Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

LarsMac;1532520 wrote: I am not offering any opinions on any of these pieces. Just sharing.


The intelligence community has made a statement today, which is considered unusual.

This is from Politico

“The IC will continue to rigorously examine emerging information and intelligence to determine whether the outbreak began through contact with infected animals or if it was the result of an accident at a laboratory in Wuhan.”

Current and former national security officials said they were surprised by the release, and suggested it could be a sign that the intelligence community feels it is being pulled into a political battle. The administration has been pressuring analysts, particularly at the CIA, to search for evidence that the virus came from a lab and that the World Health Organization helped China cover it up, according to a person briefed on the discussions.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/3 ... ory-226269




I have only two questions I'm hoping to see answered, with evidence.

Was the lab funded for for coronavirus research by any American source and if so, was it Federal funding?

Did that research involve changing the virus at any stage, as opposed to merely investigating it?

Because those are the allegations detailed in the Asia Times report yesterday. One side or the other will end up using the evidence as a coercive tool, I'd much rather it was produced in open court.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Snooz
Posts: 4800
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:05 am

Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by Snooz »

spot;1532533 wrote: I believe he wants to substitute American Homeland producers for those in China.

Either wages offered by these American Homeland producers will become equivalent to those in China (assuming they can achieve that level of productivity), or your price may vary.

Tooling up might take several years too, but it will Make America Great Again.

To understand American patriotism you have to become an American patriot. Believing American patriots to be more valuable, worthy and exceptional than foreigners, beatniks and sympathizers comes with the territory.


Sure and American Patriots will proudly pick vegetables for cents on the dollar just so long as those filthy, disease-ridden brown people are kept out of this Christian nation.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12542
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by LarsMac »

Snooz;1532545 wrote:

[QUOTE=spot;1532533]I believe he wants to substitute American Homeland producers for those in China.

Either wages offered by these American Homeland producers will become equivalent to those in China (assuming they can achieve that level of productivity), or your price may vary.

Tooling up might take several years too, but it will Make America Great Again.

To understand American patriotism you have to become an American patriot. Believing American patriots to be more valuable, worthy and exceptional than foreigners, beatniks and sympathizers comes with the territory.


Sure and American Patriots will proudly pick vegetables for cents on the dollar just so long as those filthy, disease-ridden brown people are kept out of this Christian nation.


I always though that I was an American Patriot, but Neither of those options seem to apply to me.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

spot;1532524 wrote: So, the Californian Dr Erickson in the video. I'm six minutes in and so far he's completely wrong.

He's extrapolated a positive to test ratio to the whole state. He can't do that. The people tested aren't a random selection of the population, they're tested primarily because they're in a high risk environment or they're presenting as ill. The extrapolation is not rational, the rest of the population is neither.

He's also equating the number of tests performed with the number of people tested, which is also clearly mistaken.


Here we are, I said he was talking biased cobblers. That was a political pressure broadcast with no medical input whatever.

The best current estimates are that the Covid-19 death rate is just under 1% and for flu it's 0.1%. These are estimates, which would need large-scale random testing to verify.

On Monday, as the video garnered more views, two professional medical associations, the American College of Emergency Physicians and the American Academy of Emergency Medicine, issued a joint statement condemning the doctors' "reckless and untested musings".

The medical associations said the conclusions reached in the doctors' video were inconsistent with current science and epidemiology regarding Covid-19, adding: "It appears these two individuals are releasing biased, non-peer-reviewed data to advance their personal financial interests without regard for the public's health."

YouTube removed the full video because it violated its policies which were tightened last week.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/52487960

Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
librtyhead
Posts: 199
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 2:32 pm

Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by librtyhead »

Hiya Snooze!!!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

The UK lifting of the lockdown is cautiously making progress. The only schooling between now and September is reception, year 1 and year 6 getting a few days each to sort themselves out ahead of going up a class. The September restart is probably going to involve most schools offering two or three days a week to every child, but that's just guesswork.

Everyone else is learning the notion of bubbles, where you only get close to a very limited number of people and your group doesn't vary from one week to the next. Within the bubble you don't socially distance, with everyone else you do.Key workers just wear protective clothing all the while and get close if that's part of their job.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15944
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by Bryn Mawr »

spot wrote: Wed Jun 10, 2020 1:38 pm The UK lifting of the lockdown is cautiously making progress. The only schooling between now and September is reception, year 1 and year 6 getting a few days each to sort themselves out ahead of going up a class. The September restart is probably going to involve most schools offering two or three days a week to every child, but that's just guesswork.

