Success Warrior: The Blog That Embraces ADHD

Are We Flogging a Red Herring?

So,

I was recently watching a video by The Last American Vagabond where one of the discussion points was the cycle thresholds being used when processing PCRs.  At one point, Ryan points out that he might be flogging a dead horse given how much time he was spending on the topic.  For those of us that have been researching this stuff since the spring of 2020, the answer would be yes.  However, more people are having their eyes opened each week and he is getting new subscribers and for those people, the answer might be no.  It's a difficult line to walk, trying not to bore long time listeners/independent researchers while trying to play catch up with new listeners.  The answer is relative to the listener and doesn't have a one size fits all answer.  The point is (look, now Ryan has me saying "the point is...") that he was spending a lot of time on the topic, he noticed it, and when he wondered if he was flogging a dead horse, I said "yep" and switched to listening to music while I did something else.

Later, I was listening to something on a different topic.  I can't remember who it was so I'm sorry to that person that I can't link to them.  There was a statement made that went something like this.  Arguing that torture is wrong because it doesn't result in getting accurate information is completely missing the point.  Torture is wrong because it's immoral, regardless of the validity of the information gained.  It's wrong because it's just wrong, period.  This wasn't new to me but hearing it at that moment, with Ryan's PCR discussion fresh on my mind, made me think back to my initial research into PCRs and wonder if we haven't gone off track a bit.

When the COVID-19 hoax was amping up, there was a lot of focus on "cases".  Not as much as there would be later in the year when the case-demic broke out (because there were no deaths to focus on) but enough to make me wonder, is PCR a valid COVID-19 test.  Here's how I saw it before I knew anything about cycle thresholds.

Is PCR a valid COVID-19 test?  

Is PCR a test?  No.  It's a process that makes copies of viral RNA.  This is telling, however, they have obviously adapted it so that it can give positive/negative results so I kept asking questions.

What does PCR replicate/amplify?  Viral RNA, debris left behind by viruses and bacterias.  Is COVID-19 a virus or bacteria?  No, it's a disease.  Therefore, it's factually impossible to use PCR as a COVID-19 test.

Maybe they are actually testing for the SARS-CoV-2 virus and have misnamed it as a COVID-19 test.  Does PCR identify which virus or bacteria left the viral RNA?  No, a different technique has to be applied to the amplified sample to identify it.  Has the SARS-CoV-2 protein been sequenced (aka identified)?  No.  So, even if PCR had the capability of identifying the responsible virus or bacteria, it wouldn't find SARS-CoV-2.  So, PCR is not a misnamed SARS-CoV-2 test.

It turns out that PCR is simply "a method widely used to rapidly make millions to billions of copies of a specific DNA sample, allowing scientists to take a very small sample of DNA and amplify it to a large enough amount to study in detail." (Wikipedia) and not a test or a COVID-19 test or a SARS-CoV-2 test.

This made me wonder if arguing that PCR was invalid as a COVID-19 test because they are using high cycle thresholds which are guaranteed to return extremely high numbers of false positives is completely missing the point.  Maybe PCR is invalid as a COVID-19 test because it doesn't actually test for COVID-19, regardless of cycle threshold.  Maybe using PCR as a "COVID-19" test is wrong because it's just the wrong tool, period.  Even if you lowered the cycle threshold down to 24 where a positive result would indicate that the person has a disease and is contagious, you'd have to do other tests to find out what disease the person actually had.

Historically, we see PCR being used as a "whooping cough test" that upended lives for 8 months.  When they used an actual whooping cough test, they found zero cases.  PCR was used as a "swine flu test" to fuel a fake pandemic where it turned out that there was, what, one confirmed case?  PCR amplifies viral RNA, which humans have in their bodies even when they are healthy.  Magnifying that RNA to a point where it can be detected and then claiming that it can only come from the disease flavor of the month is beyond disingenuous.  PCR does not do what officials are claiming that it does.  It's just the wrong tool.  You might as well stick a microscope up everyone's nose and if it comes out with snot on it, declare the person tested positive for COVID-19.  I'll leave it up to you to decide the intent and morality of knowingly using an incorrect medical tool to pronounce a diagnosis.

