And there are also UV systems that can be added to air ducts to kill off airborne pathogens as well. But they’re not cheap and not commonly used outside of medical facilities.

I remember back in my childhood reading all kinds of stuff about vampires, aliens and what not in articles starting pretty seriously found through search engines. So the skills to resist human or machine text generators are there, everybody had to develop those.

It’s just that the new (after 2005 or so) majority in the Web considered those skills and many others irrelevant and useless, just like the people and the culture associated with them.

It took a new kind of the same threat to make them take it seriously.

And it was in some way amazing to read something weird created by a human brain. Just like music, it has some kind of “movement”, “direction”, “structure”. “AI”-generated things in comparison to those old texts are like Ludovico Einaudi, no offense to that guy, compared to Vaughan-Williams.

I can’t really blame people for not reading it, They take a long time to get to the point and they’re not very cohesive even once they get there.

I just read an NIH meta study on ozone and covid about half the studies aren’t very useful, as is always the case with meta studies. It seems, at least with the variant they tested that the virus is not particularly susceptible to oxidation. The one study did note that it slightly lowered It’s ability to infect which may be useful.

Thing is, ozone’s pretty rough even on healthy lungs. I think the main worry is cancer risk over time which is a real bummer.

It’s hard because we’re absolutely walking germ factors and anything strong enough to truly knock out the germs is strong enough to damage us over time.

I wonder is in 100 years will have robots in stores walking around behind us sterilizing everything we touch.

Boy, this is the internet.

If you’re being sarcastic you better throw a /s on there because no one can tell in 2024 if your a chucklehead or if you’re high on Ivermectin.

“I see disinfectant, where it knocks it [coronavirus] out in a minute—one minute—and is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside, or almost a cleaning. Because you see it [coronavirus] gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that.”

There is nothing in his quote about taking taking the blood out first, he’s talking about doing the cleaning inside the body. But lets assume for a brief moment that what you say is accurate, and someone is going to take out your blood and clean it with bleach… THEN what? Now your blood is too toxic to put back in the body. Do you just kick back for a minimum of 24 hours while waiting for the chlorine to evaporate? It doesn’t work if you only take out some of the blood, because it is constantly being mixed in your body, so you have to somehow completely drain a person without them dying. Now repeat that for 8 billion people, because this process would still do nothing to protect you from getting exposed again as soon as you walk in to a store.

You might also consider how covid would have gotten into the blood in the first place – it entered the body through the lungs, and continues to grow there (which is why some many people had lung damage). So I guess while you’re killing the patient by removing all their blood, you might as well take out the lungs and bleach them too? Who here can’t hold their breath for 24+ hours? There’s just no way any of this could ever be used as a serious treatment. Yeah covid deaths would drop overnight, but only because the “treatment” would have a 100% fatality rate.

Exactly. You can live the rest of your life without blood.

I look at this the same way I look at problems I’m trying to solve at work: is this already an issue causing massive problems with how we go about our day to day operations, or is this something that might have some kind of improvement.

It’s a resource allocation issue. Sure, I can add some bulbs that kill some bacteria and viruses. But how expensive are there bulbs, and how much are we having to deal with the fallout from when someone gets sick? In the grand scheme of things, would spending ~$1,000 on light bulbs to make sure my kid doesn’t get sick (but not when in range of the bulbs…) be more beneficial than just putting that $1000 into their college savings account and learning how to deal with missing a couple days of class when the inevitable happens (which the bulb can’t protect you from anyways - you’ll get sick from other people no matter how many lights you have at home).

That thing looks terrible. t’s wifi controlled and you’re supposed to install an app to use it. And it doesn’t say anything about the UV wavelength or power (HEV=high energy visible light so I guess 9000K can be translated to wavelength). There is a pdf test report about its efficacy against a few bacteria species but nothing about aerosol viruses. I’ll pass.