Corona Virus

[Ken]

Nothing strange about it. I'm quite capable of evaluating the credibility of sources.

Another very strange reply. No one suggested you weren't capable, the comment was why you were only doing it due to others asking. If that leads you to being defensive and trying to denote that you are "capable", then you missed the point, and at this point nevermind, you aren't understanding the question at all.

Again, very simple. The authorities saying that it was impossible for the virus to have come from a lab are in effect saying that it is impossible to reach any other valid scientific conclusion. Yet many other authorities from all over the world, including one of the discoverers of the HIV virus, that are not connected to each other have reached other scientific conclusions. I cant evaluate who's right and who's wrong because I'm not a virologist. But obviously different scientists are reaching different conclusions. It seems very arrogant, dogmatic and unscientific to say that only one valid conclusion can be reached when other scientists have already reached different conclusions, or at least potentially different conclusions.

Actually again the opposite of what I was asking. Your note that the people who are saying it is not from a lab were not credible was surprising to me because it was so encompassing. The idea that different scientists are reaching different conclusions would actually suggest that you shouldn't be making a blanket statement like that.

[Gregg]

Correct in a sense, repetitive behavior created pathways in the brain, kind of like small erosion troughs that the electrical impulses flow through (Not very scientific explanation, but I hope you get my drift) When you do something over and over, your brain develops a physical pathway in the brain so you sometimes repeat behaviors without really thinking about it--Have you ever been driving home from work like you have everyday and you know that today--you're supposed to go to the store first, but you still get off at the exit which takes you home like normal? That is your neural net following a pathway you've created in your brain.

With an addict, you do the same thing--your repetitive choices to Gamble/Use creates these pathways--it gets to the point where you can say to yourself--I know this is a bad choice, I know this will lead to trouble, I know this might not end well for me or those I love--But you STILL choose to proceed with the bad choice, you kick yourself the entire time, but again, you've been making that choice so often your brain just leads you there. With substances there's an additional physiological component I'm not entirely familiar with so won't speak to.

It's hard to stop, but entirely possible. It's easier if you have a support subsystem of family and friends as they, if they can approach it as a mental health condition that needs to be treated rather than some moral deficiency, can be a huge positive force in helping find your way out of addiction and retraining your brain to make different choices.

I wish you the best brother, I know it's not easy, but it is possible.


peace.

Thank you.

[rhd]

Another very strange reply. No one suggested you weren't capable, the comment was why you were only doing it due to others asking. If that leads you to being defensive and trying to denote that you are "capable", then you missed the point, and at this point nevermind, you aren't understanding the question at all.

We dont seem to be understanding each other on this so I'll just leave this one alone.

Actually again the opposite of what I was asking. Your note that the people who are saying it is not from a lab were not credible was surprising to me because it was so encompassing. The idea that different scientists are reaching different conclusions would actually suggest that you shouldn't be making a blanket statement like that.

To clarify, what I meant to say in the original post was that the statement that the virus couldnt possibly have come from a lab wasnt credible. I wasnt saying that the scientific conclusions of those scientists werent credible. Sorry if my statement was confusing and hopefully that clears it up.

[Gregg]

Illinois is reporting 867 new confirmed cases of the coronavirus, bringing the total number of cases in the state to 127,757, the Illinois Department of Public Health announced Sunday.

The Department of Health reported 43 additional deaths from the disease in the past 24 hours, raising the number of confirmed deaths to 5,904.

In addition, our factory in Bluffton Indiana closed Friday morning due to it's first case of corona. They have been open as essential during this whole time. It was a good run.

[rhd]

As if the WHO hasnt already done enough bad stuff (video is just 2 mins):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP0OVIcldsw

The video is about a member of WHO (Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, technical lead of COVID-19 response) who said that transmission of CV-19 thru asymptomatic people is very rare. What an utterly dumb thing to say. This directly contradicts what the CDC and practically every other authority has said and negates the entire global response to this pandemic. Later, she clarified that she distinguishes asymptomatic from pre-symptomatic. But the only way anyone would know whether a person was one of the other is after the fact. The WHO evidently is not only very corrupt but also very incompetent. Just what we need from the leading world health org in battling the most deadly pandemic in over 100 years.

[Sour Masher]

As if the WHO hasnt already done enough bad stuff (video is just 2 mins):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP0OVIcldsw

The video is about a member of WHO (Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, technical lead of COVID-19 response) who said that transmission of CV-19 thru asymptomatic people is very rare. What an utterly dumb thing to say. This directly contradicts what the CDC and practically every other authority has said and negates the entire global response to this pandemic. Later, she clarified that she distinguishes asymptomatic from pre-symptomatic. But the only way anyone would know whether a person was one of the other is after the fact. The WHO evidently is not only very corrupt but also very incompetent. Just what we need from the leading world health org in battling the most deadly pandemic in over 100 years.

