More COVIDiots: can a judge "compel" a hospital to administer something that doesn't work? An Ohio judge just did...

Would YOU decide to take horse dewormer because somebody on the Internet told you it can cure COVID? 

Before you said yes, remember many months ago someone said the same thing about hydroxychloroquine? It was touted by no less than Trump himself. That did not work. 

So why would you expect ivermectin to work? It doesn't either. 

There is ONE study in Egypt with positive results for ivermectin that was NOT peer-reviewed. Then the publisher retracted the paper. Turns out there are SERIOUS problems with the data, where there are signs that data have been copied between patients, among other problems. The entire study cannot be trusted. 

You can guess what the antivaxxers did... Scream "censorship", never mind the details. 

So what is this about a judge? Hold one for one more thing...

Ivermectin CAN be used on humans... for a MUCH reduced dosage... for parasites. It can be used topically for head lice, or internally for "river blindness", and so on. It was so useful, the team that found the human use got the Nobel Prize in 2015. Again, it kills parasites, not viruses. 

Now onto the judge. 

In Ohio, a woman, Julie Smith, has her husband in the ICU for COVID since July 15th, 2021. Julie, found a Dr. Fred Wagshul, supposedly an expert in treating COVID with ivermectin, who was willing to prescribe her husband ivermectin. The hospital refused. Thus the lawsuit. 

We have determined above that most studies regarding ivermectin are either inconclusive or flawed. There is little evidence to suggest Ivermectin can prevent or treat COVID. Yet its proponents continue to claim the proof is "irrefutable" and such that it works. 

Just think about it. Ivermectin has NEVER before been formal trial tested in ANIMALS OR HUMANS for fighting a virus, muchless COVID, until very recently. Suddenly, it works wonders... then THAT study was found to be potentially fraudulent. So what's the conclusion? 

Logically, it should be "I'll have to wait and see, as there's no evidence that it really works. If it worked that well, I'd want to see some MORE proof. Extraordinary claim requires extraordinary evidence."

Indeed, that's the current Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis of ivermectin and COVID conclusion based on all existing studies (will be updated as more studies are performed):

Based on the current very low- to low-certainty evidence, we are uncertain about the efficacy and safety of ivermectin used to treat or prevent COVID-19.

But now, just because some patient asked for this unproven treatment because she shopped for a doctor that will give it to her, does that means the hospital has to provide it? Apparently a judge decided that to be a "yes". Does a judge have the right to decide if a treatment is viable? Or can any patient walk into any hospital and demand a quack treatment just because she found a doctor willing to prescribe it? 

But hold on, it gets worse. 

The dose prescribed was "30 mg daily for 3 weeks". 

So what's a typical ivermectin dose? 

For intestinal deworming, the suggested dose is ONE, repeat ONE ONLY, dose of 200 mcg/kg. Assuming her husband is 100 kg (220 pounds), that's 20 mg dose.

This "doctor" has prescribed a dose 50% over that (30 mg), FOR 21 full days. 

Where did he even get this number? 

There is no science to his prescription. 

And I'll just leave you with this bit of news...

Anti-vax police Captain of Georgia town who touted ivermectin, taken quite a bit himself, and proud of his unvaccinated status, has died of COVID. 

Don't be a COVIDiot. Get vaccinated. 

TIL: Item sold by the company through Amazon is NOT considered verified purchase

Today I learned that items purchased THROUGH Amazon, but fulfilled directly by merchant, is NOT considered an Amazon Verified Purchase. 

But let me start from the beginning. 

I have a wallet collection. Yes, I know, it's weird. 

Recently, I found a coupon on something I wanted, a Dango D03 wallet. Normally $79, the coupon took $40 off. So I bought it. It was sold by Dango Products, supposedly the maker. Right? 

Purchase of a Dango D03 Bifold with DTEX through Amazon from Dango Products 

Okay, so I used it for a few days, and wanted to review it. Guess what happens: 

Amazon has noticed unusual reviewing activity on this product.
Due to this activity, we have limited this product to verified purchase reviews. 

And the reviews indeed look rather weird. The most recent reviews are either 1 star or 5 star, suggesting some sort of review bomb or counter-bomb in progress. 

So what does Amazon consider to be "verified purchase"? Apparently NOT merchant-fulfilled orders, but only FBA (fulfilled by Amazon) orders. As per Amazon:

An "Amazon Verified Purchase" review means we've verified that the person writing the review purchased the product at Amazon and didn't receive the product at a deep discount.