Rather than flogging a dead horse with our (because I've done it too) long discussions about cycle thresholds, maybe we are instead flogging a red herring.

COVID-19 Terminology

So,

I thought it might be useful, at least for myself, to create a brief overview of info I've gathered since the hoax began.  It didn't turn out to be very brief but it is relatively brief when you consider that I could probably write multiple blog posts on each topic below.  I thought that an easy way to get it all down and encourage myself to be brief would be to add info in bullet points by buzzword.

Note, this is a work in progress.  More bullets will be added and references will be added for all bullets except the few where I express my opinion.

Pandemic:

• The worldwide spread of a new disease (1)
• In May 2009, the WHO removed the requirement that the disease cause "enormous numbers of death and illness" (2)
• Redefining the term was done in preparation for the swine flu hoax that began later that year
• This means that any cold and flu season can be declared as a pandemic if accompanied by a novel coronavirus declaration
• Declaring a pandemic makes rulers believe they have permission to act as dictators, trampling on human rights as they see fit

COVID-19:

• An upper respiratory disease that presents with flu symptoms
• Reportedly caused by a virus known as SARS-CoV-2 (pronounced sars coh vee 2 or sars kahv 2)
• There is a 99.97% chance of surviving if you catch COVID-19
• Those odds go up the healthier and younger you are and go down the more comorbidities you have and the old you are
• The average age of people killed around the world by COVID-19 is life expectancy plus two years
• If life expectancy in your county is 80, the average age of people killed by COVID-19 is 82

SARS-CoV-2:

• A coronavirus whose protein structure has not been identified yet
• Thousands of possible computer generated models exist, one of which might be SARS-CoV-2
• SARS-CoV-2 like all coronaviruses (which also cause colds and flus) are aerosolized viruses
• SARS-CoV-2 is a virus and COVID-19 is a disease caused by the virus in the same way that flus are caused by flu viruses

Koch's Postulates

• A proposed means of identifying a virus comprised of four postulates
• More to come

Covid (applicable to the United States and countries with similar reporting processes)

• A generic term denoting an upper respiratory disease with flu symptoms
• The actual disease may be pneumonia, influenza, or a COVID (COVID-19, COVID-21, etc.)
• Reported pneumonia, influenza, and COVID cases, known as PIC cases are kept as a single stat by the CDC
• PIC cases are then reported as covid cases by unscrupulous government officials and media outlets
• Most PIC cases are influenza except in locations with strict mask mandates, where bacterial pneumonia may be the predominate covid disease

Mask:

• A clothing accessory or facial fashion piece, made of any material that covers the mouth and nose of the wearer
• Many places accept a plastic shield (aka sneeze guard) affixed to a hat or band
• They have been proven time and again to be statistically insignificant at preventing the spread of aerosolized viruses
• This is easy to see while the weather is cold.  If you can see the fog of your breath going through your mask or venting out gaps between the mask and your face, your mask is not stopping you from spreading or preventing you from being infected by an aerosolized virus
• Masks are referred to as "talismans" by health agencies.  They don't offer actual protection but act as your lucky rabbit's foot for COVID-19
• Mask wearing causes hypoxia (decreased oxygen intake) and hypercapnia (increased CO2 intake)
• Symptoms of hypoxia are headaches, fatigue, trouble concentrating, and unconsciousness (which is why it's all too obvious that school kids should wear masks)
• Hypoxia reduces immunity, making it more likely to catch a disease and more likely that the effects of the disease will be more serious
• Repeated hypoxia episodes may increase the occurrence of heart attacks and strokes
• Prolonged mask wearing causes bacterial pneumonia, which is why there is nearly always an increase in PIC cases (reported as a new covid outbreak) within 12 weeks of mask mandates
• Bacterial pneumonia is contagious (Isn't that ironic?  The people who are wearing the masks are the health threat to society)
• Mask wearing increases the concentration of any airborne disease the wearer may have because they breath in the waste products their body is trying to expel
• Mask wearing causes "mask mouth"
• Mask mouth can cause bad breath, gum disease, and cavities and can lead to heart attacks and strokes
• Masks also have detrimental psychological affects, especially for children (I'll add to this as I research deeper into the topic or receive sourced material from readers)

