Re. synaesthesia: I experienced it once in a floatation tank. When my session was coming to an end, a pre-programmed soft music played and I noticed some light patterns in front of my face. I assumed some light had been turned on and reflecting off the water surface. I distinctly remember thinking to myself that it was a pity that they had turned on the light and didn't allow me to enjoy the darkness some more. After few blinks I realised that I was still seeing those patterns even with my eyelids closed, and that the patterns were changing in sync with the music.
Re. thinking in words: I used to never think to myself in words, except when recalling or imagining a dialogue, a written piece, etc. For almost all of my life I assumed that was the case with everyone and I was sure that the meaning of 'internal monologue' was much less literal than it actually is. I realised my mistake just few years ago when a coworker asked me what languages my thoughts were in (I'm multilingual), which made absolutely no sense.
Since then, I have somehow trained myself to have verbal thoughts. I assumed this would be beneficial for self-awareness and indeed, I'm much more aware of my sentiments now that they quite often surface in the form of unspoken sentences, in addition to the regular feelings. I have no idea how I did that, though. It seems as though the mere intention was enough.
Any chance for it to be also available in ePub format?
FWIW I don't mind, don't feel attacked, offended, etc.
Valid point, thanks. Although I'm not very fond of this kind of calculations of utility, your point is well made.
In my case, I probably wouldn't give my life for less than lives of a billion strangers, so that ratio would have to be extremely high, to the point where it's probably incalculable.
no evidence for long-term problems due to the vaccine,
If a vaccine was causing long-term problems, how would you expect the world to be different from what we have now?
Ha, I understand your laziness because I'm at least as lazy. Separating clickbait from quality information is too much work for my liking and so I'm crowdsourcing that classification here.
And what other drugs do you believe have been in that reference class?
I don't know.
Without that, it doesn't tell you much.
I disagree. It allows me to shift those products from the category "drugs backed by the authority of academia and years of rigorous research" to "drugs that you take because important people and your echo chamber say that you should".
I must admit, I've had some lingering doubts about drug testing before. But I never investigated those because it would take me too much time to gather the necessary knowledge to even distinguish whom to trust (especially since I find biology completely uninteresting - my high school teacher made sure of that). But I'm certain that the incentives of researchers and administrative bodies are more aligned with telling the truth in the case of ordinary drugs, than they are in case of Covid vaccines.
Direct finanical motivations seems to be even less strong in this case.
Thank you. I do not believe the guy quoted in the article because I don't know his incentives, but that prompted me to look up the stock price of Pfizer and to my untrained eye it doesn't look like investors believe the company will reap great profits from this. This strikes out my concern about financial incentives. The other concerns (about political pressure and lowered scrutiny) remain.
After reading the linked paper, I find it only mildly worrying:
Normal limitations pertaining to inferences about cause and effect from cross-sectional studies apply3,20. One might posit that people with lower cognitive ability have higher risk of catching the virus. We consider such a relationship plausible; however, it would not explain why the observed deficits varied in scale with respiratory symptom severity. We also note that the large and socioeconomically diverse nature of the cohort enabled us to include many potentially confounding variables in our analysis. Nonetheless, we emphasise that longitudinal research, including follow-up of this cohort, is required to further confirm the cognitive impact of COVID-19 infection and determine deficit longevity as a function of respiratory symptom severity, and other symptoms. It also is plausible that cognitive deficits associated with COVID-19 are no different to other respiratory illnesses. The observation of significant cognitive deficit associated with positive biological verification of having had COVID-19, i.e., relative to suspected COVID-19, goes some way to mitigate this possibility.
Care to share some links? I did some quick Googling about SARS back in Spring but couldn't find anything that didn't look to me like clickbait and scare-mongering. But I only scratched the surface, so it's quite likely that I have missed quality information.
I have absolutely no inside-understanding of how vaccines work, and I don't know whom I could trust right now, given how much political pressure, twisted incentives and increased polarization (due to the crazy anti-vaccine movement) there is. My risk model treats all the available vaccines as "drug that was developed under political and financial pressure and whose trials ended much sooner than is normally the case".