Coronavirus ( Covid-19) Part II
JohnnyBlaze said:
Hurray for that.
Trump just wants a stage for himself, same as all his never ending campaign ralleys.
It's not about COVID that is not the reason for Trump being shut down
It's just another manipulation
They (All of them including officials)
Are guilty of altering perception
Let's say it again
CONTROL THE HUMAN PERCEPTION YOU CONTROL THE HUMAN.
Hurray for that.
Trump just wants a stage for himself, same as all his never ending campaign ralleys.
It's not about COVID that is not the reason for Trump being shut down
It's just another manipulation
They (All of them including officials)
Are guilty of altering perception
Let's say it again
CONTROL THE HUMAN PERCEPTION YOU CONTROL THE HUMAN.
JohnnyBlaze said:
Hurray for that.
Trump just wants a stage for himself, same as all his never ending campaign ralleys.
Exactly. Trump wants what Trump wants despite the risks to others. Cooper has a nice set that isn't afraid to stand up to him. If we can plan a RNC, then we can plan other events. But that's right, we AREN'T planning other events HERE in NC because we aren't certain about safety protocols surrounding a virus everyone wants to conveniently forget is still a VERY real threat.
Hurray for that.
Trump just wants a stage for himself, same as all his never ending campaign ralleys.
Exactly. Trump wants what Trump wants despite the risks to others. Cooper has a nice set that isn't afraid to stand up to him. If we can plan a RNC, then we can plan other events. But that's right, we AREN'T planning other events HERE in NC because we aren't certain about safety protocols surrounding a virus everyone wants to conveniently forget is still a VERY real threat.
You know what should make everyone who fears the COVID-19 virus?
The air conditioning and the constant circulation of the suspected virus through the system You think it will get caught in the filters? Ok maybe it will that's even worse
That will result in a saturated filter breeding the virus YUCK
The air conditioning and the constant circulation of the suspected virus through the system You think it will get caught in the filters? Ok maybe it will that's even worse
That will result in a saturated filter breeding the virus YUCK
It is
with sadness
we say
goodbye
to the ones
we knew
so well
the hard fought battles
we won
and the ones
that we lose
Every Year
It is
with sadness
to see
no official
news media
recognition
no
remembrance day
of a war
that takes our loved ones
away
world wide
by the millions
but now
they are quietly silent
officially
no longer
in play
with sadness
we say
goodbye
to the ones
we knew
so well
the hard fought battles
we won
and the ones
that we lose
Every Year
It is
with sadness
to see
no official
news media
recognition
no
remembrance day
of a war
that takes our loved ones
away
world wide
by the millions
but now
they are quietly silent
officially
no longer
in play
A new peer-reviewed study shows that the Covid-19 outbreak started as a faulty experiment in China, the ex-head of MI6 says. The paper he cited was reportedly “watered down” to remove accusations against Beijing.
“I do think that this started as an accident,” Sir Richard Dearlove, who led Britain’s top spy agency, MI6, from 1999 until 2004, told the Telegraph’s Planet Normal podcast.
It raises the issue, if China ever were to admit responsibility, does it pay reparations? I think it will make every country in the world rethink how it treats its relationship with China and how the international community behaves towards the Chinese leadership.
Dearlove suggested that the virus was not released deliberately, but rather accidentally leaked when Chinese scientists were experimenting on bat coronaviruses. To back up his claims, he cited a recently-published peer-reviewed study by a British-Norwegian team which claimed to have found “inserted sections placed on the SARS-CoV-2 Spike surface” that allow the virus to come into contact with human cells.
The ex-MI6 chief told the Telegraph that the study was rewritten several times. The research paper originally said that the novel coronavirus should be called the “Wuhan virus” – the name of the Chinese city where it was first recorded – and claimed to have proven that the virus was “engineered,” the newspaper reported, citing an earlier draft of the study.
The Telegraph also said that researchers from the Francis Crick Institute and Imperial College London rejected the study’s conclusions, while “leading academic journals” such as Nature and the Journal of Virology found the study unsuitable for publication.
The report says that one of the study’s original authors had withdrawn his name from the research before the paper was “watered down” to remove any explicit allegations against Beijing. However, intelligence officials reportedly looked through its findings before publication.
