Covid-19 News


  • I guess most people here think my answering this repetitive misinformation is feeding the trolls - but as you all know i'm a sucker for it. I did this in detail a few months ago. I do not have time now to repeat that, but instead I will summarise, quoting other sources. I want to point out you can go back to the original discussion if you want more.


    First: I've not seen any worthwhile scientific argument for your extraordinary supposition. Sometimes even as a non-specialist (which I take you to be since I've never detected from you on this topic any critical appraisal) you can work out the nmerit of arguments by looking at both sides. In this case there was an early argument made by Yan and rebutted here. There was then a later argument so bad it was retracted.


    The point here is that we don't need scientific reasons for it to be the same as all other similar viruses. That is expected. Those who argue for lab origin need scientific reasons for this hypothesis and do not have them.


    How can I prove it is not a lab virus? In principle, a Navid-friendly lab run by a Navid-style deep conspiracy - probably several centuries old and possessing in secret advanced biotec all that time, could produce artificially a virus so similar in all respects to a natural zoonosis cross-over that it would fool everyone. Such a possibility can never be disproved. But it is unlikely.


    Here are facts, please let me know which you question, and why you question them, and I will post support.


    I'm quoting from a National geographic summary of the immediate scientific reactions to the Yan September rehash paper.

    https://www.nationalgeographic…an-report-fact-check-cvd/


    Chief among their complaints was that the report ignored the vast body of published literature regarding what is known about how coronaviruses circulate in wild animal populations and the tendency to spill over into humans, including recent publications about the origins of SARS-CoV-2.


    I know you have a selected attention span when it come to reading science critical of your theories - but in this case the whole "hey - look - we've found all the bits we need in bats already" stuff has been well circulated here. As someone claiming to be knowledgable about cutting edge scientific research you will I'm sure be familiar with how to critically appraise a paper. This is absolutely necessary. You find papers arguing everything under the sun, and would end up believing all sorts of batty things....


    OK that argument won't work with you: because you have done that and bought the T shirt - so to speak.


    Here is why critical appraisal matters, especially when you are not familiar with the topic. That is the position most scientists are in when looking at novel work - by definition, it is novel, so they are not familiar with it.


    You first look to see whether the paper has considered and either accepted or rejected prior work relevant. In this case the vast literature on wild CVs in bat populations, efforts to find proximal origin, and the quite substantial recent literature on COVID-2 origins. Its not difficult to find this stuff. For example, you take the original https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 paper, and look up its citations (there are 512 from nature web site). I actually did this a while back and it is posted on here, in details, with the fascinating evidence. You seem to have forgotten.


    The experts also pointed out that the report whipped up wild conspiracy theories and wrongly accused academic journals of plotting with conspirators by censoring important evidence.


    Again - I realise that while most people see this as a red flag you probably find it attractive. So i will let everyone judge for themselves.


    In July, David Robertson, a viral genomics researcher at University of Glasgow, authored a peer-reviewed paper in Nature Medicine that showed the lineage behind SARS-CoV-2 and its closest known ancestor, a virus called RaTG13, have been circulating in bat populations for decades. Virologists think this relative, which is 96-percent identical to the novel coronavirus, probably propagated and evolved in bats or human hosts and then went undetected for about 20 years before adapting its current form and causing the ongoing pandemic.


    The Yan report claims this hypothesis is controversial, and that RaTG13 was also engineered in a lab. But that flies in the face of the overwhelming body of genetic evidence published about SARS-CoV-2 and its progenitors.


    You perhaps remember the details of this (I quoted from the paper) when we last addressed this. at the time you went silent on the subject, but now seem to have come back for another dose of reality?


    What’s more, the report was funded by the Rule of Law Society, a nonprofit organization founded by former chief White House strategist Steve Bannon, who has since been arrested for fraud.


    See, I'm also giving the obvious to all non-scientific context - to counteract all the "conspiracy-smears" which are 100% non-scientific and comprise 90% of your posting on this topic. fair i think. You stick to science and I will too.


    “It’s encroaching on pseudoscience, really,” says Robertson. “This paper just cherry-picked a couple of examples, excluded evidence, and came up with a ridiculous scenario.”


    National Geographic reached out to other prominent virologists and misinformation researchers to better understand where the Yan report came from and what it got wrong. Along the way, they offered tips for overcoming misinformation surrounding the coronavirus.

    Scientists have yet to find the direct parent of SARS-CoV-2 in feral beasts, though its closest relatives exist in bats. The virus may have passed through an intermediate animal—pangolins have been implicated—and then evolved to become better at infecting humans. Or it may have made the jump directly from bats to humans, given past examples of such occurrences. After the original SARS outbreak in China 20 years ago, researchers began surveying wild bats in local caves and the people who live near them. A 2018 study found the genetic relatives of the original SARS virus in the winged mammals—as well as specific antibodies, a residual sign of infection, in their human neighbors.