I paid through Amazon, but the product came directly from Dango. Yes, I check the envelope. That doesn't count as verified purchase.  

Wait, there's a section of town that Domino's Pizza does NOT deliver to? Really?

 Always thought Domino's would deliver almost anywhere within reason, then I learned otherwise. 

I want some pizza delivered to a parking lot as my dinner schedule is uneven and it's a little far to walk for some grub. This location is 0.6 miles away from my house (about 6-7 blocks), and I've ordered before from my house. So imagine my surprise that the app won't accept the address, claiming it's OUTSIDE their service area! I then tried an address the street over, or the building across the street... No go. Apparently they've blacklisted this entire zipcode, even though it's just a few blocks over from the zip code they *do* serve. 

And indeed, I've entered the address into the Dominos website, it *does* say "Sorry we don't currently offer delivery to your location..." 

Apprently they wouldn't deliver into areas that are outside their 30 minute guarantee or whatever. 

WTF? Youtube removed harp video (with a distortion pedal) due to... "child endangerment"?!?!?! UPDATE: RESTORED! And idea about a better moderation system

 First, I suck at instruments. So much kudos to anyone who can play a harp. And Emily Hopkins briefly owned the YT one day by attaching a distortion pedal (that's something usually used with electric guitars) to a harp's output. It was... interesting. 

Then came news that some griefer had apparently flagged her video for "child endangerment"?!?!?! And YT took it down briefly (video response). It has since been restored. 

Frankly, Youtube's enforcement of its terms is just outright WEIRD and inconsistent, and too easily "gamed" by griefers or people with agendas wanting to silence the opposition. Want to call out people who are scamming other people? Get flagged for "hate speech" or "harassment". 

And it's also been flooded by mememakers who publish outright crap (such as videos featuring recipes that are impossible to do in life) just so it looks good enough to be shared. It's the equivalent of urban legends that it spawned a new category: debunking videos explaining why some videos are crap and bogus. 

Then there are the reaction videos where people post reactions of themselves watching certain videos. This is basically YT version of "selfies", which are so... last century. 

Youtube's confusing policies had lead to various alternative platforms such as Twitch and Vimeo and in some way, OnlyFans. Twitch has its own problems such as "hot tub" streams and later... "ear lick streams", when it's supposed to be for gamers. and OnlyFans... Basically known as an adult site without the word "porn" in the title. 

Can something be done? Maybe. Hear me out...

Introducing: reputation points. For every X minutes of videos you watch, rate, or otherwise engage with the content (subject to filters to stop abuse / robots) you get reputation points. An account sitting idle does NOT get such points. 

If you want to make a complaint, you are asked if you want to reinforce the complaint with your reputation points. Basically, you are putting your own reputation at risk to prove you are SERIOUS about that complaint. It can still be anonymous. I would set the minimum to make a complaint to be at least a typical "week's worth" of points. The points are taken from your account. 

The complaint then goes to the review team, who probably will take the ones with reputation points attached more seriously or more expeditiously. At least, that's the idea. 

If the complaint was validated, you get your points back, plus maybe a small bonus (10%?) to reward you for helping the community. 

If the complaint was dismissed, nothing else happens. 

If you consistently make the right complaints (i.e. your complaint was validated by mod team) many times you may be invited to sort through the mod queue and offer some suggestions as a "sorter", like "please prioritize this" or "this is bogus" (thumbs up or down). Obviously your votes will be taken in aggregate with other "sorters". This will help the mod team prioritize the review queue. Not sure how YT can reward you for it, or this will just be a volunteer position. This will last one month or one week, depending on how YT wants to run it.  

If your thumbs up/down agrees with most of the team you may be asked to come back. 

So what does reputation do for the rest of YT? Good question. 

OPINION: The Jeopardy Host Controversy

To be honest, I didn't keep track of the Jeopardy Host Succession War much. In my mind, Alex Trebek will always be the host to remember, and there are some BIG shoes to fill for the next host. 

Do I have a favorite? Yes, LeVar Burton, mainly because I know of him from ST:TNG, and a few episodes of Reading Rainbow. But let's be fair, Burton is not as SMOOTH a host as some of the other guest hosts. I think the excitement got to him. 