I'm not sure they really contradict each other in this case. The CDC and other sources warn us that transmission can occur from asymptomatic people, but have they never quantified the risk, as far as I know. The WHO is now reporting that such transmission is uncommon, and is also being vague about the numbers. Both statements can be true and likely are true (depending on how one defines uncommon), but both are vague enough to leave a lot of wiggle room--neither is telling us how contagious someone who is asymptotic is.

I'm in favor of erring on the side of caution, so I agree the WHO's messaging could be dangerous. But I'd really love actual numbers from them and from the CDC. Without knowing specific data, simply stating transmission from asymptomatic carries is uncommon seems irresponsible to me. What does uncommon mean, exactly? I'd like to know--is it so uncommon that if everyone was asymptomatic in an enclosed environment, like a classroom or movie theater, but there is one asymptomatic carrier, would everyone else be safe after hours of exposure? If that is not the case, why is the WHO sharing info that is vague enough that folks could infer conclusions that may negatively affect their behavior? Conversely, if they do have numbers that suggest this to be the case, this is HUGE info they should be sharing with the specific numbers, as it would allow schools and such to reopen as long as there is rigorous symptom checking, but I suspect that isn't really the case.

If transmission from asymptomatic carriers posed little to no risk (again, it really comes down to what the hell "rare" and "uncommon" means), we would not have seen the incredibly fast spread of this thing that we have seen. And this is the second major issue I can think of where the WHO seems out of step with the scientific consensus. They were months behind in recommending face masks, as they kept insisting the airborne droplets weren't how this thing spread. If it isn't asymptomatic carriers and it isn't airborne droplets, just how is the highly contagious disease spreading so fast? Typically scientists preach caution and it is the business-minded folks preaching the opposite. It is really weird the WHO keeps underplaying this thing compared to other scientific orgs.

[Sour Masher]

Here is an article that spells out some of the issues the WHO is having. A generous read is they are too cautious and slow to change positions based on limited data, but it does seem like it is more than just that. Reading it really gets me even more perplexed by the recent messaging, which the WHO has already walked back and a misstatement.

Apparantly, they are choosing to define pre-symptomatic differently that asymptomatic, and there is the whole difference right there. Except that is an absurd and idiotic distinction for them to make. Those that are a couple of days away from showing symptoms are asymptomatic. Making a statement that claims asymptomatic people don't really pass this only totally suggests something they know is completely wrong. Specifically, even their statements, if you drill down behind this stupid phrasing by this spokesperson, makes clear that people are highly contagious right before they star showing symptoms. It only becomes possibly a true statement if you know and accept their narrower definition of asymptomatic carriers as those who never show symptoms. Truly, it was horrid messaging. No wonder they corrected it so fast. What a dangerously misleading statement it was.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...cZp?li=BBnbfcL

Here is a relevant excerpt: "But critics, including its own officials, said the organization should be transparent about its sources. “W.H.O.’s first and foremost responsibility is to be the science leader,” said Lawrence Gostin, director of the W.H.O. Collaborating Center on National and Global Health Law.

“And when they come out with things that are clearly contradicted by the scientific establishment without any justification or citing studies, it significantly reduces their credibility.”

A key point of confusion is the difference between people who are “pre-symptomatic” and will go on to develop symptoms, and those who are “asymptomatic” and never feel sick. Dr. Van Kerkhove suggested that her comments were about people who are truly asymptomatic."

[nullnor]

a recent Harvard study on 111 satellite images of hospitals in Wuhan starting in Jan 2018 to late 2019 shows an increase in traffic and cars in hospital parking lot's and increases in internet searches for terms like 'coughing' and 'diarrhea'. if true this would be potential evidence of the disease slowly becoming 'well adapted' to humans over a two year period; and would be more evidence of a natural zoonotic disease.

[nullnor]

everyone makes mistakes. just because you have a PHD doesn't mean you are infallible. here's a story, i'll try to make it short. when I realized my first cat had hyperthyroidism, I already knew she had heart problems (murmur), I had been taking her to the vet for 2 years for occasional echocardiograms. and she was over 10 years old. they NEVER tested her for hyperthyroidism, high blood pressure. I researched enlarging heart and it's only genetic to maine coon cats and cats that don't get taurine. I had dropped the ball. I came across the term hyperthyroidism once or twice but never followed up on it. but for the vets to drop the ball is sort of unforgivable. it's their job. hard lessons learned. except the vets didn't even learn from it.

while I was waiting to get my cat radioactive thyroid care, one day she acted like that was it and her system was in trouble. I took her to the same vet and they determined nothing and we went home. still not satisfied I took her to tufts emergency, and that night her aorta split and she got a dissecting aorta aneurism. she survived. I didn't find out officially what it was for another 5 months. the technicians and doctor said she had a stroke. by this time I was pretty well educated because I realized I couldn't rely on medical advice. so I joked she had an ischemic attacked, but it's not like she is going to go to Harvard someday or anything. and the doctor looked at me and asked what I did for a living. acknowledging i wasn't dumb.

