On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 10:13:17 AM UTC-7, patrick wrote:
> On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 8:24:24 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 4/10/2022 10:27 AM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> > >
> > > I am of the same mind. If you already have antibodies for the spike proteins and you introduce some more you do nothing but weaken the immune system which has its limit.
> > :-) Says famous medical researcher Tom Kunich.
> >
> > > I have shown that the CDC's own data indicate that it is NOT a dangerous illness ...
> >
> > No you haven't, Tom, and about a dozen people have proven that here.
> >
> > You've convinced nobody but yourself.
> >
> > --
> > - Frank Krygowski
> I wonder how this man's immune system is - perhaps his immune system should be examined to see what potential damage happen with "abuse""
> https://www.dw.com/en/german-man-got-covid-jab-87-times-report/a-61338245

Vaccines do not work on all people for miscellaneous reasons. Among these is that some people simply do not react to the spike protein believed to be the culprit in covid-19. Some 40% of the population seem to be this way - they do not have any ill effects from covid-19 even though they are infected and reproducing the virus. In fact, less than 1% of our population (3 million people) show any serious signs of infection and most of those are not seriously endangered unless they have extremely ill health.

On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 16:43:01 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 9:27:35 AM UTC-5, cycl...@gmail.com wrote:
>> The fact that it has such a shockingly low mortality rate makes one have to wonder why this has been treated as such a world danger.
>>
>
>https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#datatracker-home
>Total Cases 80,191,020
>Total Deaths 982,663
>
>https://covid19.who.int/
>6,170,283 cumulative deaths
>
>7.9 billion people worldwide. 333 million people USA.
>0.295% USA death rate. 0.078% world death rate. Covid death is four time higher in the USA than the world. USA winning!!!!
>
>https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war
>15 million battle deaths in WW2.
>45 million civilian deaths in WW2.
>Covid is only one tenth as deadly as WW2. That is nothing. Why even bother talking about it?
>
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties
>8,573,054 to 10,824,236 military deaths in WW1.
>2,250,099 civilian deaths in WW1.
>Covid is only half as deadly as WW1. Who cares about that?
>
>https://ourworldindata.org/polio
>Data on this webpage says Polio infected about 607k people in the USA between 1910 and 2009. Polio only killed 59,500. Why the F-CK did we waste money and time inventing a polio vaccine with such a tiny number of people infected and killed? Thank goodness we did not give the Nobel prize to Jonas Salk for inventing the polio vaccine. Three other scientists got it for growing the polio virus in tissue.
>
>
>
>
>
>> I have shown that the CDC's own data indicate that it is NOT a dangerous illness and that the deaths have not been because of covid-19 but because of the lockdown and the shocking amount of Fentanyl pouring over our borders.
>
>Fentanyl? Synthetic opioid. Coming into USA from Mexico? And you think Covid caused this to occur?
>
>https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/nchs_press_releases/2021/20211117.htm
>The above link says we are near 100k drug overdose deaths per year. But we are at about 980k Covid deaths in the USA in two years. So about 490k Covid deaths per year in USA. About 5 times more Covid deaths per year than drugs or opioids like Fentanyl. Seems to me any intelligent person (NOT Tommy) would worry about Covid first, then Fentanyl second. Work first on the disease killing five times more.

Well, if you are talking about the news then one needs to remember
that "catastrophes sell newspapers". You never read a news article,
"Mrs. Jones' cat just gave birth to a litter of 3 black kittens", but
"Mrs. Jones hit by wild eyed bicyclist" will make the front page.

As an example there was a recent shooting in California - "6 DEAD IN
SHOOTING!" Oh My GOD! Terrible!

But in 2020 California averaged 10,2 auto deaths per day and one
doesn't see headlines "10.2 DEAD ON CALIFORNIA HIGHWAYS EVERY DAY!"
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 6:03:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
> >>
> Well, if you are talking about the news then one needs to remember
> that "catastrophes sell newspapers". You never read a news article,
> "Mrs. Jones' cat just gave birth to a litter of 3 black kittens", but
> "Mrs. Jones hit by wild eyed bicyclist" will make the front page.
>
> As an example there was a recent shooting in California - "6 DEAD IN
> SHOOTING!" Oh My GOD! Terrible!
>
> But in 2020 California averaged 10,2 auto deaths per day and one
> doesn't see headlines "10.2 DEAD ON CALIFORNIA HIGHWAYS EVERY DAY!"

It's not just about selling newspapers.

You really need to ditch the pretense that all deaths should be regarded equally.
That has never been true, and will never be true. Deliberately blasting six people
is NOT the same as several people dying in widely spaced accidents.