COVID Test

• There is no such thing
• This is not surprising since the structure of the virus has not been identified yet
• Most people are probably referring to a PCR when they say "COVID test"

PCR

• Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is a method or process for duplicating viral RNA millions of times making the sample large enough to be studied by researchers
• PCR is not a test
• Saying "PCR Test" is like saying "microscope test".  Microscopes make it possible to study incredibly small objects and so do PCRs
• PCR detects all viral RNA, including those left by cold and flu coronaviruses and bacterial infections
• A positive result from a PCR means that some type of viral RNA was found but doesn't determine what left the viral RNA behind
• PCRs were used as a "swine flu test" to create fictitious "cases" to create the illusion of a pandemic
• Because of this, PCRs should never be relied upon as the sole diagnostic tool or be used on asymptomatic people

Cycle Threshold (CT)

• Cycle threshold is a measure of how many times the viral RNA was duplicated in the PCR
• A positive PCR result using CT of 24 or less would show that there is a contagious virus
• The type of virus would not be known without further research, again demonstrating that PCR is not a COVID test
• Any result using a CT of 33 or greater would show dead viral debris 
• Using a CT of 45 will result in about 95% false positives
• Typically, labs have been using CTs of 37, 40, 45, and higher but there is talk of bringing them down as of 1/20/2021
• If I were more cynical and didn't have complete faith in my buddy Tony, who plays a doctor on TV, I would say that high CTs were used initially to ensure that nearly everyone who was tested had a positive result giving the illusion that there was a pandemic.  And that, now, if the CTs are lowered, the reduced number of cases (due to fewer false positives) will be sold to the uninformed as a double whammy "proving" that experimental COVID therapeutics work and that an incoming president with a poor image is actually a hero.  Lucky for me, I know that felonious Fauci would never lie to me.  We're all safe with him at the helm.  The only way we could be safer is if he was a computer programmer.

Vaccine

• A solution that includes a weakened or dead virus or part of the virus's structure that is introduced into a person's body, usually by injection
• The theory is that this will cause the body to create antibodies to the virus making the person immune to the virus

COVID Vaccine

• There is no such thing
• This is not surprising since the structure of the virus has not been identified yet
• Attempts at creating coronavirus vaccines have been going on for decades but all attempts have ended in disaster
• All previous attempts have created pathogenic priming/antibody-dependent enhancement (ADE) in test subjects
• Most people are probably referring to an experimental COVID therapeutic when they say "COVID vaccine"

Antibody-dependent Enhancement (ADE)

• Initially, test subjects appear to create strong antibodies to the virus making it appear that they will be immune
• When exposed to the actual virus though, their bodies take on aspects of an auto immune disease
• This makes the effects of the disease much, much worse often resulting in death

Experimental COVID Therapeutic (ECT)