    I pointed this out before. The argument that SARS-nCoV2 must be artificial because we can't find its immediate animal progenitor is fully blown apart by a little zoonotic history. SARS itself too 20 years for us to discover the link. Those bat viruses are not easy to find and isolate. Lots of bats. Lots of viruses.


    Uncovering the natural source of the coronavirus will likely require large-scale sampling of animals—including bat and human populations—in China to trace the evolution of the novel coronavirus. The World Health Organization is readying a team to conduct such an investigation in China, though a timetable has not been released.


    Navid, is there any specific scientific argument in Yan's paper that you'd like me to expand the rebuttal of? You seem now to be giving me a pretty easy job. Which I guess is why many here are getting bored of the repetition.


    Mods - you had better not move this post and Navid's both to clearance - though they deserve this as repetitive - because if you do Navid will darkly claim you are pawns of deep state interests trying to suppress the truth, siding with "spin-doctors" such as me. LOL.


    Well, I'm all for highlighting the whole truth, tedious though it is. It is only by such efforts that we can rebut the anti-science irrational internet cult-like conspiracy theories that in this coronavirus era seem to have such public traction. Should this site become a hotbed of such things I would be most sorry. Luckily I've not seen much sign of that, most here seem quite level-headed.


    THH

  • We are waiting


    Navid, I know you have a very high opinion of yourself, but I think use of the ‘royal we’ is a little much, even for you.


    Or is it the case, as Jed has suggested previously, that you can in fact read people’s minds?


    (At least your paranoia likely has a rational basis if so...)


    And normally, “scientific” papers, such as Dr. Yan’s, are peer reviewed and published in a journal. Not on the website of a political organisation, that has not previously published scientific or medical research, run by a Chinese exile with an axe to grind, and a White House goon being prosecuted on four counts of fraud.

  • Studies on Covid-19 Lethality


    https://swprs.org/studies-on-covid-19-lethality/

  • <long rant doing exactly what was not asked for deleted>


    The argument that SARS-nCoV2 must be artificial because we can't find its immediate animal progenitor is fully blown apart by a little zoonotic history. Those bat viruses are not easy to find and isolate. Lots of bats. Lots of viruses.

    The old lots and lots of stuff argument....


    Yan's argument of simultaneous co-evolution of a bat virus in a pengolin; a virus that ends up creating a 10x tighter bind to the human ACE2 receptor than the pengolin one; and at the same time the simulatenous appearance of a furin cleavage site is total comedy. She made many more arguments that as a set are unleashed and this whole thing will unravel no matter how much they pay the "fact checkers", story writers, and entry-level disinformation workers.


    I think we found out the truth in this exchange.

  • Yan's argument of simultaneous co-evolution of a bat virus in a pengolin; a virus that ends up creating a 10x tighter bind to the human ACE2 receptor than the pengolin one; and at the same time the simulatenous appearance of a furin cleavage site is total comedy. She made many more arguments that as a set are unleashed and this whole thing will unravel no matter how much they pay the "fact checkers", story writers, and entry-level disinformation workers.

    pangolin - not pengolin.


    Glad we are agreeing here - it is total comedy.


    Basically, yan does not reference the literature (has never heard of it?) on these viruses that easily cross species. (HINT - that is why SARS-nCoV2 is now a human virus). Therefore you do not need "co-evolution" to find similar viruses in different species.


    Do you want me similarly to point out the other flaws here, or shall we let it rest?


    I should point out that all you have contributed to this discussion is repeating badly researched and discredited Yan arguments, and adding spin (e.g. when you make meta-comments about "entry-level disinformation worker").


    Try harder perhaps? With some science? For example, you could go to the supporting literature for Yan's arguments? Oh - perhaps that would be difficult - because she does not reference most of the relevant literature so you'd have to look at it all for yourself first. Those 312 references. About 5% are relevant. You could go for it.


    Your fave "entry-level disinformation worker" (can I get a pay raise now? maybe level up?) I guess I need a tougher dungeon for that.


    PS - does anyone here think Navid truly believes I get paid for posting here? it would be no sillier than some of his other views. My guess is he does.

  • More serious argument.


    Be very careful of any line of argument that says "wow - that is so unlikely - 3 different things all needed at same time to evolve this or that feature in a form that would give it fitness, chances of that are zero".


    That argument has been studied extensively, and conclusively shown wrong again and again. Originally used, for example, on the mammalian eye. And yet with better gene sequencing across species we find that the various mechanisms are all developed independently for different purposes, and come together to form a proto-eye by the magic of genetic-level evolution. Mammals can do this with crossover and sexual reproduction but of course even RNA viruses can do it naturally via reassortment.