Everyone else is learning the notion of bubbles, where you only get close to a very limited number of people and your group doesn't vary from one week to the next. Within the bubble you don't socially distance, with everyone else you do.Key workers just wear protective clothing all the while and get close if that's part of their job.
Your last paragraph describes our family perfectly, we're all isolating apart from seeing family and the eldest daughter who works at the hospital stays well clear whenever we see her.
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15944
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by Bryn Mawr »

A fascinating analysis of the mode of introduction of Covid-19 into the UK :-

https://virological.org/t/preliminary-a ... neages/507
The key conclusions of our analysis are as follows:

The UK epidemic comprises a very large number of importations due to inbound international travel2. We detect 1356 independently-introduced transmission lineages, however, we expect this number to be an under-estimate.

The speed of detection of UK transmission lineages via genome sequencing has increased through time.

Many UK transmission lineages now appear to be very rare or extinct, as they have not been detected by genome sequencing for >4 weeks.

The rate and source of introduction of SARS-CoV-2 lineages into the UK changed substantially and rapidly through time. The rate peaked in mid-March and most introductions occurred during March 2020.

We estimate that ≈34% of detected UK transmission lineages arrived via inbound travel from Spain, ≈29% from France, ≈14% from Italy, and ≈23% from other countries. The relative contributions of these locations were highly dynamic.

The increasing rates and shifting source locations of SARS-CoV-2 importation were not fully captured by early contact tracing.

Our results are preliminary and further analyses of these data are ongoing.
My conclusion? The newly introduced quarantine would have helped if it started three months earlier.
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

I imagine quite a few were holidaymakers we deliberately went out and rescued.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15944
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by Bryn Mawr »

spot wrote: Wed Jun 10, 2020 2:14 pm I imagine quite a few were holidaymakers we deliberately went out and rescued.
The report estimates that half of the imports were from UK citizens.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12542
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by LarsMac »

In our recent travels, we found a different policy in each state we wandered through.

The basics, though, were common.
Tourist areas were basically closed. If the location had an open area, people were allowed as long as they remained distant, but all gift shops and such were closed down, and rest rooms were mostly closed, though a few where access could be managed a bit, were allowed.
Few dining rooms were open. Food was primarily order and take out, or drive-through ordering. Hotels were limited to essential business travelers in most states.
We did find hotels in Pennsylvania, and Missouri. Both areas were relatively small towns, in out of the way places.
All of the convenience stores at fuel stops were fairly lax in mask requirements. the workers wore them, and the cashiers were behind protective Plexiglas barriers.
No refills to used beverage containers were allowed.
We wiped any product packages we purchased with Alcohol wipes before opening.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
Snooz
Posts: 4800
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:05 am

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by Snooz »

I don't care how susceptible to the virus I might be, if I need to pee, I'm going to use a restroom whether it's been sterilized or not.
User avatar
Snooz
Posts: 4800
Joined: Sat Jan 20, 2007 7:05 am

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by Snooz »

librtyhead wrote: Sat May 02, 2020 6:38 pm Hiya Snooze!!!
Hey buddy!

Honestly, I vaguely remember your name but I don't remember you. Sorry about that, getting old is a bitch.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12542
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by LarsMac »

Snooz wrote: Thu Jun 11, 2020 11:55 am I don't care how susceptible to the virus I might be, if I need to pee, I'm going to use a restroom whether it's been sterilized or not.
Yeah, me too. Basically, if the door opens, it is fair territory.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

The lockdown brakes appear to be off again and I think we all know they're never going to be re-applied with any consistency or rigor.

Is anyone expecting the majority of the population to be vaccinated before Christmas?

Before next June?

Before 2022?

I'm just wondering where today's assumptions lie. I'll be very surprised if the Covid-19 death toll before the end of 2021 is under a million in the US, or under a quarter of a million in the UK, which is where we started our discussion back in March. What the lockdown did is to shift the profile but I don't believe it's affected the end result at all.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12542
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by LarsMac »

spot wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2020 3:35 pm The lockdown brakes appear to be off again and I think we all know they're never going to be re-applied with any consistency or rigor.

Is anyone expecting the majority of the population to be vaccinated before Christmas?

Before next June?

Before 2022?