• ECTs were not designed to give recipients immunity from SARS-CoV-2, which is why they are not vaccines
• ECTs were designed to reduce the flu symptoms in people who contracted COVID-19
• This means they would be better described as experimental cold remedies, maybe experimental preemptive cold remedies
• Currently, you might take something like Nyquil if you get a flu/covid
• If the ECT is effective, your body creates the benefits of Nyquil automatically
• Early tests have shown ECTs to be 19-26% effective at reducing COVID-19 symptoms
• Rather than injecting people with parts of the virus, ECTs use an experimental technique called Messenger RNA (mRNA)
• One result of this combination of experimental technology and ECTs not being vaccines has been the wide variety of names being used to refer to it
• Examples of these names include things like: ECT, experimental genetic modifying injection, experimental RNA "vaccine", and others (I'll add to the list as I come across them)
• Most of these names are so long that ECTs are being referred to more and more as "The Jab"
• Everyone who gets the jab becomes a test subject in the experiment, which is expected to last until at least 2023
• If you are injured by an ECT, you cannot sue the drug company for damages because calling their experimental technology a "vaccine" gives them magic immunity from lawsuits

Messenger RNA (mRNA)

• ECTs use mRNA to tell cells in the body to create part of a coronavirus spike protein
• Then the body is supposed to create the antibodies to fight the virus that was created
• Having the body act as the attacker and defender sounds like auto immune disease
• Many adverse drug reactions (ADRs) are associated with the jab and this new technology

Adverse Drug Reaction (ADR)

• Cellulitis
• Encephalitis
• Bell's Palsy
• Anaphylaxis resulting in death if not treat soon enough
• and more

Prevention

• Take off the effing mask, breathe in oxygen, and expel CO2, toxins, and waste products
• Exercise
• Get out in the sun or supplement with vitamin D
• Consider supplementing with quercetin and zinc
• Have meaningful and joyful in-person interactions with people that make you smile and laugh

If you have suggestions for bullet points or have good references (fact checkers need not apply) for existing bullet points, please leave them in the comments.

References:

1. https:https://www.who.int/csr/disease/swineflu/frequently_asked_questions/pandemic/en///www.who.int/csr/disease/swineflu/frequently_asked_questions/pandemic/en/
2. https://www.vaccinationdecisions.net/how-the-world-health-organisation-who-created-a-pandemic-of-a-disease/

The Logic Behind a Second Lockdown

So,

The second lockdown has commenced in Utah with the restriction that only people who live in your house are allowed in your house.  Your reaction to this over-reach that goes way beyond what we could have ever imagine happening in the United States is probably similar to what mine was.  This isn't the USSR, after all, but before you run off to post your rant on LieToYourFacebook which will just get censored anyway, hear me out.  I have been doing some research on the logic behind the lockdown and I've had a change of heart.  Let me share my findings with you to see if you too will come around to the right way of thinking.  For some people, the thought of going through logic may sound tedious so I'll use an analogy as I go to help clear up the logic while hopefully making it less boring.

The quick and dirty of the lockdown logic comes down to this: the number of dangerously contagious people in society is skyrocketing and therefore, we need to separate everyone from everyone.  It does impose on those that aren't a risk and those not at risk but the the virus is so deadly that it justifies the oppressive measure.  Until the United States becomes a truly 1984 police state where people wear or are implanted with biometric devices that signal when they are sick and surveillance is so complete that we know everyone that sick person has come in contact with, we have to use this less precise approach.  Luckily, the goal is to have the better solution in place by 2030 so it won't be long before mass lockdowns are a thing of the barbaric past that we'll be able to laugh at.

The problem we are trying to deal with is that people with C1984 are dangerous to everyone else in the population and should be isolated from everyone else.  By doing this, we can stop this cold virus from killing every human being on the planet.   For our analogy, we'll say that people who have accidents on the freeway where the speed limit is typically 75 mph (121 kph) or 80 mph (129 kph) on more remote stretches of road are dangerous to everyone else on the freeway.  The high speed on these roadways means that accidents are much more likely to result in serious injury and death than on roads where cars are traveling much slower.  Obviously, steps should be taken to remove these dangerous drivers from the freeway before they have an accident.  To help get funding and public support for increased safety measures, we need to demonstrate just how dangerous the situation is by reporting the extraordinarily high numbers of accidents that are occurring at the present.  How can we do this?

