South Africa and one in Brazil, appear to be more adept at dodging antibodies in vaccinated people.

While that sounds worrisome, there’s reason to be hopeful. Vaccinated people exposed to a more resistant variant still appear to be protected against serious illness. . . .

. . . People who are vaccinated should still wear masks in public and comply with public health guidelines, but you shouldn’t live in fear of variants, said Dr. Peter J. Hotez, dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. “If you’re vaccinated, you should feel pretty confident about how protected you are,” said Dr. Hotez. “It’s unlikely you’ll ever go to a hospital or an I.C.U. with Covid-19. In time you’re going to see a recommendation for a booster.” . . .

15 million doses of the J&J vaccine were ruined accidentally. What a shame! There are bound to be setbacks in this kind of crash project . . .

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/0…-coronavirus-vaccine.html

Factory Mix-Up Ruins Up to 15 Million Vaccine Doses From Johnson & Johnson

A manufacturing subcontractor in Baltimore mixed ingredients from the coronavirus vaccines of Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca, delaying U.S. shipments of the “one-and-done” shot.

WASHINGTON — Workers at a plant in Baltimore manufacturing two coronavirus vaccines accidentally conflated the ingredients several weeks ago, contaminating up to 15 million doses of Johnson & Johnson’s vaccine and forcing regulators to delay authorization of the plant’s production lines.

The plant is run by Emergent BioSolutions, a manufacturing partner to both Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca, the British-Swedish company whose vaccine has yet to be authorized for use in the United States. Federal officials attributed the mistake to human error. . . .

Quote from Peter

They don't put masks on animals; they put them in cages connected with an air passage, which is either open or covered with a mask.) They do !!

That's hilarious. But I meant scientists do not put masks on animals when investigating how well masks work.

This is good stuff.

[I hate to nitpick. But, let me suggest you people work on your production values. You need to adjust the lighting and microphone. You need to move back from the microphone. A virtual background with a green screen might help. Montgomery Childs had the right equipment, lighting and delivery. I myself am no good at videos but my wife knows how to set this stuff up. We have a green screen that cost $12.49: https://www.amazon.com/gp/prod…yo_dt_b_search_asin_title]

Quote from Mark U

This study was referenced before in this thread, so it's odd you say it's not even slightly true.

From https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7010e3.htm

Your conclusion from this study, that masks "do not work" is wrong. For over 150 years every surgical doctor and nurse has used masks to reduce the transmission of bacteria and viral disease. There is absolute, positively, no question this works. Recent studies with human populations show that masks reduce the transmission of COVID-19. Animal studies have also shown this. (They don't put masks on animals; they put them in cages connected with an air passage, which is either open or covered with a mask.)

Quote from zorud

What is exactly the root cause for the deaths with Pfizer?

There have been no deaths with Pfizer. Any deaths that occurred were coincidental. When you vaccinate 327 million people, some of them are bound to die within a short time. There is no evidence for a causal connection.

Note that I am not making a "no true Scotsman" logical fallacy. That is, I am not disqualifying experts because they say that cold fusion does not exist. I am disqualifying people who make erroneous claims about cold fusion, and people who know nothing about it, such as those who say it was never replicated or no papers about the subject were ever published.

Quote from Fm1

Which experts, the ones that say you're nuts on cold fusion?

There are no experts who say I am nuts regarding cold fusion. There are no experts who doubt that cold fusion exists, or that the experiments are irrefutable proof that it produces heat, tritium and helium commensurate with the heat at the same ratio as D-D fusion (one path).

There are thousands of people who claim that cold fusion does not exist. They include the editors at Sci. Am., Nature, and many scientists, and anonymous idiots at Wikipedia. However, these people are not experts. They are not even close to being experts. Most of them have no knowledge of cold fusion. They have no idea what experiments have been done, what results were obtained, or what the results mean. Everything they say about it is wrong.