I'm just wondering where today's assumptions lie. I'll be very surprised if the Covid-19 death toll before the end of 2021 is under a million in the US, or under a quarter of a million in the UK, which is where we started our discussion back in March. What the lockdown did is to shift the profile but I don't believe it's affected the end result at all.
Well, all the goings on of the last month since the thing in Minneapolis have stirred the air quite a bit.
And Florida is coming up with some enormous numbers of COVID cases. Arizona, and Georgia, as well.
While at the Doc's office last week for an unrelated issue, I asked for an antibody test.
I have yet to receive results. I'm not expecting to get a positive report. Just kind of curious. If I turned up positive, I think I would offer myself up to the plasma study.

Here in Colorado, word of possible uptick in cases has people stocking up on TP, again.

Humans are the most absurd creatures on this planet, I think. Perhaps in the entire galaxy.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

Who would like to offer a couple of prognosticata.

Some people are naturally immune to the current pandemic. Some may have become immune from surviving the infection, whether asymptomatically or after a degree of inconvenience.

All the rest of us will be capable of catching the disease until the day we have an effective vaccination administered, or until most of the rest of the country has become immune, whichever happens first.

So, prognostication 1: do any of us expect that day to be earlier than July 2021? I'm just wondering how optimistic or otherwise the mood is.

And prognostication 2: do any of us still think the death toll by July 2021 will be under 250,000 in the UK, or 1,500,000 in the US? I choose those figures because they were spoken of on ForumGarden back in March, if I recall.

Bear in mind that we'll revisit the thread in July 2021 and see what we thought.
At Tuesday’s hearing, Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, initially declined to directly answer a question by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) about how many deaths and infections Americans should expect before the pandemic ends.

“It’s going to be very disturbing,” Fauci replied. “I will guarantee you that, because when you have an outbreak in one part of the country, even though in other parts of the country they’re doing well, they are vulnerable … It puts the entire country at risk.”
Then Fauci added, “I would not be surprised if we go up to 100,000 a day if this does not turn around, and so I am very concerned.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/f ... story.html

Did you get that result yet, Lars? How trustworthy do you think the test kit was.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
Bryn Mawr
Posts: 15944
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 4:54 pm

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by Bryn Mawr »

spot wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:31 pm Who would like to offer a couple of prognosticata.

Some people are naturally immune to the current pandemic. Some may have become immune from surviving the infection, whether asymptomatically or after a degree of inconvenience.

All the rest of us will be capable of catching the disease until the day we have an effective vaccination administered, or until most of the rest of the country has become immune, whichever happens first.

So, prognostication 1: do any of us expect that day to be earlier than July 2021? I'm just wondering how optimistic or otherwise the mood is.

And prognostication 2: do any of us still think the death toll by July 2021 will be under 250,000 in the UK, or 1,500,000 in the US? I choose those figures because they were spoken of on ForumGarden back in March, if I recall.

Bear in mind that we'll revisit the thread in July 2021 and see what we thought.
At Tuesday’s hearing, Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, initially declined to directly answer a question by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) about how many deaths and infections Americans should expect before the pandemic ends.

“It’s going to be very disturbing,” Fauci replied. “I will guarantee you that, because when you have an outbreak in one part of the country, even though in other parts of the country they’re doing well, they are vulnerable … It puts the entire country at risk.”
Then Fauci added, “I would not be surprised if we go up to 100,000 a day if this does not turn around, and so I am very concerned.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/f ... story.html

Did you get that result yet, Lars? How trustworthy do you think the test kit was.
A date for sufficient of the population to have been vaccinated? End of next year.

Final death rate? I certainly hope that it will be well below those figures but I wouldn’t bet on it.
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12542
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by LarsMac »

spot wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 12:31 pm Who would like to offer a couple of prognosticata.

Some people are naturally immune to the current pandemic. Some may have become immune from surviving the infection, whether asymptomatically or after a degree of inconvenience.

All the rest of us will be capable of catching the disease until the day we have an effective vaccination administered, or until most of the rest of the country has become immune, whichever happens first.

So, prognostication 1: do any of us expect that day to be earlier than July 2021? I'm just wondering how optimistic or otherwise the mood is.

And prognostication 2: do any of us still think the death toll by July 2021 will be under 250,000 in the UK, or 1,500,000 in the US? I choose those figures because they were spoken of on ForumGarden back in March, if I recall.

Bear in mind that we'll revisit the thread in July 2021 and see what we thought.
At Tuesday’s hearing, Fauci, director of the National Institutes of Health’s National Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, initially declined to directly answer a question by Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) about how many deaths and infections Americans should expect before the pandemic ends.