But Frankly, who is Mike Richards? Yes, he was the exec producer, but this seems to be his bid to get in front of the camera instead of behind it. And the whole thing just "smells" funny, even if he did not do anything funny. 

Mayim Bialik... Not bad, certainly SMOOTHER than Burton. 

But why NOT Ken Jennings, who had been guest hosting the longest? And former champ?  

The most surprising? Aaron Rodgers. Yes, the American footballer. I am not sure he wants to make a career of hosting Jeopardy, but he can be an interesting guest host from time to time, assuming he wants to spend more time off sports. 

Not that Richards is out, and Mayim may be in a bit of hot water regarding her previous unscientific views on certain things, I think Jennings is right behind Mayim. Burton... a distant third choice, IMHO. 

The Quest For My Perfect Wallet Continues

 I have many different wallets as I keep looking for my optimum front-carry solution. Here are my requirements:

Ability to carry paper money -- say 5-10 bills, but NOT folded 3-4 times. 

ID Window -- either exterior or flip-up clear ID holder

A Frequently-Used Card pocket -- you have that card you ALWAYS use

Exterior pocket for RFID cards -- for tap-passes such as bus passes and building passes. 

Card sorter -- ability to carry a variety of cards and allow me to pick one out

Reasonably Compact -- for front-pocket carry, doesn't have to be minimalist

Extra wow features -- micro-pen? SIM card holder? key holder? Tether point for safety lanyard? 

So far, the wallets I've tried have not really been able to give me all capabilities, and I assure you, I have tried nearly a dozen different solutions. 

So what have I tried? They generally fall into these categories: card-holders, improved bifold, and innovations. 

Cardholders -- sometimes called "minimalist wallets", they really only good for holding credit card sized objects, with some extra gimmicks. The most famous was probably the Ridge wallet, and I have one of the clones I then customized by ordering some spare parts. so it has a money band on one side and a clip on the other (most only have one or the other). While it does hold up to a dozen cards, it lacks ID window, exterior pocket, or card sorter (well, you can sorta "push" on the indent which sorta pushes the cards out...). Being card-sized, it can't handle bi-folded money. Money had to be tri-folded or quad-folded to fit under the money clip or band. They generally lack too many features for long-term use, at least for me, but they may work better for you. 

Modified Bifold wallets -- I've tried several alternatives to the bifold, and some of these actually came close, as they handle paper money quite well. Some even have a coin pocket. And even if they don't have ID window, it's almost trivial to add one. But most of these don't have card sorter, and lost out on compactness over the minimalist wallets. And for those that did have a card sorter, it doesn't work that well. I've tried several Kickstarter wallets, such as a Mjolnir, Bando 2.0, and so on. But it seems most of them neglect the cash (paper bill) handling part. 

The oddballs -- there are some hybrid wallets that truly tried to innovate, but usually have their own compromises. 

The MiniMAX 3 -- technically a modified bifold, this one is actually pretty innovative in that it handles folded money quite well WHILE holds up to a dozen cards and a coin wallet. The external pockets are RFID compatible, but there's no ID window. There's technically no card sorter but technically it has 4 pockets each holding up to 3 cards, so sorting is not a problem. Keyholder is a bit of "meh".  Pretty darn close! 

The Suavell Slim Wallet -- this is a modified bifold that can take plenty of cards AND cash (bifold cash clip) AND an ID window... AND it has a pull-out card sorter. Basically, you pull on this tab, and the cards come out "fanned out" slightly. It has two outside slots for tap cards or frequently used cards, plus the card sorter and internal card slots. I've started using this instead of the MiniMAX 3 as a daily driver. It can use some special tricks, such as ability to hide a tile tracker, or optional / add-on accessory slot to make it stand out.  

Ekster Parliament Wallet -- this is primarily a cardholder with a money band, but it's so cool... Because it has a pushbutton at the bottom that fans your cards out. But it also commands a premium price. You can save a few bucks by getting the cheaper Senate cardholder, but it doesn't flip open like Parliament here. 

I will keep you all informed as I find more innovative wallets on Kickstarter and elsewhere. 

My Quick Review of The Halal Guys

Yes, I live in San Francisco, and no, I didn't know about the Halal Guys as I didn't have a chance to get to them until I happen to find them recently. This is a review of their O'Farrell location. 

