SirBillybob

Living here I am not surprised. With ubiquitous strip club options I would estimate having had max 3 ad-based appointments with providers weighed against dozens (likely approaching 100 or more) of private on-site club interaction, to climax, over the past decade. And those very few non-club arrangements were associated with solid recommendations. Most recent private dance hook-up sub-90USD and intensely satisfying. He just had to be pried away from a customer talking him up for a good chunk of time, with perhaps a high-yield basis such as being a known regular or making arrangements for a lucrative off-site date. Can’t blame the cock-blocker. What a doll. Ideally, a drink and chat would precede the back room. And many more club visits on top of that for face-to-face scanning and vetting, as it is also a viable social outlet for older gay men. There have been a few top-notch one-time weekend strip club performer visitors over the years that could make good bank if here more permanently. I myself would certainly have repeated. You could consider a transient strip club gig, likely requiring some kind of stage audition (non-sexual), eg, with the Campus DJ Gerry (Jerry?), as short-term talent even for a few weekend nights is generally welcome. Complete stage nudity is optional at Campus. Slick dance moves and pole use not essential. My observation this year so far is that most Campus dancers are engaged in some profit for at least part of the weekend 21:00-0:300 shifts. Because they tend to be busy in privates and Campus keeps the stage occupied with the roster cycle the more the roster the merrier. Most ad providers would ordinarily not consider private dance customer expectations beyond the scope of comfort. You could fit ad-based trysts into afternoon and early evening. Several local dancers do both. You would not be hassled by club management using your phone pretty much at your leisure.

Since most clients and scorts get mutually hard, it seems counterintuitive that official feedback is hard to acquire and ramp up. Where I engage abroad I find reviews as tantalizing for their content as much as they are questionable regarding true provenance. But in the main locations outside of NorthAmer the predominant ad sites seem not to impose barriers or paywalls for service recipients willing to sketch out their experiences. What limits do ad platforms impose regarding photo content? It seems to me that some advertisers toss in supplementary photo content not representative of their appearance but might be symbols of various types of interaction or depict verbal summations the content of which is to dissuade time-wasters or cost-quibblers, and so on. One thing that surprises me is the dearth of images related to activities and interests that put a provider into broader relatable context. The fitness buff with a gym photo along with a bookstore-browsing photo will likely get my juices going. Therefore, I might be thinking too much outside the box, but it seems to be that a few screenshots of brief client testimonials from a selection of your bona fide clients may be permissible, indeed advantageous, to include in your photo montage. This may be as simple as acquiring a text from a client, redacting if and where necessary, ensuring permission, and screen-shooting. You might in your ad text simply reference that you do this because it can take time to acquire critical mass for what seems the conventional formalized review playbook. Readers take it all with a grain of salt anyway and tend to impute unreliability to the advertiser in the absence of formal reviews. Making a concerted attempt to cover that gap in some fashion may set you apart. I don’t see how it would down-regulate client interest even if the yield is minor.

Right. There does not seem to be anything particular about the problem source being CoV infection or not, in terms of sleep disturbance management, unless one is really stuck on the etiology of insomnia and the knowing part might be psychologically helpful in some fashion, in turn possibly mitigating the disturbance. Otherwise, the management strategy transcends presumption versus verification.