When you discuss experts you have to be careful to avoid a fallacious appeal to authority logical fallacy. That is to say, you have to avoid pointing to people who claim to be experts, or people you think are experts, but who are not experts. When you yourself are not an expert, and you cannot judge who knows what, this can be difficult. See:

http://nizkor.com/features/fal…/appeal-to-authority.html

Quote from Mark U

Way more! The CDC's own study reported that mandated mask wearing resulted in a reduction of mortality of roughly 1 percent per 20 days.

First, that is not even slightly true. Masks greatly reduce transmission and mortality. Second, if it were true, that would have saved 5,000 lives in the U.S., which is a lot.

Quote from Alan Smith

Which statement would pretty much invalidate a doctor's professional liability insurance if he/she went 'off piste' and something went wrong.

That would be a civil suit, not a criminal one. As I said, there are no criminal law prohibitions or regulations preventing off-label use of drugs.

I do not know much about lawsuits, but I expect that any doctor who uses a drug off-label would first have the patient sign many forms granting permission and absolving the doctor from any and all bad results. In the U.S. even when the doctor tells you to use some over-the-counter allergy medicine, they make you sign six different forms saying they take no responsibility and you can't sue them.

Furthermore, in the case of COVID-19, the government declared that malpractice liability is suspended and any drug can be used. All risks are assumed by the patient. This is an emergency provision for this disease only. They probably make the patient sign a dozen forms to back that up.

So, for those two reasons, I do not think there will be any malpractice suits for the use of ivermectin.

Quote from Fm1

Using drugs for labeled use there is no liability. Until the FDA gives emergency use doctors will not risk their licence and assets. Now do you now understand???

No, that is not what the FDA website says. Read it. It does not say this is criminal. It says:

"If you and your healthcare provider decide to use an approved drug for an unapproved use to treat your disease or medical condition, remember that FDA has not determined that the drug is safe and effective for the unapproved use."

https://www.fda.gov/patients/l…rent%20type%20of%20cancer

If it were criminal, the FDA would definitely say so.

Quote from Fm1

Do you not understand that doctors using drugs off label open themselves up to criminal liability.

No, they do not. The laws and the FDA statement is very clear about that. Off label use is allowed in the U.S., in all cases.

Have some common sense. If this were criminal, don't you think the FDA would say so? It is Federal Government website. Do you really think the government is advising people to go ahead and commit a crime?

Quote from Mark U

How about you do an experiment Jed. Ask your doctor to give you a prescription for ivermectin - for Covid-19 - and let us know how it goes.

Many doctors in the U.S. are prescribing it. Shop around and you will find one. I would not do it if I were sick, because I tend to trust experts, based on my experience with cold fusion.

Quote from RobertBryant

Permissible? Once only?

No, not once. As many times as your doctor wants.

Quote from RobertBryant

The FDA says so... sort of...

The FDA has no say in the matter. It has no regulatory power to stop a doctor from using a drug off label. In the quote above, the FDA says you should not use veterinary ivermectin. Obviously that is not approved for any human use. It also says: "You should not take any medicine to treat or prevent COVID-19 unless it has been prescribed to you by your health care provider" meaning off label use.

I have said this maybe 10 times, and I have pointed to the FDA website that says this:

https://www.fda.gov/patients/l…rent%20type%20of%20cancer.

"If you and your healthcare provider decide to use an approved drug for an unapproved use to treat your disease or medical condition, remember that FDA has not determined that the drug is safe and effective for the unapproved use."

Let me repeat:

THE FDA CANNOT PREVENT THE USE OF IVERMECTIN FOR ANY PURPOSE A DOCTOR WISHES TO USE IT FOR. THE FDA CANNOT REGULATE THE USE OF IVERMECTIN.

THE FDA CANNOT PREVENT THE USE OF IVERMECTIN FOR ANY PURPOSE A DOCTOR WISHES TO USE IT FOR. THE FDA CANNOT REGULATE THE USE OF IVERMECTIN.

THE FDA CANNOT PREVENT THE USE OF IVERMECTIN FOR ANY PURPOSE A DOCTOR WISHES TO USE IT FOR. THE FDA CANNOT REGULATE THE USE OF IVERMECTIN.

