abenjami

Ibuprofen generally doesn't make sense as a treatment for any viral infection. Ibuprofen is an anti-inflammatory drug that is most effective dealing with muscle or joint pains caused by inflammation. Tylenol/acetaminophen makes plenty of sense, as those are commonly effective to reduce fever with many types of illnesses.

BTW, I was very close to being heavily reinvested last week. I had a number of limit orders entered that came very close to execution but just never quite got there. For example, I had a large SBUX order to buy at $50. It got down to $50.02 and but didn't hit the mark. Do I wish I had bought at $50.02? Yes, absolutely. I was also within a dollar or two of buying some DIS, HD and AAPL but those didn't get to my price point either.

@OILERMANI have never disagreed with your strategy. I've even flat out admitted it's the tried and true way to achieve safe returns over time. I actually heard an analyst today say something like if you were out of the market on the 10 best days over the past 20 years, you lost 40% of the potential gains. Generally speaking, there's no doubt you want to be in the market and not out of the market, because over time the market has always gone up. What you said about # of shares is completely true. And now because I took this risk and gutted it out, in the end I am going to own a lot more shares than I would have.

The DJIA actually did hit my sell point last week. But keep in mind both my actual sell point and "it will go below 17k" were based on the DJIA, which is more of a point of reference that defines the overall market as opposed to a real investment. None of my original portfolio was invested in the DJIA. At the bottom point of this crash (so far) last week, 5 of my 10 original investments were already in the money, meaning they had dropped below the price point I had sold them at 3.5 years ago. Another 3 were dancing the line and I was <$1,500 of being even on the original portfolio. The only reason the original portfolio wasn't in the money at that point in time was due to QQQ and VGT being so good they hadn't fallen far enough yet. You are correct that as of right now, my original portfolio would have been better off had I just stayed in the whole time. But had I stayed in the whole time, I also would have been dumping more money into a rising market as I explained in that post last week. On a net basis of original portfolio + new contributions, I'm WAY ahead at this point. The losses I would have suffered with my new contributions are way greater than the losses my original portfolio has absorbed. Although this was not the original way I intended to make a nice return, this is the benefit I got for gutting this out 3.5 years instead of giving up and buying in the rising market. The 4 Aces at this point means the only way I can lose is to be stupid enough to let some chump chasing a straight flush hit it on the river (i.e. I don't go all in before the market springs back up). No, my ultimate scenario would not have been if I had kept buying. My ultimate scenario was accurately described by @OilerTitanHybrid below: But that's not just my ultimate scenario, that's EVERYONE's ultimate scenario.

Sure I don't care. Like I said, you may as well delete everyone but ME and Rolltard.

Is she is SD?

I hear you but I have my limit. And realistically I don't think there's any way we bottom out far enough for it to make that huge a difference. I flopped 4 Ace's. I'm going to bleed it a bit and see what happens on the turn, but I'm all in before the river.

I made $9,700 the last 7 trading days just buying and profit taking.

LOL

True. But I will long before the break even point.

It reminded me of Iowa's ice bucket video sans the dog.

The first example is why I have already won.

Yeah they really do and I don't get it either. I chose to embrace it a long time ago.

Or an increase in other viruses...

Does this count?