The new Corona virus, should we worry?

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
11,244
Reaction score
4,923
Points
113
Destroy millions of lives, and with no net effect on reduced deaths.
There you go making shit up again with zero proof. Just because Covid will be here forever, doesn't mean there was no net effect on deaths, that's just complete bullshit.

I am glad for it all, my parents are still alive and got their boosters on Friday. Vax is here everything is open and you guys can't stop crying. LOL
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
11,244
Reaction score
4,923
Points
113
Correct, “super” flu.



For more than a decade now, two scientists–one in the U.S. and one in the Netherlands–have been trying to create a deadly human pathogen from avian influenza. That's right: they are trying to turn "bird flu," which does not normally infect people, into a human flu.

Not surprisingly, many scientists are vehemently opposed to this. In mid-2014, a group of them formed the Cambridge Working Group and issued a statement warning of the dangers of this research. The statement was signed by hundreds of scientists at virtually every major U.S. and European university. (Full disclosure: I am one of the signatories.)

In response to these and other concerns, in October 2014 the U.S. government called for a "pause" in this dangerous research. NIH Director Francis Collins said that his agency would study the risks and benefits before proceeding further.
….
Not surprisingly, then, when other scientists (including me) learned about the efforts to turn bird flu into a human flu, we asked: why the heck would anyone do that? The answers were and still are unsatisfactory: claims such as "we'll learn more about the pandemic potential of the flu" and "we'll be better prepared for an avian flu pandemic if one occurs." These are hand-waving arguments that may sound reasonable, but they promise only vague benefits while ignoring the dangers of this research. If the research succeeds, and one of the newly-designed, highly virulent flu strains escapes, the damage could be horrific.

One of the deadliest strains of avian flu circulating today is H5N1. This strain has occasionally jumped from birds to humans, with a mortality rate approaching 50%, far more deadly than any human flu. Fortunately, the virus has never gained the ability to be transmitted directly between humans.

That is, it didn't have this ability until two scientists, Ron Fouchier in the Netherlands and Yoshihiro Kawaoka at the University of Wisconsin, engineered it to gain this ability. (Actually, their work showed that the virus could be transmitted between ferrets, not humans, for the obvious reason that you can't ethically test this on humans.)

Well, Fouchier and Kawaoka are back at it again. NIH actually lifted the "pause" in December 2017, and invited scientists to submit proposal for this type of research. Fouchier confidently stated at the time that all he had to do was "find and replace" a few terms in his previous proposal and it would likely sail through peer review. It appears he was correct, although according to the Science article, his study has been approved but not yet actually funded. Kawaoka's project is already under way, as anyone can learn by checking the NIH grants database.


World is in desperate need of a massive human die off. Hope it's not my family.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
28,909
Reaction score
7,238
Points
113
Delta variant. I haven't seen any proof that Delta is less deadly.
It's more deadly.

If you could go back in time and start with Delta, instead of the original genome, we'd have ... 2, 3, 4, 5x ??? more dead. Something like that.

But with vaccines and let's be honest, the government paying for extremely expensive, and not approved (!!!!) monoclonal antibody treatments, this has resulted in fewer of the hospitalized eventually dying.
 

Blizzard

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
4,311
Reaction score
500
Points
113
Correct, “super” flu.



For more than a decade now, two scientists–one in the U.S. and one in the Netherlands–have been trying to create a deadly human pathogen from avian influenza. That's right: they are trying to turn "bird flu," which does not normally infect people, into a human flu.

Not surprisingly, many scientists are vehemently opposed to this. In mid-2014, a group of them formed the Cambridge Working Group and issued a statement warning of the dangers of this research. The statement was signed by hundreds of scientists at virtually every major U.S. and European university. (Full disclosure: I am one of the signatories.)

In response to these and other concerns, in October 2014 the U.S. government called for a "pause" in this dangerous research. NIH Director Francis Collins said that his agency would study the risks and benefits before proceeding further.
….
Not surprisingly, then, when other scientists (including me) learned about the efforts to turn bird flu into a human flu, we asked: why the heck would anyone do that? The answers were and still are unsatisfactory: claims such as "we'll learn more about the pandemic potential of the flu" and "we'll be better prepared for an avian flu pandemic if one occurs." These are hand-waving arguments that may sound reasonable, but they promise only vague benefits while ignoring the dangers of this research. If the research succeeds, and one of the newly-designed, highly virulent flu strains escapes, the damage could be horrific.

One of the deadliest strains of avian flu circulating today is H5N1. This strain has occasionally jumped from birds to humans, with a mortality rate approaching 50%, far more deadly than any human flu. Fortunately, the virus has never gained the ability to be transmitted directly between humans.

That is, it didn't have this ability until two scientists, Ron Fouchier in the Netherlands and Yoshihiro Kawaoka at the University of Wisconsin, engineered it to gain this ability. (Actually, their work showed that the virus could be transmitted between ferrets, not humans, for the obvious reason that you can't ethically test this on humans.)

Well, Fouchier and Kawaoka are back at it again. NIH actually lifted the "pause" in December 2017, and invited scientists to submit proposal for this type of research. Fouchier confidently stated at the time that all he had to do was "find and replace" a few terms in his previous proposal and it would likely sail through peer review. It appears he was correct, although according to the Science article, his study has been approved but not yet actually funded. Kawaoka's project is already under way, as anyone can learn by checking the NIH grants database.