    It is very unwise to bet against evolution on grounds that it is unlikely - intermediate mechanisms are discovered all the time that make apparent miracles turn into something bound to happen. Eyes, independently evolved in different branches of the evolutionary tree many times over, are a great example of this.


    Perhaps the same people who took up that argument against evolution would find Yan's arguments attractive? I don't know, but they are very shaky for that reason. Which is why the serious comment on the topic views Yan's arguments as "cherry-picked examples, excluding science".

  • PS - does anyone here think Navid truly believes I get paid for posting here? it would be no sillier than some of his other views. My guess is he does.


    The man believes in a sprawling conspiracy that claims Don T is leading a fight against satanic paedophile rings that harvest children’s pituitary hormones inside networks of secret underground tunnels.


    But even so, I don’t honestly think he’s daft enough to believe that you actually get paid for practising your (our?) strange hobby.

  • Chief among their complaints was that the report ignored the vast body of published literature regarding what is known about how coronaviruses circulate in wild animal populations and the tendency to spill over into humans, including recent publications about the origins of SARS-CoV-2.

    THHuxleynew : Citing paid idiots does not make your statements true. You should try to refute a scientific write-up with science arguments not by spin-doctor citations.


    spin of spin = spin2!


    Just to note: There is no published evidence for a natural evolution of the CoV-19 virus. But there are tons of papers full of nonsensical spin!

  • So the nonsensical spin predominates discussion - nice one Wyttenbach- we could simply say that the inventors of this virus made a slight mistake in their sequencing perhaps but are now waiting for it to evolve into a much more lethal variant and kill everyone which will probably happen around Xmas in the Northern Hemisphere? So get your Anti-Bat virus supplies in early before the pharmacies abroad run out!:)

  • Thing are really escalating out of control in the UK - the number of deaths has trebled just in one day! Absolutely shocking statistics but the general public are now 'conditioned' to accept this disaster to be normal and it is this normalisation which now enables the state to enforce dictats without any parliamentary discussion or control. This is a fascist's dream come true! And the Proud Boys in the US are given police protection as they unload automatic weapons into crowds of Black Lives Matter demonstrators. Again a fascist's dream come true! So who can really believe that there is not some element of conspiracy here?????? The next step as far as I can see is justified nuclear war, a first strike on Kin Jong Un or maybe that evil Emperor Xi Jin Ping masquerading as a communist?=O

  • Proof home-based treatment trumps the failed Fauci model

    https://www.wnd.com/2020/10/pr…rumps-failed-fauci-model/


    Dr. McCullough's team of experts recommend cheap, safe, FDA-approved medicines – HCQ with azithromycin or doxycycline, possibly ivermectin or colchicine, inhaled budesonide or the more potent oral prednisone, anticoagulants, supplemental zinc, vitamin C and vitamin D, and home oxygen concentrators.


    ………………….


    note: the above is from the article and the title is "Proof" not that I am saying it is that, its just the title of the article.

  • Proof home-based treatment trumps the failed Fauci model

    AAPS is ummm ... not a main-stream physicians group. Ain't saying they're WRONG ... but I wouldn't bet my life on their recommendations.

    From her bio ... specializing in preventive and climacteric medicine
    Climacteric !!??
    having extreme and far-reaching implications or results; critical.

  • Peak Prosperity - Oct-13

    Combo Therapy Works! And another U-Turn on the W.H.O. bus?

    - WHO backtracks on lockdowns

    - Is the "2nd Wave" just a delayed part of "1st Wave"?

    - Study: Combined Ivermectin+Azithromycin+Cholecaliferol treatment

    - Study: Combined Ivermectin+Doxycycline+Zinc+Vitamin D3 treatment


    Medcram - Oct-13

    Would eating a handful of walnuts reduce viral replication?

    Coronavirus Update 112: Linoleic Acid; Vaccines; UK COVID 19 Data

  • Hurray record 2x+ ! Switzerland has beaten USA! 2833 new CoV-19 cases for 8.5 mio. people - would be more than 110'000 for USA.

    But the average death rate is terribly low. But CoV-19 is reaching the older again as the number of infections among age >80 did rise 3x stronger than average. So you can guess why there are some deaths.

    https://www.srf.ch/news/schwei…ona-zahlen-in-der-schweiz


    Germany faces far more deaths with 5x less new cases. So in reality death rate is 10x larger than here.

    So we are all on the Sweden track now!


  • The idea of locking up tight everyone who is over 60 (female) or 55 (male) and letting young people catch COVID is not ideal - but still quite attractive.


    The problem with this strategy is that older people often live with younger ones, and also may look after grandchildren, etc. It is difficult to lock up the older 1/3 of the country!