221–230 of 281 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ignored scientific evidence Any "scientific evidence" that can be touched by the Chinese government will be corrupted. Any influence they have over "scientific evidence" is not scientific evidence.
No offence, but this is just pure racism.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
WIV-1 can directly infect humans. So did civit cats and racoon dogs give us SARS-1 or did we infect them (or backwards and forwards as in the case of SARS-CoV-2 and mink)? If you go back a few months before the pandemic outbreak in humans and there's a zoonotic jump to civit cat and raccoon dogs then I don't think you can usefully call that the reservoir species. It existed and evolved for decades in bats, which I'd…
WIV-1 can infect human cells in vitro. No complete human infected with WIV-1 has ever been identified, living or dead. When SARS-1 emerged in humans, cases were concentrated among traders handling civet cats, as were positive antibody tests. That seems to me like a pretty strong case for forward zoonosis, maybe not perfect but certainly stronger than any evidence we have for SARS-CoV-2. I agree there's no evidence fo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can't world leaders put pressure on china to clean up these wild life markets? Like better health practices and what not?
Live markets exist in China because there is low trust in the food supply. For many Chinese, they want to see the animal killed in front of them so they can make sure they're not getting ripped off. Due to various policies, China is a relatively low-trust society. Of course, it's also low trust because ripping people off isn't necessarily seen as bad, it's seen as clever.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Point me to a specific fine for data falsification. Unlike you, I have made no false claims here.
https://violationtracker.goodjobsfirst.org/violation-tracker... follow up source: https://www.doj.state.or.us/media-home/news-media-releases/o... Quote: "Today’s settlement follows a two-year investigation by the Oregon Department of Justice into evidence that suggested Pfizer was using unreliable and unsubstantiated claims to promote Zyvox®, a relatively new and expensive antibiotic used for treating certain types o…
No, that's a very long way of saying that they haven't received FDA approval to make that claim. Nothing in there substantiates your claim that Pfizer falsified data in https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta....
> Couldn't be because they lied, hide, or downplayed information about Chantix's impact on people's mental health.
There are no allegations that they falsified data in this suit either.
That's three strikes — you're out! Would you like to step up to bat again to try to substantiate your claim that Pfizer has been fined for data falsification?
One problem in these kinds of investigations is that nobody involved really wants the truth to be known. The lab isn't going to let anyone poke around and see what it was doing until the CPP falls. And even then records have probably been wiped already. The problem is that there really isn't any evidence. SARS-COV-2 has never been detected in any Chinese land animals associated with the market. We know that birds can…
In Dr. Birx's recently released book she claims to have known it came from a lab origin from the start, based on evolutionary reasoning. As she describes: A virus takes years to learn/evolve the ability to infect humans, and does so poorly at the start. But covid was extremely effective at infecting humans "right out of the box." In a lab environment the virus is repeatedly exposed to human cells and gets better at i…
This sounds like pure speculation. How much actual data do we have on viruses that just made the jump from animals to humans? Probably nowhere near the amount needed to confidently say that the original Wuhan strain was somehow too infectious to realistically be of natural origin.
As for getting better at infecting humans over time, covid _has_ done that. Whatever omicron subvariant we're on could run circles around the original strain without breaking a sweat.
> If covid evolved naturally, it would be capable of spreading outside, where animals live. Instead, it appeared to evolve to spread in lab-like air conditioned conditions only.
Did she make an actual quantitative comparison between the infectiousness of covid and other respiratory viruses, inside versus outside?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If it spreads asymptomatically though isn't that "good" at spreading rather than "medium"? SARS-1 disn't have a presymptomatic infectious phase and the peak of symptoms was roughly the peak of infectiousness, and it was mostly severely virulent, and it didn't produce a global pandemic and was controllable. To have an uncontrollable pandemic you really need that silent spreading, so the pandemic virus that emerges nec…
How does a virus that's pretty good at spreading through humans but not yet amazing at spreading through humans stay in an isolated region for months or even years?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not really disagreeing, but isn't comparing Ebola and Marburg to SARSes a bit apples-to-bananas? Ebola and Marburg for decades were quite rare. Incredibly deadly, but an outbreak would affect a few tens of people, and invariably in remote locations. By the time the epidemiologists arrived, the outbreak was waning. Clearly the Ebola outbreak in 2010s was much bigger, but that was the first such large outbreak. Als…
China is not "hyper-urbanised". There is still a good 30% rural population a lot of which live close to very dense forests with questionable sanitation. I don't understand how those viruses being rare in humans and outbreaks fading is actually making it harder to find them. If anything it is easier because then they don't have to figure out if humans gave it to them or they gave it to humans.
Id also guess the manpower that went into searching for the SARS2 predecessor far exceeds the efforts that went into sampling animals in African rainforest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
China is not "hyper-urbanised". There is still a good 30% rural population a lot of which live close to very dense forests with questionable sanitation. I don't understand how those viruses being rare in humans and outbreaks fading is actually making it harder to find them. If anything it is easier because then they don't have to figure out if humans gave it to them or they gave it to humans.
Wuhan itself is 12 million people, 1,500 km^2 according to Wikipedia. I don't know but I'm guessing there is far less opportunities for coming up close with all sorts of wildlife. Id also guess the manpower that went into searching for the SARS2 predecessor far exceeds the efforts that went into sampling animals in African rainforest.
There might have been more manpower looking for the SARS-2 predecessor but, unlike with Ebola, there isn't any guarantee it still exists in a recognizable form, and in intermediate hosts you have the issue of human-animal transmission.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The top comment in this thread: >I wonder how many people who are seemingly willing to believe the self-serving CCP party-line on this, would be just as believing of the owners of a nuclear power plant in their town, once the drinking water became radioactive, claiming "it didn't come from the plant, someone else down the street must have done it" - that is just about as believable as this. Absolutely sure the CCP ar…
To be fair, if 100 years ago some scientist wrote a paper about how being a certain race made you more prone to violence or how lobotomies are safe and effective.. there would be people saying you don't believe the facts of you don't agree. So, before you judge people maybe reflect on history a little and see that people have reasons to distrust government. A single paper doesn't prove anything. It must be reproducib…
And we're in the same place now.
Because people 100% believe things based on zero evidence.