- Frank Krygowski

On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 20:49:05 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 6:03:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
>> >>
>> Well, if you are talking about the news then one needs to remember
>> that "catastrophes sell newspapers". You never read a news article,
>> "Mrs. Jones' cat just gave birth to a litter of 3 black kittens", but
>> "Mrs. Jones hit by wild eyed bicyclist" will make the front page.
>>
>> As an example there was a recent shooting in California - "6 DEAD IN
>> SHOOTING!" Oh My GOD! Terrible!
>>
>> But in 2020 California averaged 10,2 auto deaths per day and one
>> doesn't see headlines "10.2 DEAD ON CALIFORNIA HIGHWAYS EVERY DAY!"
>
>It's not just about selling newspapers.
>
>You really need to ditch the pretense that all deaths should be regarded equally.
>That has never been true, and will never be true. Deliberately blasting six people
>is NOT the same as several people dying in widely spaced accidents.
>
>- Frank Krygowski

No, I really do believe that the News is largely printed, or displayed
in a manner to entice someone to buy the paper. A newspaper doesn't
make a profit on selling newspapers, they make a profit on selling
advertisement printed in the newspaper.

And, I suggest that from looking at various "news sites" on the Web it
does appear that on-line news works the same way. Big splashy
headlines and a lot of "click here for this and that".

As for some deaths matter and others don't, to paraphrase your
statement, I'm afraid I can't agree with you. You seem to be saying
that, God forbid that it should happen but, if your wife were killed
by being hit by a car when crossing the street it would be less
traumatic then if she were shot to death?
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:47:24 AM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
> On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 20:49:05 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 6:03:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
> >> >>
> >> Well, if you are talking about the news then one needs to remember
> >> that "catastrophes sell newspapers". You never read a news article,
> >> "Mrs. Jones' cat just gave birth to a litter of 3 black kittens", but
> >> "Mrs. Jones hit by wild eyed bicyclist" will make the front page.
> >>
> >> As an example there was a recent shooting in California - "6 DEAD IN
> >> SHOOTING!" Oh My GOD! Terrible!
> >>
> >> But in 2020 California averaged 10,2 auto deaths per day and one
> >> doesn't see headlines "10.2 DEAD ON CALIFORNIA HIGHWAYS EVERY DAY!"
> >
> >It's not just about selling newspapers.
> >
> >You really need to ditch the pretense that all deaths should be regarded equally.
> >That has never been true, and will never be true. Deliberately blasting six people
> >is NOT the same as several people dying in widely spaced accidents.
> >
> >- Frank Krygowski
> No, I really do believe that the News is largely printed, or displayed
> in a manner to entice someone to buy the paper. A newspaper doesn't
> make a profit on selling newspapers, they make a profit on selling
> advertisement printed in the newspaper.
>
> And, I suggest that from looking at various "news sites" on the Web it
> does appear that on-line news works the same way. Big splashy
> headlines and a lot of "click here for this and that".
>
> As for some deaths matter and others don't, to paraphrase your
> statement, I'm afraid I can't agree with you. You seem to be saying
> that, God forbid that it should happen but, if your wife were killed
> by being hit by a car when crossing the street it would be less
> traumatic then if she were shot to death?
> --
> Cheers,
>
> John B.

What about if your wife was 98 years old and died in her sleep?

I have a friend whose wife died of uterine cancer a few years ago. Mid 60s age. They have two kids. But I do not believe it was traumatic because she had the cancer for about 5 years. And slowly over the years got worse. Her last year or months were not good. So no trauma when she finally died.. Sorrow, yes. Sadness, yes. But not traumatic. Maybe even some happiness that she was no longer suffering. There was no newspaper headline of her passing. Just an obituary in the paper.