Blame me, though I think I’ve tried to refrain in this thread from digging rabbit holes, planting land mines, lighting gas lamps, remotely flying arms-loaded drones, and standing on tall buildings with telescopic lens hoisted up to my face.😏 I spearheaded the convo about the estimates of true SARS-CoV infection to date because if you were never infected so far you cannot have COVID-specific sleep disturbance, physiologically that is. Pandemic stressors are another matter. And because the likelihood of never having been infected is surprisingly high, particularly among older persons. Well, what information do you (OP) have that could corroborate the hypothesis you put forward here? ?? There is typically a threshold of added information that assists other platform members to enter productive responses. There is nobody in my family or social network that, if uncertain about actual infection but experiencing new symptom presentation that COULD be a signature indicator of lingering COVID morbidity, wouldn’t be dragged by me to the venipuncture lab with a requisition in hand for assessing infection-induced antibodies. I would happily pay the mid-2-figure amount myself. The test will cover both types of antibodies: 1. the quantitative volume of spike (S) protein antibodies that inevitably resulted from infection alone, inevitably resulted from vaccination alone, or from both infection and vaccination (hybrid immune response), the test therefore accurately signifying past infection on its own only if not at all vaccinated with any dose because of the common feature of both infection and vaccination creating S antibodies. 2. the categorical binary (yes detected vs no not detected) of nucleocapsid protein (N) antibodies (not quantitatively depicted) that would be represented by having had SARS-CoV-2 infection or the disease COVID (terms used interchangeably) irrespective of vaccination uptake. The S volume is a bonus in the 2-for-1 procedure if one wishes to triangulate immunity information around trip-planning and booster or reboot formulation vaxx uptake timing. If my recent infection had been asymptomatic and not spurred infection testing I would have pursued, in the absence of knowing infection history to date, yet another N test before queuing for the Fall rollout. Similarly, I was in an early vaccination trial fraught with deficiencies and unblinded myself at 10 months at the point early trial data were reported regarding the percentages of poor levels of antibody titres for vaccine recipients. They had 10 months of follow-up and my data were not discarded because infection incidence rates are collapsed across total study cohort person-years. They only eventually got as far as 6-month immunogenicity for the study cohort anyway. Sure enough, my S antibody levels sucked, N antibody negative, and S levels then soared at the point a few days prior to boost dose of 2-dose mRNA primary series. Hit the road travelling abroad with a sense of solid artificial immunity yet realization of risk of infection. I would not have opened this can of worms but for the fact that a very sizeable proportion of the population assumes not having been infected when they actually have been infected and do possess N antibodies and, more to the point, approximately half of that proportion in volume terms among older folks have never been infected irrespective of their second-guessing assumptions about infection status … some 99%-100% of that population component would not know they don’t harbour N antibodies and it would not be front of mind anyway outside of the context of a clinical reason that renders expedient knowing the specifics of antibody status. Most are understandably fine with knocking over the hurdle bar while assuming infection immunity status, yet circumventing the high bar of definitive awareness. Since long-COVID morbidity is not dissimilar from unrelated disease or pathogens, any clinician assessing such in the context of unconfirmed past infection might be deemed to be out to lunch. The imperative of a simple N antibody test is greater among older folks because their past infection rates are the lowest for adults (estimated at 70-75% cumulatively in Canada, for example) and older folks are more likely to possess morbidity that resembles COVID symptom sequelae yet is truly unrelated if infection did not occur. Similarly, any adult person, particularly not older group, doggedly putting forward the logical fallacy that they have not been infected (we already know those subjective estimates fall short of reality) but claiming to have extended vaccination-induced morbidity should have the nucleocapsid antibody assay in order to possibly disabuse them of the claim, depending on the N binary result, that vaccination alone fucked them over.

Interesting and important question. Short answer: A lot of complex variables are involved in second-guessing timeline for the Novavax formulation. I will touch on a few. Note that none of the 3 are technically boosters. They are designed as if the ancestral CoV strain in well behind us. Therefore, the standards of viability are as stringent as a few years ago for the initial candidates. That said, track records and vaccine platform preferences are likely ‘unofficially’ folded in to authorization decisions. Novavax is historically plagued with being bridesmaid, option of last resort, go-to choice of mRNA hesitancies, &c. I don’t need inoculation now but I would have no problem choosing Nuvaxovid re-boot. That said, I am Team Whatever Is Approved. All 3 companies presented to CDC’s immunization advisory committee on 12 Sept, a day following FDA approval of both Pfizer and Moderna. So the two mRNA options already had it in the bag. Moderna is recently approved in Canada while Pfizer awaits disposition. The two are essentially viewed as interchangeable. My sense is that the trajectory of non-clinical or pre-clinical (ie, animal models of immune response) progressing to human data confers an edge. Novavax has presented macaque immunogenicity data. As I put elsewhere they are still recruiting for their human immunogenicity trial and all subjects (N=330?) will get the new vaccine. If desired, I can steer those interested but it helps to know if study site location will fit, and a few attendances and solid follow-up commitment are required. But no older than age 54. I think another hurdle for Novavax is the added demonstration of legitimacy for cross-platform, or what is called heterologous dosing. Most folks have had within-mRNA sequential dosing, termed homologous. The CDC meeting threw a question to Novavax regarding the introduction of heterologous dosing for a greater number of people having previous exclusive mRNA uptake. Homogolous and heterologous dosing are generally considered mutually non-inferior but there may be sticklers peppering authorization entities around this question. In sum, I would venture to forecast that Novavax access, although likely quick at getting from authorization to table, will not precede Turkey dinner or be stuffed into mantle stockings. In fact, it could be initially restricted to previous Nuvaxovid recipients. Its other two potentials are the heterologous model as described above with single-dose series or a 2-dose series for those completely unvaccinated to date.