I have a weird work schedule that often requires me to find a meal late at night, and this particular location is near one of my late break areas that are still open. I've tried the beef "Sandwich" and the Chicken platter. Keep in mind that if you go in at late night they often may run out of some items, and one night when I showed up at about 9PM they are closed!?!  

The beef "sandwich" is really wrapped in thick pita "bread" that's soft and fluffy, but being that big, is not ideal wrap material. Still the ingredients are reasonably fresh and pretty tasty, but the trick seems to be all in their signature white sauce, which is where most of the calories seem to be from. They'll throw in a packet or two and if you read the label, that 2 oz packet is 330 calories (!) 

And the chicken platter is basically the same things albeit packed in an aluminum "bowl" with chicken added then sauce dripped all over it, plus a few bits of pita albeit cut into large "chips". If you are cutting down on carbs, this is probably what you should order. That's quite a bit of food. 

You can then add "sides" like extra olives, jalapeno peppers, and so on. 

I haven't tried their falafel yet, and if I go back again I would give them a try. 

They are expensive for fast food, but not outrageously so. Expect to have your wallet dinged for 12-18 depending on the number of options you added and/or if you ordered one of their specialty drinks (packaged a bit like the boba tea places). I personally skip the drink. 

They apparently only work with UberEasts, but not Grubhub. 

All in all, Halal guys deliver a satisfying meal of chicken or beef (or falafel, not reviewed) and they open till late night for your midnight hungers. If you live in the area, definitely give them a try. 

A Kickstarter Rant: where's the real innovation?

 I am a superbacker on Kickstarter, as I like gadgets and scifi, so I backed a LOT of things. But in recent years, I've noticed some trends that to me, feels a bit... off. 

1) Companies using Kickstarter to launch new product line

MiPow (it's pronounced My-Pow) using Kickstarter to launch its ultra-thin BT folding keyboard, claims to be the thinnest ever. 

Keychron uses Kickstarter to launch each of its new models before making them available for general sale on its own website. 

I am NOT knocking them on their products. I backed the Keychrone 96-key a while back and it's a good keyboard. I also backed the MiPow as I do need a folding BT keyboard (I have one and it's not as good). 

But it sort of takes away the origin story, about how Kickstarter (and IndieGogo) are for inventors who need funding to finish their project. 

2) Lack of innovation or dubious claims

The latest battle for wearable seems to be in SmartGlasses, and even Razer had joined the battle with Razer Anzu, while both Amazon (Echo Frames) and Bose (Tempo Frames) but most of those are just regular Bluetooth bone conduction speakers mounted to glasses, with a few improvements. The cheaper bone conduction BT glasses from China have already dropped under $50 on Amazon (while Bose and Amazon entries are about $200-250, and Razer Anzu as low as $150, but usually $200. They don't claim a lot of battery life though. Razer Anzu claims 5 hours. Bose claims 8 hours. Amazon is a bit cagey but relents that Echo frames get 4 hours of continuous playback. 

So when a company claimed they have BT bone conduction glasses that have 12 hours playback on Kickstarter, one should be skeptical, esp. if they also claim to be lighter than their competitors, AND does simultaneous translations. AND the early bird price is under $100. 

And so far, the team is a bit cagey showing their faces... Or reveal what is the company and team... 

Instead, they are more enthused to present the boxes and packaging. 

I don't need the translation feature, but it's kinda interesting to have. I am mainly interested in 12 hour playback without recharging. Not that many neckband headsets can claim that, muchless eyeglass BT headset. All this from an unknown team? I'm a bit skeptical, esp. when their biggest schtick (aside from the claimed translation capability with no detail) is "now with 7 different lens options!"

Dust over on Indiegogo, on the other hand, relies on a different schtick: the LED can be manually controlled to provide different levels of shade. And Bluetooth is optional. 

But really, why do most of these frames look so f-ugly? Not only are they thick as f***, they are almost all based on Wayfarer or such. More people should do what Razer does: not only 2 different frame styles (square vs rounded) they also have 2 different sizes for each style, and swappable lenses, rather than have 6 or 7 different front-frames. 

Also, I have a large head, which is why I ask if there's a large frame size or spring-hinged temples. But with arms that can't be bent, fitting will be a MAJOR issue. 

Instead, I am going to try the JLab JBuds, which are basically two Bluetooth modules that can be clipped to ANY pair of glasses. At $50 USD, it's quite affordable, but reviews generally call it "horrible sound quality". We'll see for ourselves.