COVID PDF - why was my post about the Austrian Supreme Court ruling deleted?

Corona PDF - why was my post about the Austrian Supreme Court ruling deleted??

The Austrian Supreme Court ruled that those COVID tests aren't reliable, yet whenever I include the link, my post gets wiped. What's the deal with this PDF?

First off, this forum isn't a place for dumping links.
Secondly, posting coronavirus links from these kinds of trashy websites isn't welcome here—unless you're heading over to our specific corner for conspiracy theories.

It feels like the Democratic Party news outlets are just as unreliable... I’m definitely on the same page as you here:

Gregory Turner71 said:First off—this forum isn't exactly a dumping ground for links, I guess.

Like when—just one example:

Nicole James said:So, I just saw this story about a ten-year-old kid battling some serious complications from COVID—it’s pretty heavy stuff, honestly. It makes you realize how unpredictable this whole thing still is, I guess. Maybe we should all be taking it a bit more seriously? Just a thought.

So, some patient at NYU Langone ended up losing an arm due to COVID—turns out the virus can trigger blood clots that just wreck your circulation. I guess even when you survive the actual illness, the aftermath can be pretty brutal.

So, apparently, there's some research out of Johns Hopkins suggesting that COVID might actually leave people with long-term neurological issues—long after the initial infection clears. I guess we should probably start bracing ourselves for a whole new wave of "brain fog" discussions, maybe? Just one more thing to add to the pile, I suppose.

Left or right hand—your pick, I guess.

Nicole James said:Also, just a heads-up—links to those trashy websites about the coronavirus aren't really welcome here, unless you're posting them in our conspiracy theory corner, I guess.

silentfalcon3 said:So, I guess the Democratic Party website is just garbage too. I'm pretty much on the same page as you here—

The Austrian Supreme Court just stepped in regarding that whole situation with Anderlon—it looks like they're actually reviewing the case now. I guess we'll see if the ruling changes anything, maybe.

Depending on who’s doing the talking, the media can be a solid source of info—or just straight-up garbage—and I guess studies are pretty much the same way; they're either actually useful or just totally irrelevant.

Nicole James said:That study you posted is pretty much irrelevant—I guess.

It’s kind of like how those little personal anecdotes we tell—I guess you could say they're just tiny snapshots—can actually be mapped onto the general population at any given moment.

Nicole James said:I was out working in the yard yesterday—two hours with the weed whacker, clearing brush, burning stuff... probably spent four hours in a mask, plus a face shield for mowing. When I finally finished, I realized I actually had it on my face. Most people's carbon footprint probably goes up just by looking at a mask. I guess I'm just built different...

Nicole James said:I wear the mask because of the dust. And the shield because getting hit by a stray pebble or a twig isn't exactly fun. It doesn't even really make breathing harder—I honestly just forget I'm wearing it.

Nicole James said:Then again, I have no idea how I didn't pass out when I was training regularly in a mask after some pretty intense surgery and dealing with a few awkward chronic issues...

Maybe I am some kind of superhero...

Nicole James said:It’s not a burden on the heart or lungs. I wore a mask following doctor's orders for a serious lung infection and right after heart surgery. The impact on oxygen levels was basically zero.

Which isn't really something you can apply to the general public:

Nicole James said:Personal anecdotes aren't exactly scalable to the rest of the population.

Gregory Turner71 said:First off, this forum isn't a place for spamming links.

Wait, what? 🤦
Anderlon (Zac), is there actually a pilot flying this plane? 😵

Wait, which trashy news sites are we talking about?

The bottom line is that the court ruled the tests were unreliable. That’s the only thing that matters, not which outlet broke the story.

swiftotter46 said:Wait, what trash news sites are we even talking about?

The bottom line is the court ruled the tests were unreliable—that's the actual point. It shouldn't matter which outlet reported it.

I guess Boldati is being funny too. Honestly, it doesn't matter which site breaks the news when you're just talking about facts. I don't see any logic in banning someone from stating facts just because of where they heard them.