On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 23:31:44 -0700 (PDT), "russellseaton1@yahoo.com"
<ritzannaseaton@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:47:24 AM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
>> On Sun, 10 Apr 2022 20:49:05 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>> <frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sunday, April 10, 2022 at 6:03:08 PM UTC-7, John B. wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> Well, if you are talking about the news then one needs to remember
>> >> that "catastrophes sell newspapers". You never read a news article,
>> >> "Mrs. Jones' cat just gave birth to a litter of 3 black kittens", but
>> >> "Mrs. Jones hit by wild eyed bicyclist" will make the front page.
>> >>
>> >> As an example there was a recent shooting in California - "6 DEAD IN
>> >> SHOOTING!" Oh My GOD! Terrible!
>> >>
>> >> But in 2020 California averaged 10,2 auto deaths per day and one
>> >> doesn't see headlines "10.2 DEAD ON CALIFORNIA HIGHWAYS EVERY DAY!"
>> >
>> >It's not just about selling newspapers.
>> >
>> >You really need to ditch the pretense that all deaths should be regarded equally.
>> >That has never been true, and will never be true. Deliberately blasting six people
>> >is NOT the same as several people dying in widely spaced accidents.
>> >
>> >- Frank Krygowski
>> No, I really do believe that the News is largely printed, or displayed
>> in a manner to entice someone to buy the paper. A newspaper doesn't
>> make a profit on selling newspapers, they make a profit on selling
>> advertisement printed in the newspaper.
>>
>> And, I suggest that from looking at various "news sites" on the Web it
>> does appear that on-line news works the same way. Big splashy
>> headlines and a lot of "click here for this and that".
>>
>> As for some deaths matter and others don't, to paraphrase your
>> statement, I'm afraid I can't agree with you. You seem to be saying
>> that, God forbid that it should happen but, if your wife were killed
>> by being hit by a car when crossing the street it would be less
>> traumatic then if she were shot to death?
>> --
>> Cheers,
>>
>> John B.
>
>What about if your wife was 98 years old and died in her sleep?
>
>I have a friend whose wife died of uterine cancer a few years ago. Mid 60s age. They have two kids. But I do not believe it was traumatic because she had the cancer for about 5 years. And slowly over the years got worse. Her last year or months were not good. So no trauma when she finally died. Sorrow, yes. Sadness, yes. But not traumatic. Maybe even some happiness that she was no longer suffering. There was no newspaper headline of her passing. Just an obituary in the paper.

Well, we've been married for about 50 years and both my wife and I are
getting close to "the end of the road" so to speak, but I can't even
begin to imagine how I could live without her. If she were to die I
would be desolate. Regardless of how or why she died.

--
Cheers,

John B.

On 4/11/2022 1:47 AM, John B. wrote:
>
> As for some deaths matter and others don't, to paraphrase your
> statement, I'm afraid I can't agree with you. You seem to be saying
> that, God forbid that it should happen but, if your wife were killed
> by being hit by a car when crossing the street it would be less
> traumatic then if she were shot to death?

Yes, a traffic death would be less traumatic than if she were shot to
death. There would be grief and mourning in either case, but our family
members and I plus society at large would react very, very differently.
This is obvious in the laws of the land and, I suppose, every other land.

You really do seem to have a blind spot regarding this matter.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/11/2022 10:34 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/11/2022 1:47 AM, John B. wrote:
>>
>> As for some deaths matter and others don't, to paraphrase
>> your
>> statement, I'm afraid I can't agree with you. You seem to
>> be saying
>> that, God forbid that it should happen but, if your wife
>> were killed
>> by being hit by a car when crossing the street it would be
>> less
>> traumatic then if she were shot to death?
>
> Yes, a traffic death would be less traumatic than if she
> were shot to death. There would be grief and mourning in
> either case, but our family members and I plus society at
> large would react very, very differently. This is obvious in
> the laws of the land and, I suppose, every other land.
>
> You really do seem to have a blind spot regarding this matter.
>

Hard to parse differences and severities:

https://ksltv.com/489394/i-wish-i-could-forget-it-witness-describes-responding-to-two-cyclists-hit-in-southern-utah/

--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Monday, April 11, 2022 at 12:22:22 PM UTC-7, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/11/2022 10:34 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> > On 4/11/2022 1:47 AM, John B. wrote:
> >>
> >> As for some deaths matter and others don't, to paraphrase
> >> your
> >> statement, I'm afraid I can't agree with you. You seem to
> >> be saying
> >> that, God forbid that it should happen but, if your wife
> >> were killed
> >> by being hit by a car when crossing the street it would be
> >> less
> >> traumatic then if she were shot to death?
> >
> > Yes, a traffic death would be less traumatic than if she
> > were shot to death. There would be grief and mourning in
> > either case, but our family members and I plus society at
> > large would react very, very differently. This is obvious in
> > the laws of the land and, I suppose, every other land.
> >
> > You really do seem to have a blind spot regarding this matter.
> >
> Hard to parse differences and severities:
>
> https://ksltv.com/489394/i-wish-i-could-forget-it-witness-describes-responding-to-two-cyclists-hit-in-southern-utah/

Utah certainly seems to attract a whole lot of kook cases. Hit and run at 2 in the afternoon as if she wasn't going to be seen.

