Coronavirus

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by Clean, Jan 28, 2020.

  1. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    • Hot Hot x 1
  2. OUBubba

    OUBubba Reluctant and Bullied Sponsor

    LOL. Whatever. So the Isreali example is going to differ materially from the US experience? We are splitting pubic hairs now.
     
  3. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    If our experience is different from Israel or Britain perhaps we have to ask some questions to how we are defining things.
     
  4. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Yes, a very small minority have died from the vaccine. How many would have died without the vaccine? We simply need to look at the rate of death for the unvaccinated (>200k) vs. the fully vaccinated (~12k) since the vaccines became available to answer that question. Now compare the number of known vaccine related deaths. As of July 19 that number was 3.

    You are correct, that many of these vaccines were tested longer. Of course, technology has accelerated the test process, gathering of data and monitoring test subjects so is "time" really a persuasive argument? Considering the volume of deaths Covid is directly tied to one can make an argument for the need for speed.

    Still, you are very wrong about booster shots. Clearly you don't have children. Here is the child immunization schedule.
    upload_2021-10-20_10-9-44.png

    If you continue on 15 months to 18 years you'd see that many of these vaccines require a 5th dose years later.

    The vaccines aren't 100% effective either.

    Natural immunity is good but waiting for that is a game of Russian Roulette. 450k died before the vaccines were available. Data right now is inconclusive whether natural immunity or vaccines are more effective. What's not disputable is that both natural immunity and vaccines trump them both in effectiveness.

    You took a straight forward chart of Covid deaths for vaccinated and non-vaxxed and couldn't help but paint it with your own bias that somehow the CDC was "hiding" something. When pointed out that the data wasn't included with an narrative to shape the viewers interpretation of the data you responded it should have had a narrative attached, yours. So, you "two eyes" do fail you especially when your brain translates what you are seeing. That's bias.

    I'll say it again, absent Covid would any patients with Co-Morbidity factors be dead? Would they have died when they died, sooner rather than later?

    That's your choice and a personal problem. My wife wears a mask in the HS she works at for 8hrs / day. All staff and kids do. It's uncomfortable but it's a safety measure. Anything that can be done to limit the spread and keep everyone safe is a small sacrifice.

    STRAWMAN ARGUMENT. Nobody has said "everyone who gets this will be hospitalized or die". You are vastly overexagerating. Prove me wrong.

    Always back to the "illegals". Yes, they should all be tested and vaccinated. "Illegals" is a diversion to any main point of how the US is handling the virus. They are a minor problem compared to the population already here.
     
    • WTF? WTF? x 1
    Last edited: Oct 20, 2021
  5. nashhorn

    nashhorn 5,000+ Posts

    ok I am certain it’s my reading comprehension but not sure I can comprehend the above, so ~12k have died from Covid after full vaccine? And the 3 people died from the vaccine? Is that the assumption here? How do they determine that? Did the 3 did immediately or did they die and test negative? Just curious.
    That is one heck of an aggressive immunization schedule. I shuddered at my grandkids getting their shots but none of them went through that regimen of three shots in 6 months, aye yi yi.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    ~12k people have died with break through cases of COVID after full vaccination.

    3 people (as of July) had died due to complications with the vaccine itself. The young woman above who died because of VITT would be a good example of dying from the vaccine rather than with the vaccine.

    That's the recommended vaccine schedule from the CDC. If you click though the link they also have a "catchup" schedule. The point is that most vaccines come in multiple doses with mere weeks/months between doses. What we are seeing with the Covid vaccines is in line with other vaccines, not some abomination process as another poster inferred as a reason for not taking the vaccine. Fauci has stated that he thinks Covid will end up being a 3-dose vaccine when it's all said and done. Notice some of the vaccines that are standard can be 5 doses before the age of 18.
     
  7. Creek

    Creek 1,000+ Posts

    Seattle-you need to understand that the count of the vaccine deaths isn’t being done at all.
    If I get the jab and I get blood cancer in a week or
    My heart grenades, or breast cancer—nobody is gonna count that as a Vax death, except the family. I’m above average on analysis and gambling but -I’ll bet the vax hurt Powell.
    There is zero motivation to count it-too much money, too much power/tyranny at stake.

    The left didn’t get the shut down from Covid they desperately wanted thanks to Trump. (Trump also pretty much saved Football)
    The left did figure out a new way and are getting a new shutdown because of the vax mandates…
     
  8. bystander

    bystander 5,000+ Posts

    Last February I received both Moderna vaccines. After the second I had a severe reaction: my chest had a rash, my lymph node under in my armpit blew up, my arm was swollen and was painful. All these symptoms were gone in about a week except the swollen lymph node. I waited a couple of more weeks then went to a surgical oncologist who diagnosed me with Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (aka CLL). I then went to another Oncologist in Austin and MD Anderson in Houston. Everyone I spoke with said the vaccine did not cause the CLL; it revealed it.

    I believe this to be true. The shot saved my life.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  9. Horn2RunAgain

    Horn2RunAgain 1,000+ Posts

    I'm glad it worked out for you, I really am. MB227 posted of a YOUNG woman who died because of the shot. I know a 20yo kid that was paralyzed for a week and spent over a month in a hospital after taking the jab. It's not one size fits all.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  10. Musburger1

    Musburger1 2,500+ Posts

  11. Creek

    Creek 1,000+ Posts

    Bystander-You ever considered the vax caused it? Doctors are wrong half the time. They swore up and down I had hip cancer for a month at MD Anderson -until right before operation they figured out it was a harmless cartilage growth because I could still squat 325.
     
