SirBillybob

Solo videos from many years ago done with MuscleHunks and PowerMen. You can Google search using his name + porn.

Montreal stripper Malik has just started an account at Onlyfans: malikdelgaty. This coincides with a new Twitter account with one blurred out solo JO teaser but who knows how much will be presented on OF? I have been disappointed by the content of two Brazilians’ accounts ... Brazilians in Brazil, not Canada ... this month and won’t be checking out our hometown lad Malik’s unless he ‘stocks’ (pun intended) it with plenty of, and sufficiently x-rated, material. You would think these local strippers getting filmed masturbating at Stock should not restrict their paid-for content.

Right you are. And Studio 54 was shot in Toronto. Big Sky was originally to have been filmed in New Mexico. Some of the border exceptions seem to have been keeping ‘Hollywood North’ a bit active. ——- Though Vancouver filming has not spared Richard Schiff hospitalization there due to CoV. And his time in the West Wing was long before the pandemic. Apparently he and his wife acquired it in the community, not specifically on set.

Better in Montana than Studio 54 ... there’d have been major rioting and cinema walkouts.

Hahahah. She looked so familiar but older, I had to look up her background. The casting call: “a live Mrs Bates”. But what a shocker/ hook in the pilot.

Some of what people are suggesting is missing information is contained in the very lengthy study protocols. They are accessible in the public domain. The primary endpoint variable is the binary: vaccination vs placebo among those without known prior infection. The assumption is that individuals as an overall group of 40,000 behave in the same manner with respect to behaviour, mitigation, etc. I believe that similar results have been obtained thus far for one of the secondary endpoints that includes a composite of participants with or without prior infection. I do not know the percentage of prior infection scooped into recruitment but it was deliberate. The updated (rounded) effectiveness ratio is 20:1, not 9:1, but what I want to know is the average time frame for the vaccination assignment group’s population-adjusted infection rate of 40 per 100,000 because total cases puts it on par with, for example, New Zealand’s total since the pandemic commenced. I believe the longest time frame begins at the end of August, a month following the study commencement. One of the BioNTech’s scientists cautions that the current results translate to expectations of halving transmission patterns one might otherwise see a year from now.

Updated to 95%, as by now many of you will know.

Boom! What did I tell you 5 days ago (re: Pfizer-BioNTech)?! Though it’s clearer now that the add-on is number of participants at the same time point from baseline (that had not been reached a week ago at first release), not an additional week of surveillance. I had thought that the vaccinated that got infected might have been outliers that needed a bit of extra time to develop immunity.

Just throw it a bone, perhaps giving it credit for two versions of vaccine candidates undergoing clinical investigation: inactivated; subunit sub-particle virus.

I neither know Garrett nor watch American stations but I just read an extensive piece she wrote on vaccination in Foreign Policy. She totally distorted the main clearly delineated finding Pfizer released ... cringeworthy ... then proceeded to grouse about the scarcity of additional details. If she is a credible med science reporter, she could pay attention to how her wording in one sentence describing a central result contradicts the wording in another sentence, or get a skilled editor. Every one of her statements should accurately reflect the data. Much of the lack of study results detail is attributable to the early stage of the research. Moreover, the companies are wise to be parsimonious at this point because if journalistic distortion is going to occur, best to reduce the bullet points and breadth of misinterpretation. The few Infectious Diseases experts I have read a bit critically appraising the two studies’ early results are naming limitations that you will find in Pfizer’s and Moderna’s Discussions sections when published. The authors won’t need to take cues from the input of experts interviewed by the press.

I can try to answer your question but I am not sure what you mean by “it’s” (did you forget “that” later in the sentence, and I don’t know what you mean by “less severe” ... less compared to Pfizer? Less than some other thing? I don’t know why you think I may be downplaying good news (if you are thinking that) in such a way that negates the idea of a win. The prospects for emergency authorization are good since the standard is 50% at 2-month follow-up. Sign me up. I doubt any of us are reading the same stuff as it is so ubiquitous. I did not catch any reports regarding infection severity in the Pfizer release and I have yet to understand whether they only counted symptomatic cases as incidents of infection. I am only going to pay attention to the company press releases and not try to second-guess too many comparisons or get caught up in the distortions that often occur by journalists’ interpretations. I can tell you that the Pfizer release does not mention infection severity. Because greater severity is rare for something else that is already rare (ie, infection over the short duration), there is currently lacking statistical power to compare the two studies, or in fact the two arms within either study, according to a greater threshold of severity on the severity continuum. Moderna reported that the small number of infections accompanied by greater disease severity were all in the placebo group, as would be expected since the number of infection cases therein was high enough to contain the low rate of greater severity that occurs in the general population. There were insufficient cases in the vaccinated group to stratify on a severity gradient or to mirror the rate of greater severity in the placebo group or gen pop. That about ~10% of cases, so far, among the unvaccinated are considered severe, assuming all infection cases are captured, provides additional support for the benefit of vaccination uptake, and may sway some of the vaxx naysayers or the relative neutrals/fence-sitters that downplay how sick one can be if infected.