Since the first weeks of the Covid-19 outbreak, media reports and some Western politicians have alleged that the SARS-CoV-2 virus may have originated from a high-profile virology lab in Wuhan. US officials have been particularly keen on blaming China, with President Donald Trump saying that the country must compensate for the damages caused by the outbreak.
Beijing has repeatedly denied these claims.
In late April, the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence stated that the virus “was not manmade or genetically modified.” Likewise, intelligence sources told the Guardian last month that there is no evidence that the coronavirus was released from a Chinese lab, or that a possible leak could have caused the pandemic.
“I do think that this started as an accident,” Sir Richard Dearlove, who led Britain’s top spy agency, MI6, from 1999 until 2004, told the Telegraph’s Planet Normal podcast.
It raises the issue, if China ever were to admit responsibility, does it pay reparations? I think it will make every country in the world rethink how it treats its relationship with China and how the international community behaves towards the Chinese leadership.
Dearlove suggested that the virus was not released deliberately, but rather accidentally leaked when Chinese scientists were experimenting on bat coronaviruses. To back up his claims, he cited a recently-published peer-reviewed study by a British-Norwegian team which claimed to have found “inserted sections placed on the SARS-CoV-2 Spike surface” that allow the virus to come into contact with human cells.
The ex-MI6 chief told the Telegraph that the study was rewritten several times. The research paper originally said that the novel coronavirus should be called the “Wuhan virus” – the name of the Chinese city where it was first recorded – and claimed to have proven that the virus was “engineered,” the newspaper reported, citing an earlier draft of the study.
The Telegraph also said that researchers from the Francis Crick Institute and Imperial College London rejected the study’s conclusions, while “leading academic journals” such as Nature and the Journal of Virology found the study unsuitable for publication.
The report says that one of the study’s original authors had withdrawn his name from the research before the paper was “watered down” to remove any explicit allegations against Beijing. However, intelligence officials reportedly looked through its findings before publication.
Since the first weeks of the Covid-19 outbreak, media reports and some Western politicians have alleged that the SARS-CoV-2 virus may have originated from a high-profile virology lab in Wuhan. US officials have been particularly keen on blaming China, with President Donald Trump saying that the country must compensate for the damages caused by the outbreak.
Beijing has repeatedly denied these claims.
In late April, the US Office of the Director of National Intelligence stated that the virus “was not manmade or genetically modified.” Likewise, intelligence sources told the Guardian last month that there is no evidence that the coronavirus was released from a Chinese lab, or that a possible leak could have caused the pandemic.
By Peter Andrews, Irish science journalist and writer based in London. He has a background in the life sciences, and graduated from the University of Glasgow with a degree in genetics
We were supposed to be “following the science,” but now the scientists are falling over themselves to admit they didn’t get it right. How on earth did we end up in this ridiculous situation, and can we ever trust “experts” again?
While it seems that the initial coronavirus attack has largely blown over, at least in Europe, learning lessons will be crucial to better deal with the next pandemic. But learning lessons is hard when the “experts” seem more bamboozled than ever.
The first such expert is, surprise surprise, British epidemiologist and academic Neil Ferguson, who has been put in the rather uncomfortable position of having to justify his actions. Hauled up in front of the British House of Lords on Tuesday, Ferguson was forced to admit, in response to a question about the apparent success of the Swedish model, that Sweden had “got a long way to the same effect” without imposing lockdown. This is an overt admission that he now thinks that the UK lockdown was (and is) pointless. As opposed to the covert one that involved multiple illicit visits from his mistress.
Also on rt.com
'Professor Lockdown' Ferguson, UK's Covid-19 czar, admits crippling restrictions MADE NO DIFFERENCE – where’s the outrage?
More weirdly, Ferguson said that Sweden had achieved this by adopting “quite similar science” that his Imperial College London team did. This seems to be a reference to the fact that a study from Uppsala University took the Imperial apocalypse-model, but predicted only a fraction of the number of deaths that he had.
But when pressed on this point, Ferguson denied that the Swedes had followed the same science, saying “First of all, they did not use our model. They developed a model of their own.” This is despite the fact that the Uppsala study quite clearly states, “We employed an individual agent-based model based on work by Ferguson
We were supposed to be “following the science,” but now the scientists are falling over themselves to admit they didn’t get it right. How on earth did we end up in this ridiculous situation, and can we ever trust “experts” again?