The key to knowing how bad things are and what actions are required is to identify the dangerous people.  With drivers, we enforce various traffic laws to keep cars in their respective lanes and at a safe speed.  Those that continue to violate these laws are deemed dangerous and their driver license is suspended with the intent of keeping them off the roads, hopefully preventing accidents that they would have caused.  With C1984, the common approach to identifying dangerous people is PCR testing.

Lots and lots of PCR testing.  Testing has skyrocketed around the world.  In Utah, the number of tests being done now is about 500% more than it was in April.  In the UK, I've heard the difference is about 20,000%.  You might think that by doing that much more testing, it might be natural to see a correlation in the number of "cases".  You're on the right track.  If you look at the number of accidents on the freeways now compared to 50 years ago, you would expect there to be more accidents now based on the number of additional cars on the road.  You might ask, "but is this justification to completely outlaw driving or lock everyone in their houses?"  Maybe not but it's a good way to ensure that the number of cases does go up somewhat dramatically and is a good first step toward that justification.  

What if there was a way to magnify the "cases" beyond what people might expect?  If you tested 5 times as many people and rather than getting somewhere around 5 times as many cases, you got 23 times as many cases using April 1 and Nov 1 in Utah as an example.  Now, we're definitely talking justification for removal of all human rights from the populace.  The virus has come back with a vengeance.  The people should feel lucky that we allow them out to get groceries.  We could have the national guard deliver meals on wheels and put everyone on house arrest (without the actual arrest, house detention).  

To accomplish this, we test as many people as possible as outlined above using PCR tests and call any positive results "cases."  There are several reasons why the use of PCR tests is vital for this logical lockdown.

First, and possibly most importantly, PCR tests do not test specifically for C1984.  They are testing for viral RNA, any viral RNA.  If you have a cold, a coronavirus, that isn't C1984, it will still return a positive result.  In our crash analogy, it means that we can count people who back up into a light pole in the grocery store as a freeway accident.  This doesn't carry the same risks as crashing at 80 mph but you have to remember that we aren't looking for truth or reality, we are looking for justification to lock people in their houses, keep them from associating with each other, destroy the economy, and make them more willing to accept the 1984 solutions presented when their lives are in complete ruins.

The viral RNA doesn't even have to be a close cousin to C1984.  According to the CDD and FDA, PCR tests will test positive for bacterial pathogens.  That means that in addition to adding people who run into light poles in a parking lot to our count of freeway crashes (cases), we can add people who ride their bicycle into a mailbox as well.

It gets even better though.  We can manipulate PCR tests so that they detect viral RNA that is long dead and inactive.  This is done by adding cycles to the test.  Basically, that means that we look for finer and finer tiny bits of viral RNA.  RNA that is no longer alive and no longer contagious.  We can get a positive result by testing someone who had a cold 6 months ago.  We can test asymptomatic people who are asymptomatic because they don't have C1984 and never have had it and get a positive result.  So, now in our count of freeway accidents, we can add to today's number anyone who has crashed (car or bike, freeway or parking lot or mailbox) in the past.  Dr. Falsey says that cycles should be limited to 35 or less to reduce the chance of picking up traces of dead RNA.  Other doctors say that it should be 33 cycles or less.  If you are actually looking for contagious RNA, it should be 24 cycles or less.  Companies are testing using 37 cycles, 40 cycles, and there is one using 45 cycles.  By doing this, we make it almost a sure thing that the test comes back positive and gets added to the number of "cases."  I'm sure you can see how useful this is in justifying a lockdown. 

It should be pointed out that the FDA recommends that PCR tests not be used for diagnosis because they don't point to a definitive disease.  We will need to ignore that and pretend like these tests were created for detecting C1984.  I'm sure you understand that this is something that must be done in order to justify lockdowns.