It is generally good news. Cannot wait to read the published versions. Among a subgroup of 5 vaxx arm participants that were infected, you would not expect any to have a severe case beyond coin-toss odds, given about 10% of those infected in placebo arm met severity criteria. Therefore, Moderna answered a question that is among those typically front of mind, but prematurely assessed at this stage. This comes back to whether vaccination can mitigate severity even if infection occurs. ——— So far, Pfizer has conceded placebo participants can elect to be vaccinated when the product is approved and regulated. One of the reasons I am curious about severity is that Moderna’s severity rate is high enough that one would anticipate placebo participants in either of these two trials of a similar class of vaccine to pursue study unmasking and receive the two doses. The original long term durability assessment would then rest on a reduced placebo arm. I wonder if we will see Pfizer’s 5-week results this week. If 20-25% more placebo arm are infected, adding the additional week to 4 weeks (1 additional week subsequent to second dose), the two study results are even more similar. If I recall correctly, Pfizer already reported that 2 weeks post final dose might confer better protection. What is strategically better for press release and attention-grabbing than 95% effectiveness at 5 weeks? ... 90% at 4 weeks followed by greater than 90% at 5 weeks.

Moderna’s preliminary results are released and similarly promising. Apparently their protocol specifies novel detecting coronavirus infection irrespective of symptoms, but Pfizer’s does not specify tracking asymptomatic cases. Yet the overall placebo arm infection rates reported are similar to each other and consistent with general community rates. A bit confusing since only counting symptomatic cases biases results, and one would expect differences unless both candidates track the same way. Perhaps the two candidates have similar infection tracking after all and it is a question of wording in the Pfizer protocol. I suppose it hinges as well on frequency of visits because they would have to be spaced fairly closely to capture evidence of infection among the asymptomatic. What the Moderna report suggests, however, is that greater case severity occurs in at least 10% of all cases including asymptomatic. That contradicts a lot of layperson claims that severely symptomatic cases are rare.

Descovy is not generally subsidized by provincial or territory health care plans in Canada, for either treatment or prevention. Some jurisdictions will cover the cost based on ‘exceptional need’. I assume that may be related to pre-existing hep/neph or bone health issues. My TDF/FTC PrEP is relatively infrequent and exclusively on-demand. Otherwise, I might be inclined to investigate further.

I believe that the Pfizer/BioNTech participants will be tracked for another 2 years. I expect that long before that time the placebo arm will be unblinded as they should not be denied vaccination, and the vaxx arm will be unblinded and followed for durability of immunity (bio-markers + infection incidence). In general, I hope that in 2 years we will know more about the potential for vaccinated individuals to host, shed, transmit, acquire infection, as well as updated severity/mortality data that guides precaution standards. I bought masks, sanitizer, and commenced thinking about mitigation 9 months ago. It seems that the time has passed quickly. Unfortunately, there is a substantial gap on the continuum between the actually intrusive measures I find reasonably tolerable or adaptable versus the exposure risks (notwithstanding eventual vaccination) posed by my desire to squander a large amount of liquidated funds on trade.

I assume the manufacturer is TEVA if you are USA-based. Canada and other parts of the world have had the generic option for over 3 years. I don’I think I have ever taken Gilead’s Truvada because I commenced subsequent to Fall 2017, but I have had generic emtricitabine/tenofovir prescribed in Canada and filled using at least three (maybe four) manufacturers, I believe one time it was TEVA’s. In fact, there have been company switches made by the pharmacist for a ‘repeat refill’ within one distinct prescription iteration. There should be no difference and I have not noticed any. I expect that side effects have more individual person or contextual factor variation than manufacturer variation. I use it ‘on demand’ in South America where I have always tended to have GI upset such as travellers diarrhea anyway. A few times in Europe without diarrhea.