While it seems that the initial coronavirus attack has largely blown over, at least in Europe, learning lessons will be crucial to better deal with the next pandemic. But learning lessons is hard when the “experts” seem more bamboozled than ever.
The first such expert is, surprise surprise, British epidemiologist and academic Neil Ferguson, who has been put in the rather uncomfortable position of having to justify his actions. Hauled up in front of the British House of Lords on Tuesday, Ferguson was forced to admit, in response to a question about the apparent success of the Swedish model, that Sweden had “got a long way to the same effect” without imposing lockdown. This is an overt admission that he now thinks that the UK lockdown was (and is) pointless. As opposed to the covert one that involved multiple illicit visits from his mistress.
Also on rt.com
'Professor Lockdown' Ferguson, UK's Covid-19 czar, admits crippling restrictions MADE NO DIFFERENCE – where’s the outrage?
More weirdly, Ferguson said that Sweden had achieved this by adopting “quite similar science” that his Imperial College London team did. This seems to be a reference to the fact that a study from Uppsala University took the Imperial apocalypse-model, but predicted only a fraction of the number of deaths that he had.
But when pressed on this point, Ferguson denied that the Swedes had followed the same science, saying “First of all, they did not use our model. They developed a model of their own.” This is despite the fact that the Uppsala study quite clearly states, “We employed an individual agent-based model based on work by Ferguson
drone said:By Peter Andrews, Irish science journalist and writer based in London. He has a background in the life sciences, and graduated from the University of Glasgow with a degree in genetics
We were supposed to be “following the science,” but now the scientists are falling over themselves to admit they didn’t get it right. How on earth did we end up in this ridiculous situation, and can we ever trust “experts” again?
While it seems that the initial coronavirus attack has largely blown over, at least in Europe, learning lessons will be crucial to better deal with the next pandemic. But learning lessons is hard when the “experts” seem more bamboozled than ever.
The first such expert is, surprise surprise, British epidemiologist and academic Neil Ferguson, who has been put in the rather uncomfortable position of having to justify his actions. Hauled up in front of the British House of Lords on Tuesday, Ferguson was forced to admit, in response to a question about the apparent success of the Swedish model, that Sweden had “got a long way to the same effect” without imposing lockdown. This is an overt admission that he now thinks that the UK lockdown was (and is) pointless. As opposed to the covert one that involved multiple illicit visits from his mistress.
Also on rt.com
'Professor Lockdown' Ferguson, UK's Covid-19 czar, admits crippling restrictions MADE NO DIFFERENCE – where’s the outrage?
More weirdly, Ferguson said that Sweden had achieved this by adopting “quite similar science” that his Imperial College London team did. This seems to be a reference to the fact that a study from Uppsala University took the Imperial apocalypse-model, but predicted only a fraction of the number of deaths that he had.
But when pressed on this point, Ferguson denied that the Swedes had followed the same science, saying “First of all, they did not use our model. They developed a model of their own.” This is despite the fact that the Uppsala study quite clearly states, “We employed an individual agent-based model based on work by Ferguson
Well, now we know what website to go to for opinion editorials ... and tabloid fodder.
We were supposed to be “following the science,” but now the scientists are falling over themselves to admit they didn’t get it right. How on earth did we end up in this ridiculous situation, and can we ever trust “experts” again?
While it seems that the initial coronavirus attack has largely blown over, at least in Europe, learning lessons will be crucial to better deal with the next pandemic. But learning lessons is hard when the “experts” seem more bamboozled than ever.
The first such expert is, surprise surprise, British epidemiologist and academic Neil Ferguson, who has been put in the rather uncomfortable position of having to justify his actions. Hauled up in front of the British House of Lords on Tuesday, Ferguson was forced to admit, in response to a question about the apparent success of the Swedish model, that Sweden had “got a long way to the same effect” without imposing lockdown. This is an overt admission that he now thinks that the UK lockdown was (and is) pointless. As opposed to the covert one that involved multiple illicit visits from his mistress.
Also on rt.com
'Professor Lockdown' Ferguson, UK's Covid-19 czar, admits crippling restrictions MADE NO DIFFERENCE – where’s the outrage?
More weirdly, Ferguson said that Sweden had achieved this by adopting “quite similar science” that his Imperial College London team did. This seems to be a reference to the fact that a study from Uppsala University took the Imperial apocalypse-model, but predicted only a fraction of the number of deaths that he had.