so i looked it up on the internet and found that when the arch of the aorta splits, the patient will look like they are having a stroke. also fluid will build up in the sack on the left side of the heart, which is abnormal because in heart failure you usually get a right side plural effusion. i even tried to tell them they were wrong but nobody would listen to me. not that it would make a difference, but i wanted them to realize. later echocardiograms confirmed it. with medical care the cat lived two years with it. and it wasn't the main reason she eventually died.

my point is if you need medical professionals to do something special like operate, or insert a feeding tube, or clean your teeth, they are great. it's where they shine. but if you need them to traverse patients with a constellation of symptoms, they get rattled just like anyone else, and they make mistakes.

when you try to help people medically, even when you don't screw up, the people will blame you for their problems. it happens all the time to the WHO. and it causes them to get rattled, and defensive and even withdraw into their own bubble or ivory tower; and make more mistakes. they are human like everyone else. i don't say this to defend them. the WHO is worse because they are corrupt. but what i am trying to say is, during a pandemic, this sort of thing is expected.

[nullnor]

and now a British-Norwegian study working on a vaccine, citing some pretty confusing genetic analysis, alleges COVID-19 is lab escaped https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3945654

After carefully examining the genetic sequence of the virus, he said that it did not appear to have evolved from natural processes.

[chancellor]

and now a British-Norwegian study working on a vaccine, citing some pretty confusing genetic analysis, alleges COVID-19 is lab escaped https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3945654

There's some Aussie researchers saying something very similar; they have a paper in peer-review right now. Not sure on timing for acceptance/decline.

[Sour Masher]

and now a British-Norwegian study working on a vaccine, citing some pretty confusing genetic analysis, alleges COVID-19 is lab escaped https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3945654

Their claims are being dismissed and questioned by many leading members of the scientific community right now: https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidni.../#27d2127868f6

Nonetheless, these aren't randos in a basement making these claims, so they are noteworthy. Will be interesting to see how this plays out.

Here is an excerpt highlighting one argument against their findings: "Gunnveig Grødeland, vaccine researcher at the University of Oslo, is one of the scientists voicing their disagreement with Sørensen. She explains that what Sørensen referred to as "inserted sequences" can enable the development of a more serious disease, but this is not unusual in nature: "Examples can be found in other viruses including subtypes of influenza (including "bird flu"), HIV, and several human coronaviruses (MERS, OC43, HKU1)." Grødeland also says that Sørensen's paper offered no biological confirmation on the relevance of positively charged patches."

[Sour Masher]

There's some Aussie researchers saying something very similar; they have a paper in peer-review right now. Not sure on timing for acceptance/decline.

I think you are referring to Nikolai Petrovsky of Flinders University. RHD spells out his claims in post 2100. Another voice to not dismiss, although there again, there are conflicting reports. The crux of his claims seems to be that COVID-19 was perfectly adapted for human transmission from day one, which is really suspicious. However, there is evidences that suggest the virus jumped earlier and was not so well adapted initially but mutated to be so. It is a question we certainly need to be asking and we need answers to. The vast majority of researchers I have seen claim it likely developed naturally, and that is where I'm at until I see more concrete evidence (not just conjecture, which is all I've seen on the human-made side) but not all the evidence is in yet, and the jury is still out.

Even if it was made in a Wuhan lab (which again, evidence does not yet support), I'm not sure what will come of it. It would amount to an act that costs the lives of 100s of thousands across the globe. There would be demands from the international community for recompense, but China would deny to the end. As I've said before, we are so intertwined financially with China, I don't know what we could or would do. Severing ties with them would be like our own Brexit. We didn't sever ties with Saudia Arabia after 9/11 or after they lured a journalist living in America to his torture, dismemberment, and death. Unless there is widespread and consistent consumer calls for change, I doubt much changes with China, even if these claims were true, unless they are proven beyond all reasonable doubt.

[nullnor]

I think I just heard the weirdest coronavirus news, Rhode Island is now allowed to open strip clubs but it has to be outside. ..I always knew this would happen. the directions would get all fouled up and make a wrong turn and suddenly there'd be women dancing and stripping at the corner of Cumberland Farms.

[Sour Masher]

I think I just heard the weirdest coronavirus news, Rhode Island is now allowed to open strip clubs but it has to be outside. ..I always knew this would happen. the directions would get all fouled up and make a wrong turn and suddenly there'd be women dancing and stripping at the corner of Cumberland Farms.

I need visual verification of this before I can believe it :P.

Also, every time I see your avatar, the first thing I see is my dog's face and body, which is what the upper left portion of your cat looks like to me. It always takes my brain a second to switch from seeing that duck, to seeing the rabbit that is your cat. It is really weird that my brain won't stop doing that. Your cat's left eye is my dog's nose. He is a Cavaliar King Charles, and his head is white, like your cat's ear, and his ears are reddish brown like what I see on either side. Can anyone else see a sleeping Cavalier in that part of the photo? Probably not.