Here's the frosting on the cake.  PCR tests return positive results if the person has the antibodies that makes them immune to C1984.  I mean, it doesn't get much cooler than that.  We can add to our freeway crash numbers people who live in places where there are no freeways, where it is physically impossible for them to be in an accident on a freeway.  Seriously, this one doesn't score us as many positives as the healthy people who were sick with some kind of disease at some point in their lives but there is just something very empowering about telling someone that can't contract the disease that they have it.  In your face!

As you can see, by increasing the number of people being tested and increasing the number of "cases" of this deadly virus exponentially, we have justified any and all unconstitutional or inhumane solutions, including lockdowns.  Easy, peasy, lemon, squeezey.

And that's where you must stop the logic.  If you take the next logical step, you completely undermine all of the work that has been done to this point so we won't do that.  For those of you that are happy that lockdowns have been justified and reinstated on the populace, stop reading here.  For those of you who are curious about the next logical step, read on but remember that this is something that will not be implemented because it completely derails the agenda.

In our car analogy, if you were told that freeway car crashes had increased by 23 times over a time period, you would have some expectations.  BTW, for those that are curious, the number of crashes in the United States has been essentially flat when factoring in the increased number of cars.  If there are 5 times more cars, there are about 5 times more accidents, as you might suspect.  Those of you who came to this conclusion earlier in regards to the number of tests being given really were on the right track.  Anyway, if instead of a direct correlation (5 times), you instead had 23 times more accidents reported by the media, you might expect to see:

• Crashed cars all the time on the side of the freeway
• News stories about how tow truck companies can't keep up with demand
• News stories about the trillions of dollars insurance companies are paying out
• Friends and family members who had been involved in some of these accidents
• Maybe even someone in your own household involved in at least one of these accidents

In short, you would rightfully expect to see a reflection in the real world of what was being reported by the government and propaganda sources.

This extremely deadly virus (which is still much less deadly than the boring old flu) has seen "cases" go through the roof, 23 times more now than in April for Utah.  We should be seeing the number of deaths going up in a similar manner.  You would think they would go up somewhere between 5 to 23 times as much, if this virus is so deadly and so many people have it.  Sadly, for our justification, the number of deaths is completely typical for this time of year.  We aren't seeing any correlation at all between "cases" and death.  This is why it is vitally important that we keep hammering away with "cases, cases, cases" and steer clear of any mention of the deaths or the dreadful lack thereof.  If we point this out, it would show that either the virus isn't that deadly or that there really aren't that many people who have it (kind of ruining the whole "pandemic" angle we're going for).  Just between you and me, it's both and this is something that we can't talk about at all or it will completely destroy the logic justifying mandatory masks and lockdowns.  Remember, the mantra for today is "cases, cases, cases" and let's see if we can get even more people tested with these completely unreliable, easily manipulated PCR tests.

We just need this to last a little bit longer.  We are working on our next scam, COVID-21.  We know that COVID-19 basically died off around June and we're asking you to really flog a dead horse by going along with this paper-thin justification but there is a light at the end of the tunnel.  Soon, we'll hit them with the new and improved (meaning more deadly or, at least, scarier sounding) scam pandemic and we can let go of 19.

For any of you that skipped the section on what to avoid and are looking for some kind of conclusion paragraph, I'll say this.  I think it has been clearly and logically demonstrated that lockdowns are completely justified and we are taking steps to make sure that they remain completely justified for the foreseeable future.  Spread the good news to everyone, especially those who have been wearing masks for so long that the reduced oxygen intake and increased CO2 intake has impaired their critical thinking ability.  

What is the Purpose of the Dystopian Conditioning?

So,

My son recently had a lacrosse tournament and there were some weird conditions put into place for spectators due to the C1984 virus bogeyman. 

