The worst about the SpaceX IPO is Nasdaq changing their inclusion rules for the Nasdaq 100. The index fast-tracked SpaceX stock for inclusion 15 days after the IPO, instead of the normal three-month seasoning period. They also changed its 10% minimum float rule to a 3x weighting boost for low-float stockss.
So many people will unwillingly and prematurely invest into SpaceX, before it has any chance to discover its real price.
IE: The floating, 5% at launch, could attain 30% end august, if Nasdaq didn't change their rules it would have included SpaceX after this..
Wonder how GitHub wasn't able to detect a single token downloading the entire organization's worth of repositories, especially if it's over 6 thousand of them. Surely that's not something that's done regularly? Seems like a pretty massive oversight if anyone can just grab a token and get themselves a full copy of the organization.
"Persons who received the BA.5-containing bivalent booster had better neutralizing activity against all Omicron subvariants (especially against BA.2.75.2, BQ.1.1 and XBB) than those who received 1 or 2 monovalent [original] boosters"
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2214293
Only purpose of this kind of initiative is to cause trouble.. Marketed by the same trolls who spread medical disinfo, climate negationism, Russian propaganda..
What eliminates social cohesion and trust is
* the disease itself
* the people instrumentalizing the disease and/or the sanitary measures to partisan ends..
The vaccine antigen is only a small part of the virus. Furthermore is was modified and is inert.
https://cen.acs.org/pharmaceuticals/vaccines/tiny-tweak-behi...
Because of international pharmacovigilance we know that ARNm vaccine induce some myocarditis and pericarditis, at a much lower rate than the virus and less severe.
Tess Lawrie co-wrote a meta-analysis that was crowd-funded, on the premises that ivermectin is working against covid.. That doesn't bode well for its neutrality, does it ?
Tess Lawrie ? The same Tess Lawrie who wrote a fraudulent pharmacovigilance analysis claiming that covid vaccines are unsafe, based on the arbitrary claim that anything bad happening to vaccinated people can only be caused by the vaccine. An old anti-vaccine trick.
Insufficient scientific data, no rationale
After chloroquine, same kind of fallacies are used to push ivermectine..
"Ivermectin has been shown to inhibit the replication of SARS-CoV-2 in cell cultures. However, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies suggest that achieving the plasma concentrations necessary for the antiviral efficacy detected in vitro would require administration of doses up to 100-fold higher than those approved for use in humans."
https://www.covid19treatmentguidelines.nih.gov/antiviral-the...
The 94% effectiveness isonly reached one week after the second shot. Only 27% got the two shots. Also Israël recently got the UK strain which is far more transmissible.
Where was Simone Gold fired from? If you look at her LinkedIn profile she is working as a concierge physician for 9 years, she worked as a congressional fellow.. never worked as an emergency physician. Claiming to have been fired is part of her whistle-blower narrative..
https://www.linkedin.com/in/simone-gold-md-jd-4636a87
Only a fool or someone just looking for confirmation would take an anonymous sham of meta-analysis seriously.
https://finance.yahoo.com/markets/stocks/articles/nasdaq-che...