But when pressed on this point, Ferguson denied that the Swedes had followed the same science, saying “First of all, they did not use our model. They developed a model of their own.” This is despite the fact that the Uppsala study quite clearly states, “We employed an individual agent-based model based on work by Ferguson
Well, now we know what website to go to for opinion editorials ... and tabloid fodder.
JohnnyBlaze said:
Well, now we know what website to go to for opinion editorials ... and tabloid fodder.
I absolutely LOVE how these types totally forget New Zealand, who locked down hard and fast. Let me repost!
New Zealand could return to normal life as early as next week
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-newzealand/new-zealand-could-return-to-normal-life-as-early-as-next-week-idUSKBN23A0FY
Well, now we know what website to go to for opinion editorials ... and tabloid fodder.
I absolutely LOVE how these types totally forget New Zealand, who locked down hard and fast. Let me repost!
New Zealand could return to normal life as early as next week
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-newzealand/new-zealand-could-return-to-normal-life-as-early-as-next-week-idUSKBN23A0FY
Cook County Jail releases could be spreading COVID-19 in community, study suggests
https://chicago.suntimes.com/coronavirus/2020/6/4/21280984/cook-county-jail-covid-19-tom-dart-health-affairs
The peer-reviewed analysis, published online by the journal Health Affairs, shows that COVID-19 case rates were significantly higher in zip codes with higher rates of arrest and released jail inmates.
Eric Reinhart, a University of Chicago medical student who is on leave from Harvard, analyzed records for more than 2,000 inmates released in March that he obtained through an open-records request. He then linked that information with COVID-19 data by ZIP code from the Illinois Department of Public Health. Reinhart concluded for each person arrested, there’s a risk of infecting at least two people in the community with COVID-19, a multiplier effect estimate he called conservative.
“For every person you put in jail, you’re going to infect more people in the community,” Reinhart said in an interview.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/coronavirus/2020/6/4/21280984/cook-county-jail-covid-19-tom-dart-health-affairs
The peer-reviewed analysis, published online by the journal Health Affairs, shows that COVID-19 case rates were significantly higher in zip codes with higher rates of arrest and released jail inmates.
Eric Reinhart, a University of Chicago medical student who is on leave from Harvard, analyzed records for more than 2,000 inmates released in March that he obtained through an open-records request. He then linked that information with COVID-19 data by ZIP code from the Illinois Department of Public Health. Reinhart concluded for each person arrested, there’s a risk of infecting at least two people in the community with COVID-19, a multiplier effect estimate he called conservative.
“For every person you put in jail, you’re going to infect more people in the community,” Reinhart said in an interview.
Love Governor Cooper.
Governor Cooper Signs Executive Order to Address Disproportionate Impact of COVID-19 on Communities of Color
https://governor.nc.gov/news/governor-cooper-signs-executive-order-address-disproportionate-impact-%EF%BB%BF-covid-19-communities?fbclid=IwAR03hP5_OVeUtvuWaXdH52g_dMCMH1OYBDIZZXCcGATrJhfw5-SObR0Gdng
Governor Cooper Signs Executive Order to Address Disproportionate Impact of COVID-19 on Communities of Color
https://governor.nc.gov/news/governor-cooper-signs-executive-order-address-disproportionate-impact-%EF%BB%BF-covid-19-communities?fbclid=IwAR03hP5_OVeUtvuWaXdH52g_dMCMH1OYBDIZZXCcGATrJhfw5-SObR0Gdng
JohnnyBlaze said:Now comes a moment of truth for the U.S. because it has been almost 2 weeks of mass public protesting and symptoms of resulting new infections should be manifesting.
yep.
Well Well. . .
Sweden's top scientist admits response to virus was too lax
Sweden's state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, who instituted the policy of keeping the country open during the Covid-19, expressed some regret about the plan as the death toll continues to rise.
https://www.livescience.com/results-of-sweden-covid19-response.html
yep.
Well Well. . .
Sweden's top scientist admits response to virus was too lax
Sweden's state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, who instituted the policy of keeping the country open during the Covid-19, expressed some regret about the plan as the death toll continues to rise.
https://www.livescience.com/results-of-sweden-covid19-response.html