First, I had to answer an online questionnaire asking if I had C1984, had traveled outside the United States, or had come into contact with someone who had C1984.  First of all, the answer to these questions, regardless of reality, is "No".  At least, if you want to watch your kid play in the tournament, that's how you answer.  In reality, the answer to the last question is either "probably" or "how the hell should I know".  I gave that second answer at the local hospital when I was going in for some physical therapy and they let me in.  It's a stupid question and you're an idiot if you say yes.  "Probably" is most likely to be the true answer, since everyone and their dog has been exposed at this point but if there is one thing we have learned through all of this, the truth is not important.  When I got to the tournament, there was no Checkpoint Charlie where some assigned Gestapo agent verified that people had completed the questionnaire.  We were supposed to submit the questionnaire both days of the tournament but since no one was actually checking if I had, I didn't bother the second day.

Second, there was a stated mandate that masks were going to be required.  This mandate was not actually being enforced at the tournament.  About 25% of the spectators were wearing masks over their mouth and most of those also had their nose covered.  About 25% were wearing their masks around their neck, either to be ready if confronted by mask Nazis or possibly they had been wearing them until they saw most people weren't and pulled them down around their neck.  The rest of us had our masks in our pocket.

Did I mention that we were outdoors and the temperature was in the 90s and there was a 10 - 15 mph wind and that everyone and their dog has been exposed to the virus?  On top of that, the questionnaire is absolutely pointless and we now know that the masks people are wearing are statistically insignificant at preventing an aerosoled virus, which is one of the traits of C1984.  We also know that with such a virus, a physical distancing of 6 feet might work at a lacrosse tournament but is totally pointless indoors where the recommendation is 27 feet in a well ventilated room.  So, the questionnaire, the masks, and the physical distancing rules that we are being bombarded with 24/7 are meaningless in terms of our health.

A patient asked my doctor when all the C1984 madness was going to end.  He said that he didn't know because it wasn't a medical decision but a political one.  None of these rules have any bearing on us from a medical standpoint and all effects on human health has been negative.  

Masks decrease oxygen intake and increase CO2 intake to the point where people are suffering from lethargy, headaches, nausea, and unconsciousness.  If the health departments, who are recommending the practice, which is useless at best and unhealthy at worst, were to find the same level of gasses in the air at a WalMart, they would shut down the store until adequate ventilation and/or canaries had been installed.  Hell, even Dr. Falsey and the surgeon general have said that masks won't help and aren't necessary and they are usually on the side tried to generate panic over this thing.

The physical distancing, especially lock downs, is wreaking havoc on the well being of humans, who are social beings and who need jobs in order to live in today's world.  The rate of suicide, drug overdoses, and deaths that could have been prevented by early detection but weren't because people can't or won't go to the doctor are all skyrocketing.  Unemployment and homelessness are on the rise and deaths from this political ploy will far exceed any deaths that occur during flu season.  Some people say that the "cure" is worse than the disease but this isn't a cure.  You can't cure a cold.  It's not even prevention.  It's something else.

And that brings me to my question for you all.  We now know that none of these draconian measures are aimed at curing or preventing a seasonal disease that has been a part of human history ever since there have been humans.  In fact, the number of deaths in the 2019-2010 flu season isn't even close to the worst ever or even the worst in the last 5 years.  According to CDC numbers, the total number of deaths was completely typical for winter in the United States.  Things didn't go berserk until the draconian measures were put into place, especially in the states where governors wouldn't allow sick people to go to the hospital but decided to house them with the most vulnerable population on the planet.

We know that if you are under 75 years old, the odds of being killed by this virus are less than dying in a car crash or from slipping in the shower or being attacked by a shark (which is saying something for those of us that don't live near an ocean) and yet, businesses are still closed, people are still being locked down, and my wife and I have to alternate which one of us gets to watch our son play lacrosse.

The question is: why are these rules in place?  Why did a take a questionnaire that no one is going to verify and that I can just lie about anyway.  Why do I carry my mask to the grocery store, put it on at the door, pull it down around my neck once I'm inside, and take it off as I'm walking out?  Why am I not allowed to high five a fellow disc golfer who just made a hole in one?