If people don't think there isn't another unit 731 somewhere in China they're seriously underestimating human depravity.
 



MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
28,909
Reaction score
7,238
Points
113
If people don't think there isn't another unit 731 somewhere in China they're seriously underestimating human depravity.
Depraved to try to prevent the next epidemic from killing your highly dense population that lives near huge bat caves?

:ROFLMAO: What else will you lie about?
 






Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
11,244
Reaction score
4,923
Points
113
Depraved to try to prevent the next epidemic from killing your highly dense population that lives near huge bat caves?
Stupid take, scientists will always want to push. They are rarely if ever connected in such a way as you assume in this statement.

Glad you don't give a shit about the damage this research caused. F brilliant...
 








MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
28,909
Reaction score
7,238
Points
113
That is highly unlikely and a rediculous assumption.
Of course it's highly likely.

WIV was created because China is a massive vector for new epidemics/pandemics to come from.

You're no better than conspiracy filth to suggest otherwise.
 


Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
18,322
Reaction score
2,928
Points
113
75,000 healthcare workers in New York chose to be fired?? I demand a recount.

"Steven Corwin, the president and CEO at New York-Presbyterian Hospitals, one of the largest systems in the country, said he believes a mandate is needed to get everyone fully vaccinated.

Before its own vaccination deadline last week, 30% of staff were unvaccinated. But after the deadline, less than 1% refused the shot and resigned.

"So out of 48,000 employees and affiliated physicians, we have less than 220 that have not chosen to get the vaccine," Corwin told CBS News' Errol Barnett."

from https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccine-mandate-new-york-hospital-workers-2021-09-28/

The higher the education level and difficulty of finding other work the higher the vax rate will be under the mandates. Lower paid staff, who are also essential, will leave in significantly higher numbers. I’d guess 5-20% at long term, nursing homes, and so on. Nursing assistants, janitorial, and so on.
 


Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
50,166
Reaction score
4,308
Points
113
There you go making shit up again with zero proof. Just because Covid will be here forever, doesn't mean there was no net effect on deaths, that's just complete bullshit.

I am glad for it all, my parents are still alive and got their boosters on Friday. Vax is here everything is open and you guys can't stop crying. LOL
At best, you delayed deaths by a year or two. The cost is incredible.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
28,909
Reaction score
7,238
Points
113
The higher the education level and difficulty of finding other work the higher the vax rate will be under the mandates. Lower paid staff, who are also essential, will leave in significantly higher numbers. I’d guess 5-20% at long term, nursing homes, and so on. Nursing assistants, janitorial, and so on.
Byyyyyeeee

In a just world, they'll never be hired in those positions again.
 

MplsGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 4, 2017
Messages
28,909
Reaction score
7,238
Points
113
At best, you delayed deaths by a year or two.
With no lockdowns, mandates, etc., the total deaths at the end of the pandemic would've been 5-10x higher.

Good thing that government can use force and make people do things against their will. Love that. :)
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
18,322
Reaction score
2,928
Points
113
Byyyyyeeee

In a just world, they'll never be hired in those positions again.

Sounds good until it’s your butt on the line, or Grandpa’s. Whistling past the graveyard has always been a sound defense mechanism. Not my problem, bro!
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
11,244
Reaction score
4,923
Points
113
At best, you delayed deaths by a year or two. The cost is incredible.

Everything looks fine to me. What was the incredible cost? Some businesses went under, I feel for them and would have supported more help for them. Every crisis will chew up and spit out some people. That can't be avoided.

It will take a few more years for me to pass judgement on much of what has gone on.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
11,244
Reaction score
4,923
Points
113
With no lockdowns, mandates, etc., the total deaths at the end of the pandemic would've been 5-10x higher.

Good thing that government can use force and make people do things against their will. Love that. :)

More make believe shit you can't assume.

This post literally makes me want to puke, and it makes me want to vote for Trump in 2024. I am planning a Trump is dead party and you are making me want to vote for him ...
Good job..🙄
 



balds

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
2,811
Reaction score
536
Points
113
Delta variant. I haven't seen any proof that Delta is less deadly.
That simple, huh? With roughly equal case counts, more deaths with 65% of the population protected via vaccination than with 0% protected via vaccination? Delta variant. Case closed.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
11,244
Reaction score
4,923
Points
113
That simple, huh? With roughly equal case counts, more deaths with 65% of the population protected via vaccination than with 0% protected via vaccination? Delta variant. Case closed.
Yes. Why not?

Delta has much higher viral loads, like 10x+.

Case counts mean nothing now, I am not sure they ever meant much tbh. With vaccinated people transmitting the virus many probably have minimal symptoms and don't get tested.

I know lots of people who wouldn't want to miss work and would go when sick right now. With the enhanced unemployment, people were fine sitting at home sick.

Most of the world doesn't get sick days, I don't get paid unless I am at work. No sick days, no pto.
 

Pompous Elitist

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 18, 2013
Messages
18,322
Reaction score
2,928
Points
113
With no lockdowns, mandates, etc., the total deaths at the end of the pandemic would've been 5-10x higher.

Good thing that government can use force and make people do things against their will. Love that. :)
I'm sure those workers were unreplaceable, the best there ever was. Did things no one will ever be able to do again.

Coming from someone that doesn’t work
 




Top Bottom