My third point is a question: Name one instance in which someone gets an organ transplant, wakes up feeling better than before, walks out of the hospital and never comes back there again. Or just an instance in which someone gets a transplant, has just one weekly check-up and then maybe just annual check-ups from there on out, picking up their normal life again and lives free from medication. I know people who’ve had organ transplants and none of them wasn’t bound to constant doctor’s visits and permanent and daily use of medication. If it doesn’t work like that, how can it be considered a legitimate healing method?
It’s a cash cow. Name an instance in which someone who needed an organ transplant wasn’t already taking heavy medications and/or consuming other things heavy on the organs. Medicines often permanently change body chemistry. (Such as blood thinners. (Permanently prescribed after finding one blood clot.) Can eating more citrus fruits and living healthier do the same thing blood thinners do?)
People with organ transplants bring in a ridiculous amount of money. Because prices for organs are off the charts, for the rest of their lives they’re seeing a doctor on a very regular basis (there are instances in which people need more than one organ replaced) and for the rest of their lives they’re taking medicines.
Sure I can be seen as the bad “selfish” person for wanting to remind people about the due date for making sure that your organs are and stay yours – especially because I don’t want to contribute to someone living the rest of their existence in a hospital. And don’t get me wrong, if the body doesn’t repudiate the organ (sometimes that happens, sometimes it doesn’t – a gamble, basically) then sometimes people do manage to pick up their lives to some extent.
But transplanting an organ is like putting a CD for a Windows 95 computer into a computer running on Windows 10: it might recognize it for what it is and it might use its basic functionality to run it, but it won’t be able to use it for its greater capabilities. It’s not designed for it.
Imagine you’re walking somewhere with a friend and you get hit by a car. It looks like a miracle is needed for you to recover from it. The ambulance arrives. It looks like you’re dead, but you can still hear. Then you hear the ambulance worker ask your friend: “IS HE/SHE AN ORGAN DONOR? IS HE/SHE AN ORGAN DONOR???” No, thank you.
I consider it a huge problem that the government is launching this huge operation that will make them make money off of their citizens’ (and citizens from other countries) organs. I consider this unethical. And that – I mean if you’d forget February 3rd – your organs are theirs by default. It’s not a choice anymore. (And this is one of the few instances in which race, where no one is 100% ethnically the same, plays a huge role, given the climate circumstances a body is made for etc.)
Saying this sounds ironically victimized, but as a traditionalist I see my values be discounted more and more with every political decision that is made. Food becomes more and more unnatural, sex becomes more and more unnatural, health care becomes more and more unnatural, the build-up of society becomes more and more unnatural, acquiring knowledge becomes more and more unnatural, the idea of fun and relaxation become more and more unnatural, decent standards, logic and even the truth become more and more unnatural. It never ends. 🙁 And people let their propagandist false prophets convince them that it’s good. You should hear my parents.
11:57 (AM) CET
You know how I feel about the concept of stock trading, but this (great contributor to the way I feel about stock trading in general) is satisfying:
16:56 (04:56 PM) CET
The hypocrisy is real.
So when people influence the markets on a mass scale through “journalism”, that’s like the most casual thing ever. But when non-elitists do something similar in their own way the stocks are barred from being sold? Prohibiting a successful stock from being sold is unlawful market intervention.
They should just allow the stock value to fluctuate just like they always do. Influencing the markets via “journalism” and via internet forums both are insider trading, so that shouldn’t suddenly be considered a problem. It is incredibly offensive to prohibit succesful stocks from being sold, saying that plebians are not intelligent enough to see the risk. (Saying that is just trying to influence the situation through “journalism” once again.) Stock trading always comes with risks. There is no one who does not know that. What makes it even more offensive is that they think they can get away with their “We’re just doing this to help dumb plebians,” while in fact they’re doing it because a bunch of elitist babies are shxtting their pants right now. Like they can start buying a trailer to live in. That is obvious as well. It is unfair for them to be protected.
It wouldn’t be a surprise if now suddenly people are going to start to acknowledge that stock money and crypto money have no actual tangible value because there are not enough resources to allocate that “value”. And that now suddenly because of this there might be a more serious acknowledgement of the economic depression we’re all living in. It’s disgusting but it’s about damn time. Through the interference, however, the balance in which the stock market will permanently (sorry but god damn finally) collapse (wonder why I was dancing¿) will be artificial because it’s prohibited from rising further. My God can’t these people let things happen naturally for once? (I believe it’s time for people to start jumping off of buildings ’n shxt.)
With a CTR of 0,63%, an interaction rate of 31,34%, a view rate of 13,18% and about 1,9K views currently, my ad campaign has ended. (Sharing governmental information without permission from the government is kind of a big deal. Especially in the Netherlands.) I’m thinking of extending it. Like for the cause, the amount of views is extremely unsatisfying.
23:53 (11:53 PM) CET