On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 11:34:36 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 4/11/2022 1:47 AM, John B. wrote:
>>
>> As for some deaths matter and others don't, to paraphrase your
>> statement, I'm afraid I can't agree with you. You seem to be saying
>> that, God forbid that it should happen but, if your wife were killed
>> by being hit by a car when crossing the street it would be less
>> traumatic then if she were shot to death?
>
>Yes, a traffic death would be less traumatic than if she were shot to
>death. There would be grief and mourning in either case, but our family
>members and I plus society at large would react very, very differently.
>This is obvious in the laws of the land and, I suppose, every other land.
>
>You really do seem to have a blind spot regarding this matter.

Perhaps I do have a "blind spot" as the simple fact that my wife (God
forbid it should happen) is dead would be about as traumatic an event
that I could handle. Whether she died of a car wreck, Covid, gunshot
wound, or simply old age.
--
Cheers,

John B.

I very nearly hit two cyclists yesterday.

I was emerging from a local park onto a city road. My main attention was to my left, where considerable traffic appears at speed from one of the more affluent neighborhoods. The bicyclists arrived from the right, next to the curb on the "wrong" side of the road. I didn't see them until nearly too late; they were moving quickly and not paying any attention to cars coming from the park.

Yes, I had a stop sign and an obligation to check for hazards, and I did. But it was still a surprise to have the hazard appear so quickly and from that direction.

On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 12:10:59 PM UTC-7, timoth...@gmail.com wrote:
> I very nearly hit two cyclists yesterday.
>
> I was emerging from a local park onto a city road. My main attention was to my left, where considerable traffic appears at speed from one of the more affluent neighborhoods. The bicyclists arrived from the right, next to the curb on the "wrong" side of the road. I didn't see them until nearly too late; they were moving quickly and not paying any attention to cars coming from the park.
>
> Yes, I had a stop sign and an obligation to check for hazards, and I did. But it was still a surprise to have the hazard appear so quickly and from that direction.

This seems to be a common occurrence around schools. Kids are taught to walk facing traffic and somehow they transfer that knowledge into riding against traffic. I don't say anything since they will be behind the wheel of a car soon enough and they can't get a license without at least knowing what side of the road to drive on.

On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 12:10:56 -0700 (PDT), Tim R
<timothy42bach@gmail.com> wrote:

>I very nearly hit two cyclists yesterday.
>
>I was emerging from a local park onto a city road. My main attention was to my left, where considerable traffic appears at speed from one of the more affluent neighborhoods. The bicyclists arrived from the right, next to the curb on the "wrong" side of the road. I didn't see them until nearly too late; they were moving quickly and not paying any attention to cars coming from the park.
>
>Yes, I had a stop sign and an obligation to check for hazards, and I did. But it was still a surprise to have the hazard appear so quickly and from that direction.

In a number of studies done of bicycle "accidents" it has been found
that a large number were the fault of the cyclist, in one, in
California, more then 50%.
--
Cheers,

John B.

Am 25.04.2022 um 21:10 schrieb Tim R:
> I very nearly hit two cyclists yesterday.
>
> I was emerging from a local park onto a city road. My main attention was to my left, where considerable traffic appears at speed from one of the more affluent neighborhoods. The bicyclists arrived from the right, next to the curb on the "wrong" side of the road. I didn't see them until nearly too late; they were moving quickly and not paying any attention to cars coming from the park.
>
> Yes, I had a stop sign and an obligation to check for hazards, and I did. But it was still a surprise to have the hazard appear so quickly and from that direction.

ISTR that even on a legel two-way bike lane, the accident risk is higher
than on the carriageway by a facotr of 10, exactly due to this situation.

I've had to tell off my 82-year old dad for doing stunts like that at
his age.

Rolf

On 4/25/2022 3:10 PM, Tim R wrote:
> I very nearly hit two cyclists yesterday.
>
> I was emerging from a local park onto a city road. My main attention was to my left, where considerable traffic appears at speed from one of the more affluent neighborhoods. The bicyclists arrived from the right, next to the curb on the "wrong" side of the road. I didn't see them until nearly too late; they were moving quickly and not paying any attention to cars coming from the park.
>
> Yes, I had a stop sign and an obligation to check for hazards, and I did. But it was still a surprise to have the hazard appear so quickly and from that direction.

Those cyclists were violating the most basic rule of roadway use. And
their behavior is way too common.

You'd think something so simple would be part of every child's basic
education, but at least in the U.S., it's not. The rules of Dodge Ball
are considered more important.

--
- Frank Krygowski