I have some theories but I'm interested in hearing what you all think.  What are we being conditioned for?  What is coming in the future that will be adopted more readily by a populace that has been repressed to the point where suicide and alcohol/drug abuse seem like the best alternatives?

Disc Review: Prodigy PA-1 and Prodigy PA-3

So,

I had planned on discussing the two putters we used in The Iron Man in more detail but managed to forget to do it in the original post.

Putt how could you forget something like that?

Are you going to start some Super Troopers "meow" thing putt using the word "putt" instead?

I thought I would grab the numbers on the discs and compare them to a couple of other discs.  All the numbers below come from the Infinite Discs website.  In the tournament, we got to use a couple of Prodigy putters, a PA-1 and a PA-3.  I usually putt with a Latitude 64 Sarek so I'm using that for comparison and since most people probably aren't familiar with the Sarek, I included the Gateway Wizard in the comparison.

Model	PA-1	PA-3	Sarek	Wizard
Brand	Prodigy	Prodigy	Latitude 64	Gateway
Speed	3	3	2	3
Glide	3	4	4	5
Turn	0	0	0	0
Fade	2	1	1.5	2
Diameter	21.0 cm	21.1 cm	21.2 cm	21.0 cm
Height	1.9 cm	1.9 cm	2.2 cm	2.1 cm
Rim Depth	1.4 cm	1.4 cm *	1.5 cm	1.8 cm
Rim Width	1.0 cm	1.0 cm *	1.1 cm	1.0 cm
Bead	Hellz Yes	Yes	No	Yes

* These numbers look like they were reversed on the website so I have put in my assumptive correction

The tournament was, for the most part, about putting (aren't they all but this one more so) which meant it was very likely that one disc out of the two putters was going to be the one that was predominantly used.  For me, that turned out to be the PA-3.  The glide matches the Sarek and the fade is probably even closer than the numbers suggest (at least at the beginning of the tournament - soft plastic) since my Sareks have seen a bit of use.  On top of that, the bead on the PA-3 is smaller and rounded compared to the razor blade bead on the PA-1.  The razor blade bead on the PA-1 is twice as high as the bead on the PA-3 and has been sharpened using ancient samurai sword-making techniques.  The purpose of a bead, for those who don't know, is to extend the life of the stability of the disc.  The disc slides on the bead sparing the rim from much of the damage that it would otherwise take.  The purpose of a razor sharp bead is...

To be a complete putt hole to disc golfers?

To give disc review puttzes like you something to whine about?

A guy in the first group that I played with and I were talking about the discs before the tournament started.  We talked about the plastic, the feel, etc.  He said he was going to use the PA-3 for every shot because he hated the feel of the PA-3.  He didn't like the bead.  Amen, brother!  I used the PA-3 for 18 out of 20 of the holes.  There were 2 holes where I didn't want the extra glide and I wanted to make sure the disc would hold a hyzer.  For those 2 holes, the PA-1 worked just like I wanted it to.  If the PA-1 is one of the tournament discs next year, I'm going to spend part of my warm-up time skipping the disc down the parking lot.  

Dude, were you traumatized?

Seriously.

Well, I might be exaggerating a little bit.  The bead might have been sharpened using current, conventional means.  On top of that, it's a dramatic change for someone who usually plays beadless.

Is that a euphemism for ball-less?

Some players have big beads, others don't.

The PA-3 did what I was hoping it would do and worked really well for my "ninja putt" (a topic for another post - people who have seen me do it know what I'm talking about).  It flew straight for flat putts fading at the very end of its flight and worked great for soft anhyzer putts, flattening out and flexing where needed for some of the trickier shots.

That's my take on Prodigy's PA-1 and PA-3.  Have you thrown either of these discs?  What did you think?  You can let me know what you think of the Sarek or Wizard too.  Or any other putter, for that matter.  Although this is a post about the PA-1 and PA-3 so I'm most curious about your experience with those two.