“It’s going to be very disturbing,” Fauci replied. “I will guarantee you that, because when you have an outbreak in one part of the country, even though in other parts of the country they’re doing well, they are vulnerable … It puts the entire country at risk.”
Then Fauci added, “I would not be surprised if we go up to 100,000 a day if this does not turn around, and so I am very concerned.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/f ... story.html

Did you get that result yet, Lars? How trustworthy do you think the test kit was.
Oddly enough, I've still yet to hear from the Doc, or the lab. It was a blood draw. I presume that if the results were of a concern the Doc's office would have contacted me by now.
????
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

There's a slight contradiction from the White House today:
“We condemn the Hong Kong government’s decision to postpone for one year its legislative council elections and to disqualify opposition candidates,” White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany said at a news briefing. Reading from a prepared statement,she characterized the move as part of an effort by China to deny “promised autonomy and freedom to the Hong Kong people.”

On Thursday, Trump drew immediate rebukes from across the political spectrum after proposing to delay the Nov. 3 election and claiming without evidence that widespread mail balloting would be a “catastrophic disaster” leading to fraudulent results — an assertion he repeated later Friday when speaking to reporters.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html
It's almost surreal.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

spot wrote: Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:01 am spot;1530471 wrote: Elsewhere, "IOC insists Tokyo Olympics will go ahead despite coronavirus ".


"I proposed to postpone for a year and [IOC] president Thomas Bach responded with 100% agreement," said Shinzo Abe, Japan's Prime Minister.

They took over five weeks to make that obvious decision.
And Japan is in a similar state of denial this year too. The Games can't possibly go ahead this year but they keep saying it will. How on earth do they think they can accommodate an audience, for one thing.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12542
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by LarsMac »

Just reading about it in the AP.
While Officials want to see the games go on, the reality seems pretty harsh.
All the time and money spent will hurt if the games fail to go on. But Realists are pretty sure that the world will not be ready, logistically, to handle what could prove to be the greatest "Super-Spreader event of all time"
Most countries will be fortunate to have even a quarter of their citizens vaccinated by July.

AP (Associated Press) has a fairly readable piece on the subject.
Speculation over Tokyo Olympics: 2021, 2032 or not at all?
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

If the officious money-grubbing twerps in Australia had even just refused to allow any Australian Tennis Open contender a travel permit, and organized for the whole event to be played by players from the local schools, it would have been more sensible than the farrago they have at the moment.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

The question of whether SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes Covid-19, first infected a human as a result of a leak from the National Biosafety Laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, is hotting up.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-57926368

There are only two biosafety level 4 facilities in the whole of China. One of those is located within a mile of the presumed initial outbreak.

That could of course be a coincidence. I don't like coincidences at all but I concede they're not impossibilities.

A relevant question is whether anything has ever escaped from biosafety containment in the past. In the UK alone, for example, a foot and mouth outbreak started from one in Pirbright and the final Smallpox transmission came from one at Birmingham University. The question is legitimate.

There's also the matter of America having banned research into viral gain-of-function research. I think this clipping is accurate, though it's a lousy source:
At a May 11 Senate hearing, Dr. Rand Paul interrogated Dr. Anthony Fauci on the role of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) in advancing coronavirus gain-of-function research. As director of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID) at the NIH, Dr. Fauci tried to dissociate the NIH, its director, Dr. Francis Collins, and himself from having any connection to coronavirus gain-of-function research. A moratorium was placed on this unethical virus experimentation in 2014, but the NIH established a loophole in the moratorium, allowing American and Chinese scientists a way to continue these dangerous virus, animal, and human experiments.

https://europerenaissance.com/2021/05/1 ... bioweapon/
If Coronavirus gain-of-function research was ever performed or proposed at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and if it was funded in whole or in part by American research funding, I think the fact should be made public. That evidence, if it happened, would definitely exist in America quite independently from any information which could be sought within China. The answer may be commercially confidential but the question has a higher priority and the answer should be immediately disclosed.

Should the answer to that be yes, the follow-up is whether SARS-CoV-2 was held in the facility during 2019. Answering that, as opposed to the first question, requires political cooperation in China. If the first answer was yes then I expect China's cooperation would be enthusiastically given.