THE FDA CANNOT PREVENT THE USE OF IVERMECTIN FOR ANY PURPOSE A DOCTOR WISHES TO USE IT FOR. THE FDA CANNOT REGULATE THE USE OF IVERMECTIN.

THE FDA CANNOT PREVENT THE USE OF IVERMECTIN FOR ANY PURPOSE A DOCTOR WISHES TO USE IT FOR. THE FDA CANNOT REGULATE THE USE OF IVERMECTIN.

THE FDA CANNOT PREVENT THE USE OF IVERMECTIN FOR ANY PURPOSE A DOCTOR WISHES TO USE IT FOR. THE FDA CANNOT REGULATE THE USE OF IVERMECTIN.

This is black and white. It is very simple. THE FDA HAS NO POWER TO STOP YOU FROM USING IVERMECTIN. Period. Full stop.

Do you understand?

Quote from RobertBryant

if only we were cattle

for cattle

Ivermectin is permissible

and horses..and dogs

and for millions of poor Africans

It is permissible for anyone in the U.S. Any doctor can prescribe it. I have pointed this out time after time, but the message does not get through. I do not understand why. I think this resistance to fact and to reality is grounded in conspiracy theories and a desire by many people to see themselves as victims. But anyway, let me repeat:

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

Do you people understand? Have I made myself clear? Do you speak language? Let me say it again a few times:

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

ANYONE IN THE U.S. CAN TREAT COVID-19 WITH IVERMECTIN.

It is not banned. Not restricted. Not unavailable. Not in any way, shape, or form disallowed. The FDA and others discourage the use of it, because they think it does not work, but they have no regulatory power to stop the use of it for any reason, by any doctor.

Georgia will now offer vaccinations to anyone over age 16. I thought that was an odd thing to do, but it makes sense. Two reasons:

1. Young people are spreading it more than older people.
2. Many people over 65 have now been vaccinated. Estimates are 60 to 70%. From the data I saw months ago, there is not much of difference in the fatality rate among people ranging from age 20 to 60. There is not much justification for holding off on a vaccinating a 20 year old to give it to a 60 year old. There was a great deal of justification for holding off both of them to give it to an 75-year-old, but now that most of them have been vaccinated there is no reason to separate the rest of population into age groups.

The one thing they should do -- but they probably won't -- is to continue to push people over age 65 to the front of the waiting list. If an elderly person manages to register for a shot, he or she should be given top priority. "Manage" is the key word. It is still very difficult to register for an appointment. I was able to do it using cyber legerdemain. (I watched the websites and figured out they opened new appointments at 5 or 6 a.m., so I got up early and typed like mad.)

Here is an article about the new policy:

https://www.ajc.com/news/atlan…IAGVYEUBAIPH6WHY2T4CH2SI/

Doctors seem supportive. But they have other complaints. Here is what one had to say:

Dr. Cecil Bennett, medical director of a primary care center in Newnan, and an adjunct professor at Morehouse School of Medicine’s Family Medicine Program, said while it was understandable Georgia started the vaccine rollout by vaccinating older adults and the most vulnerable residents, followed by teachers, he said it now makes sense to open it up to everyone 16 and over.

He called Gov. Brian Kemp’s step approach to expand eligibility “spot on in my opinion.” . . .

Bennett said his practice, while approved to administer the COVID-19 vaccine, is still waiting for its first shipment. He said he doesn’t know of a single primary care practice that has the vaccine to administer.

“I have seniors call me every day asking me if I have the vaccine yet,” Bennett said.

The registration systems have made it hard for some to get vaccine appointments, he said.

“I’m really, really not happy with the current online system for setting up an appointment for the vaccine, and I have a number of seniors I can tell you if they don’t have a loved one help them set it up, there is zero chance of them getting the vaccine,” he said.

That gets to another critical issue with the rollout now, experts said. Opening up vaccination to all comers will only go so far if the state doesn’t do outreach to populations that are hesitant or having difficulty registering online. . . .

Quote from Fm1

The Coronavirus Variants Don't Seem to Be Highly Variable So Far

SARS-CoV-2 may be settling into a limited set of mutations

That's good news!