It is inferred that about 85 in placebo group (.44%) versus 9 in vaxx group (.046%) acquired SARS-CoV-2 infection and I am assuming this was exclusively over the initial 28-day period as one must use a common time frame for comparison. Since the 28-day period for some Phase 3 participants, I assume, ended months ago, it may be that there have been actually more than 94 infection cases to date because the 70 additional cases to make up 164 cases should be able to manifest fairly quickly if comparable to community infection rates. Again, I assume that there is a temporal stagger and that each analytic stage must equalize the duration from 1st dose. As time progresses, the between-subject temporal gap from 1st dose shrinks proportionally. One phenomenon that supports my assumption about the preliminary 28-day analysis is that the one-month infection rate in USA over any given 28 days since mid-summer seems comparable to the placebo group infection rate reported. I have not compared to one-month infection rates in the other 5 nation study locations, though USA, Brazil, and Argentina seem to have similar trajectories in total cases. The remaining are Germany, Turkey, and South Africa. It is unclear to me whether the 4,580 shortfall from subject volume target represents ongoing participants not yet at 28 days or some degree of dropout. The protocol is about 170 pages and I am not going to read it all ... I also do not have a pharm background. Severity of infection cases has not yet been reported. I have attempted to ‘drill down’ a bit but it seems ambiguous and I believe that only symptomatic cases are reflected in the 94 to date ... due to the logistics of regular testing for the virus and capturing all exposures, perhaps. Also, some participants with past documented novel coronavirus exposure are included in the study, another potential confounder. Once the threshold of 164 cases is achieved, assuming again about a 10:1 ratio of acquiring infection, I will be interested in how many of the anticipated 150 or thereabouts cases in the placebo group at that time has had severe or even lethal outcome. Because ICU-grade severity and also death are relatively small proportions of overall cases, you need much larger sample sizes and longer follow-up duration to assess the vaccine according to disease severity and mortality. Because I assume it would have been somewhat advantageous for Pfizer/BioNTech to recently report case severity or death among the placebo group (parenthetically ... or suppress the actuality of severity/mortality among the 9 estimated vaxx cases ... that would have been less likely as well as poor fortune for the company), I take it that the results may be seen as not particularly impressive clinically, but a good prospect to mitigate transmission. That seems fine, the ultimate goal being to reduce exposure for those that might not respond well to the vaccine or might otherwise be among the unfortunates that experience severity or death.

To attempt to answer the question, I was in Bogotá for the first time last September for a week, loved it, and had no problems with safety and security. My concern about Medellin today would be that it is one of Colombia’s epicentres of Covid-19 and the “department” Antioquia is trending these days at about 1/50 persons potentially Infectious carriers, adjusted for 2-week contagion period and for estimates of undiagnosed ‘under the radar’. The official reported rolling average is 32.8/100,000 daily new case incidence. If Antioquia were a nation unto itself it would rank about 12th globally in new cases. For good info on the pandemic and ‘new normal’ ... www.medellinguru.com In terms of flights, my thinking had been that if I were to go to Medellín I would not rule out transferring in Bogotá, particularly if options were good in terms of flight times, to fly to the city airport in Medellín (Olaya Herrera) as I understand the ride from the international airport in Antioquia is apparently harrowing.

Being treated like an ATM only works if insert - remove happens in a very rapid cycle.

What gets me is not knowing ahead of time certain vid content costs extra. I may be repeating what I’ve written before, but the companion or fronting Twitter teasers are often just as arousing and any one of any lengths of them repeats automatically. I have done 3 OF one-month purchases and rarely even looked at them following an initial scan-through. Maybe one or two self-JO while viewing. In contrast, tend to get fixated on a few Twitter vids and JO ... wash, rinse, repeat. Often guys with OF options. To me, close enough, unlike a regular film preview. Sometimes still pictures on one device with Twitter clip on another. But solo scenes work fine for me. I get that interactive or more x-rated vids are sometimes more likely on OF.

But I’ll wager he then wanted to ‘rip off’ your clothes ?

Amore ties more gauge cash flow if in the hole you have insufficient funds.

I don’t think that detail was in the article, a news outlet in Canada.

Apparently he is an American working in Thailand, was charged, detained, and released on bail.

Penicillin, Penis swollen ... let’s call the whole thing off.