Let’s unpack this a bit more. In the absence of 2023 USA data, what immunity research might one draw on to estimate ongoing cumulative infection-induced N-antibody seroprevalence subsequent to the latest CDC slice some 9 months ago? I don’t have time to search global regional trends. In Canada we see a relative levelling off of increase in infection immunity rates by time throughout 2023. If it weren’t for a 10% increase among older folks, always in fact lagging behind in evidence of infection acquisition, the plateau or relative flattening trend would be more pronounced. I might dare to put forward that a similar increase to, say, 85% in USA trends will be borne out in the next analysis iteration. But none of us is a crystal-ball gazer. Geographic population density has been assessed a little but seemingly only in Quebec, with no difference in infection immunity between the two urban centres and the dozen or so less populated regions. In fact the sparser areas to date have higher rates of infection immunity but when looking at confidence intervals for the smaller sample sizes those differences are essentially nullified. I append 2 specific province graphs, and an age-based graph representing all of Canada for the N-antibody component. It doesn’t seem off base to assume that a substantial minority of board members, given age demographics, remain infection virgins, notwithstanding that both under-the-radar infection and spidey-sense are poor predictors of type of immunity. I am not an immunologist but I thought that over time, and given re-infection in terms of this disease, the residual minority of uninfected are not particularly low hanging fruit for first infection. Moreover, the extremely high rate of population artificial immunity in concert with ever increasing hybrid immunity would be a protective factor transmission-wise for the as yet infection-spared. That said, I am hacking through a sinus cold superimposed on a recent initial SARS-CoV infection characterized by transient high fever and now remitted aggravatingly itchy abdominal trunk flank rash of 2 weeks. I tracked my infection status microbiologically over the past few years and made the decision to defer a Fall Europe trip pending re-vaccination (now moot), so pandemic OCD sometimes pays off with respect to circumventing illness abroad. I am sleeping marvellously.

Last year I came across a few cross-affiliated fellows, at 50-ish in Thermas yet 150-ish via ad sites, the latter obviously more the full hour. Not surprising that some degree of gap closure would evolve. 75 in a structured environment with an expanded array of choice seems reasonable. What I am currently curious about is how much the apparently large volume of visiting providers with site ads might be supplementing in this manner, as some work in Spain seasonally, temporarily, even in cycles.

Uncut is Director’s Cut topic prerogative. Personally, I think I tune in at times because he (you, J, are) is articulate but tune out due to a (my) sense of impotence with respect to influencing outcome. Fortunately, J frames these threads as potentially cathartic, so there’s that. And is not contemptuous towards the board membership largely made up of client constituency; I am sure some disgruntled providers have a major hate-on that they performatively mask. Unfortunately, while a variety of sound and interesting contributions here, some with supportive empathy, there’s little scope here for Dr Wendy Rhoades-grade job coaching, that is, as vocation dynamics can be complex in their own right and not necessarily attributable to personal deficiency. That said, the OP is bright and articulate, certainly not without potential, and a formidable focused baseline drive. Interestingly, the latest BILLIONS episode included our fave ex-marital-dom Wendy referencing Tversky and Kahneman. (Yeah, this gives away I utilize closed-caption😏.) Late last night I took to reading their dozen-page essay Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics & Biases. It strikes me how the OP’s understandable uncertainty about how bookings will roll out, a wild snakes’n’ladders ride, runs up against the ambivalence and reservations about outcome probabilities that seems central to many prospective clients. The written piece also touches on the worthlessness of information that may be presented (in this case to clients) with good intentions but, as other posters opined, is best extremely edited and streamlined, IF the goal is deal-seal above and beyond process. Another concept is that of anchoring assumptions in such a way that other possibilities are overlooked. We perhaps see this within both our illustrious appellant and various contributions within the thread. Obviously, there is too much to summarize from the essay but my sense is that a paradigm shift, as also put forward by others, is necessitated here in order to acquire a sustainable stroke exceeding head above water.

The purpose of immunization would be the possibility that anyone and everyone could acquire viral infection but that artificial immunity would render natural immune response a much less rough journey. Natural immune response, infection-induced, to date is estimated as 80% of the total population. In fact PfizerBNT’S FDA submission late 2020 reported a suspected rate of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the vaccine group that was 150 times that of case count used in efficacy computation (see insert below). That metric would not be dissimilar to the pre-vaccination general population incidence at the time. It would have been cost-prohibitive and extremely impractical to track infection-induced nucleocapsid protein antibody production precipitated by actual infection, in order to differentiate hybrid immunity from artificial immunity among those vaccinated in the trial, and in order to differentiate natural immunity from infection-spared among placebo recipients. The key was to demonstrate protection from serious illness and get a viable vaccine on the table. Vaccination was not designed to prevent viral exposure and natural immunity. The reality of a current majority of the population having acquired infection, with far less dire consequences, simply supports the legitimacy of vaccination development and administration efforts made to get there. I don’t grasp negative spins on this, though it is well established that the illusion of opinion validity is unequally distributed.