A third question, if the first two are yes, would be whether the virus is genetically modified from its wild state, but the second and third questions require the funding issue to be explored first. The funding issue needs no cooperation from China at all, it's an American matter. I doubt it would just be disclosed without legal compulsion. Appropriate evidence could, of course, be leaked through news outlets. I'm sure the Washington Post would oblige.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

spot wrote: Sat Jan 23, 2021 7:28 am
spot wrote: Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:01 am spot;1530471 wrote: Elsewhere, "IOC insists Tokyo Olympics will go ahead despite coronavirus ".


"I proposed to postpone for a year and [IOC] president Thomas Bach responded with 100% agreement," said Shinzo Abe, Japan's Prime Minister.

They took over five weeks to make that obvious decision.
And Japan is in a similar state of denial this year too. The Games can't possibly go ahead this year but they keep saying it will. How on earth do they think they can accommodate an audience, for one thing.
The opening ceremony is on Friday, where a crowd of 900 is being allowed to attend. Most people in Japan say the Games should have been cancelled. I can't imagine the current arrangements will improve Tokyo's public image in years to come.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

spot wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 8:32 am The question of whether SARS-CoV-2, the virus which causes Covid-19, first infected a human as a result of a leak from the National Biosafety Laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, is hotting up.
I note the following arrived on the BBC news website a day after my post. Had it been earlier I'd have referenced it.
Coronavirus: Was US money used to fund risky research in China?


Did the US fund virus research in China?

Yes, it did contribute some funds.

Dr Fauci, as well as being an adviser to President Biden, is the director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the US government's National Institutes of Health (NIH).

This body did give money to an organisation that collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

That organisation - the US-based EcoHealth Alliance - was awarded a grant in 2014 to look into possible coronaviruses from bats.

EcoHealth received $3.7m from the NIH, $600,000 of which was given to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

In 2019, its project was renewed for another five years, but then pulled by the Trump administration in April 2020 following the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic.

So - was SARS-CoV-2 held in the Wuhan Institute of Virology during 2019?
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

There is a new word in England.

Pingdemic.

It took me ages to work this one out. A ping is a sonar or Internet interrogation with something sent out and a response listened for. The Pingdemic seemed to be a word for a vast number of pings in relation to the Covid Track and Trace protocol but I didn't see how.

What I discovered eventually is that the "ping" relates to an obsolete sense of the word in which the sound of a sonar ping is imitated, and the Covid Track and Trace app uses this sound to get the attention of the app's user. When hundreds of thousands of phones make the sound it's a pingdemic.

I'm not impressed. We'll end up with a new word whenever lots of things all happen in a short space of time. When people all choose to hawk in the gutter for example, that'll be a phlegmdemic.

I'd prefer to stick with the existing word hoard rather than coining new instances.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

spot wrote: Thu Jul 22, 2021 8:32 am Should the answer to that be yes, the follow-up is whether SARS-CoV-2 was held in the facility during 2019. Answering that, as opposed to the first question, requires political cooperation in China. If the first answer was yes then I expect China's cooperation would be enthusiastically given.


Oddly enough it might be the second question which gets answered before the first.
An online open-source intelligence group last year identified that a virus studied at the Wuhan Institute of Virology taken from an abandoned copper mine in Yunnan province was the closest known relative to Sars-CoV-2

https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/ ... ster-grows


I hadn't expected that at all. I clearly missed that first time around. I can't rely on my memory these days. What it refers to all goes back to a single source, https://drasticresearch.org/ which may, so long as it never gets hijacked, be a legitimate attempt at informed open-source scientific analysis. One can at least hope so.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!
User avatar
LarsMac
Posts: 12542
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:11 pm
Location: Far Out, Man

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by LarsMac »

At this stage in the game, where the bug came from is far less of a concern for most of us than how we will deal with it in the next couple of years.
Control is an illusion. The Chaos is all part of the fun.
-Susan Hattie Steinsapir
User avatar
spot
Posts: 39282
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2005 5:19 pm
Location: Brigstowe

Re: Not with a Bang, but with a Sneeze?

Post by spot »

LarsMac wrote: Fri Aug 20, 2021 9:31 am At this stage in the game, where the bug came from is far less of a concern for most of us than how we will deal with it in the next couple of years.
I think the world will react differently if it turns out the project which leaked was US-financed, you know. Seriously. Research banned on safety grounds in the Homeland but sponsored in China?

Dealing with it involves vaccination without charge to the patient, worldwide. The quicker the better, and with as much health education as it takes.
Nullius in verba|||||||||||
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game!

Return to “Current Events”