  12. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    Fauci lied. I wonder how the media will spin this.

     
    • WTF? WTF? x 2
    • Hot Hot x 1
  13. mchammer

    mchammer 10,000+ Posts

  14. bystander

    bystander 5,000+ Posts

    I've certainly wondered but I know now that I had CLL symptoms that pre-dated the vaccine.
     
  15. Monahorns

    Monahorns 5,000+ Posts

    Did they count my uncle? If not, that count has been falsified.
     
  16. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    No need to spin...what's the key word that National Review inserts that is NOT in the letter? Hint: It's not in the quote but is added to the sentence following the quote.

    It's the difference between "gain-of-function" and regular old research.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  17. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    You've seen my question enough to mark it "funny". Have you figured it out yet where you've been led astray? Just a quick test of reading comprehension skills. Tom Roten failed. Carolyn Downey is confused or maybe intentionally misleading. I'm giving you a chance at redemption.

    Another hint...it's in this paragraph:
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  18. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    "The laboratory mice infected with the modified bat virus “became sicker” than those infected with the unmodified bat virus."

    That is gain of function research.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    What is Gain-of-Function Research?

    Gain-of-function research refers to the serial passaging of microorganisms to increase their transmissibility, virulence, immunogenicity, and host tropism
     
  20. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    Nowhere in the letter do they say they modified the bat virus. In fact, they explicitly say it was "naturally occurring". Modified was inserted by the author of that National Review article. You are quoting the AUTHOR of the article, not the letter!

    They put a naturally occurring bat virus with the human ACE2 receptor to see if they bonded. The letter doesn't even infer any modification of the bat virus yet the article author, Tom Roten and now @Garmel is claiming "modified".

    I have to point out that this doesn't reflect well on the poster that repeatedly claims that others are being lied to by the MSM.
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2021
  21. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    And nowhere in the DHHS letter do they state or infer that they "serial pass(ed) microorganisms to increase their transmissibility, virulance, immunogenicity, and host tropism."

    If you think taking a naturally occurring virus and seeing how an organism reacts to that virus is "gain of function" then you've simply described nearly all research. In fact, Ivermectin started as a bacteria found in Japan that was introduced to parasites. Gain of function or research?

    "Gain of function" is modifying the virus either genetically or serial passing the virus to isolate mutated functions and enhancing those. Based on that letter, there isn't any evidence to support that claim.
     
  22. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    Dr. Richard Ebright, biosafety expert and professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University, had previously rebutted Fauci’s claim that the NIH “has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology [WIV]” as “demonstrably false.”

    Ebright told National Review that the NIH-financed work at the WIV “epitomizes” the definition of gain-of-function research, which deals with “enhanced potential pandemic pathogen (PPP)” or those pathogens “resulting from the enhancement of the transmissibility and/or virulence of a pathogen.”

    Sounds like the WIV1 was modified in this experiment.
     
  23. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    That is Ebright's claim. He hasn't produced any evidence that I'm aware of. Is here a reason you want to sidestep the topic that this author either misled the reader accidentally or intentionally and the consumers ran with it?

    Carolyn Downey wrote this letter was an admission yet needed to introduce the word modified to reinforce her claim. Heck, you QUOTED Downey as if that somehow gave the claim more credibility. Do you have actual information from the NIH or DHHS that shows they modified the virus because that is Gain of Function or do you merely have articles in which the author claims something that the letter didn't say?
     
  24. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    :facepalm:
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  25. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    That was my thought too. You could have easily just said my bad the author of the article made a leap that that letter didn't state. Instead, you doubled down, sidestepped. I get it, you believe the Gain of Function narrative thus were quick to promote this tweet. What article/tweet is claiming is not from the letter though but rather editorializing. That much is CLEAR, right?
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2021
  26. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    No, I used that because you're acting stupid as usual. The author is misleading nobody because she is taking the word of Dr. Ebright. Taking the word of a doctor in his specialty is a good idea. However, I sent a message to Dr. Ebright for a further explanation and if he can provide more details.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  27. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    You can't be this dense. This is the very first paragraph of the article. .

    The "top NIH official" didn't say that. The author stated that. That's why you quoted the author stating the virus was "modified", not the NIH official. The NIH official actually said the opposite of what Carolyn Downey is claiming. He said the virus they used was "naturally occurring".
     
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2021
  28. Garmel

    Garmel 5,000+ Posts

    Yes. However, She took Ebright's word there was a modification and went with the story. There was no intent to deceive. I want to hear what Ebright says.
     
  29. Seattle Husker

    Seattle Husker 10,000+ Posts

    She literally said the DHSS official said something they didn't say to claim vindication for Rand Paul. Either she was severely confused or had the same reading comprehension skills that Tom Roten and you have demonstrated OR she is misleading.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
    Last edited: Oct 21, 2021
  30. Duck Dodgers

    Duck Dodgers 1,000+ Posts

    At this point, how big of a dumb *** does a person still have to be to believe that the coronavirus which originated in Wuhan, China, wasn't from the Institute of Virology, which was performing gain of function experiments with bat borne viruses, to make them more contagious, and also coincidently located in Wuhan, China.

    Or do you still believe it started when someone ate a bat?

    If I drive through Pasadena, Texas, and smell sulfur - it's more than a bit likely it's coincidently from a refinery, not from some bad eggs at the local farmers market.

    The level of suspension of all logical belief, to allow for the lemming like followship of Experts!, such as the fraud Fachi is at this point laughable. But please, keep believing it's all from bat soup!
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page