These CDC data are entirely consistent with Canada’s Immunity Task Force findings, up to and including July 2023, so ours slightly higher in the categorical nucleocapsid antibody rates that signify infection, as I indicated above.

Quebec City is so gorgeous in the Fall and it is easy to navigate, walkable-wise, the main sights in merely 2-3 days. Both lower town and upper town. Perhaps use more financial resources for upscale gastronomie in lieu of danseurs nus.

There is no strip club or bar with male strippers in Quebec City.

Formal surveillance shows that NHS patient satisfaction is at an all time low. That said, I am surprised an Ophthalm consult wasn’t in the cards. In contrast to Ontario where I lived most of my adult life, in Quebec I pay out of pocket for primary care and urology, both practitioners having ‘opted out’ as is legal here; lab work, and MRI imaging. None of it is tax-credited due to my income level. I have had a few ultrasounds and dermatology check-ups covered by provincial health insurance. STI testing is covered at community clinics; as an active gay man I feel that is a good compensatory offset. I have travelled abroad specifically for specialty inguinal hernia repair accessed on short notice at great expense, as opposed to risking the caprice of acute emergency-based surgical intervention locally. —— Portugal’s median age, 46, is 5 years higher than UK and USA due to a markedly high baby boom 1960-1985. Like many nations the health care system will be saddled, even more, with a very high proportion of seniors going forward.

It’s not uncommon and there is a literature on it that you can search. I assume you have had a positive SARS-CoV test, or signature COVID symptoms at some point, and that is the basis of your assumption for your own sleep disturbance. Bear in mind that test-negative research suggests that many folks pursuing formal testing for SARS-CoV-2 based on symptoms alone have unrelated illness. Therefore, a self-admin rapid test or lab test would have been your best bet, not simply illness symptoms. The probability to date of NOT having infection-induced seroprevalence as represented by nucleocapsid antibodies, in contrast to spike protein antibodies that result from EITHER infection OR vaccination, is approximately ‘snake eyes’ on a single die roll. In fact older persons are less likely to have acquired infection that in turn spurs natural immunity. The research on infection-based antibody seroprevalence is quite sophisticated and accounts for waning levels of nucleocapsid antibodies. If you have not had COVID infection confirmed, ie, there is some doubt you acquired it, and given the ratio of infection and non-infection history in the population, I would suggest ponying up some cash for a blood draw to assess for nucleocapsid antibody presence, often termed N antibodies by various labs. I’ve done it several times myself. I use Dynacare but my US contacts utilize Labcorp for the most part. To me, it would be worth it to confirm the basis of sleep changes in the absence of a previous formal infection disgnosis.

And you provided an essential early lesson with which he drove off, it is hoped and is likely, certified.

Kryptvaxon? Will it make my gassiness odourless?

For those 18-54 with exclusively mRNA vaxx history but interested in changing things up with the main established protein subunit option there may still be openings in this Novavax trial. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05975060?cond=Covid19&term=Novavax&page=2&rank=11

The guidance indicates 6 months. See the last bullet point in ‘what you need to know’. That said, you probably won’t run up against much resistance if you pursue the new formulation earlier, particularly since the new variant seems distinctive and there is no evidence of harm with premature uptake. (USA FDA has set eligibility with merely a 2-month gap from more recent dose.) https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac-aspc/documents/services/publications/vaccines-immunization/national-advisory-committee-immunization-summary-supplemental-statement-september-12-2023-addendum-guidance-use-covid-19-vaccines-fall/summary.pdf

Entering haiku territory.

The ticket order site seems functional, so maybe it bumped out the main site? And Instagram is operational. https://www.redeyetickets.com

With that plunging, yes, sedation please …

Not yet rolled out here and “COVID-23” recently beat it to the punch, a virtual KO, fever 102-103F a few days; weeks to recoup health. Some 40 months was a lengthy period of time to be spared. One less jab this Fall. Though case incidence seems paltry compared to historical peaks, even correcting for ascertainment bias, one might lay low considering access is nigh.

A second go would require … TROLLS WORLD TOUR | Pinky Promise - GIPHY Clips GIPHY.COM The power of a pinky promise. 😱😱😱 #TrollsWorldTour in theaters everywhere April 17!

Oops, gonna have to wash it again.

I have face coverings in various colours. Non-sequinned wear.