Announcement

Collapse

Health Science 101 Guidelines

Greetings! Welcome to Health Science.

Here's where we talk about the latest fad diets, the advantages of vegetarianism, the joy of exercise and good health. Like everywhere else at Tweb our decorum rules apply.

This is a place to exchange ideas and network with other health conscience folks, this isn't a forum for heated debate.
See more
See less

whats wrong with the covid-19 virus?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • whats wrong with the covid-19 virus?

    whats wrong with the covid-19 virus?

    It is one of the viruses that needed a vaccine before they saw whether it needed one. Others like this were the swine flu and the bird flu. Those disappeared with no problem.

    This may be the first time that we see a concerted effort to discourage use of effective treatments so that only a vaccine would be used.

    It maybe the first virus being protected from debate by other opinions and discoveries by medical doctors and scientists. This may be the first virus protected by US censorship.

    This virus is detected by the RT-PCR test which has an estimated 97% false positive rate.

    This virus is counted by the positive tests in the community among asymptomatic people.

    When the deaths had become manageable (and reducible by common medicines), the media switched over to an emphasis on tests by asymptomatic people in the communities.

    This is the only virus that demanded most countries to shutdown their economies with the effective of causing starvation, bankruptcies, and deaths of despair.

    This is one of the few viruses that gets constant propaganda pushed on the public with trite sayings: wash your hands; social distance; wear your masks; we are all in this together.

    Somehow the problem keeps escalating. It started with many deaths in NYC due to Cuomo's policies (and meanwhile most states were shutdown but had next to no deaths). It went to shutdowns of most economies. There were a rise of deaths attributed to covid-19 (even if these were car accidents or heart attacks). When those death counts went down, then the media started counting cases, but the cases were redefined as positive tests in the community. These cases went up as people tested for Thanksgiving and Christmas travel. Once this task was done, then they claim there is a new strain of the virus.

    Magically, the new strain is expected to be fixed by the same vaccines for the original strain.

    The vaccines are created somehow overcame previous problems of cytokine storms happening with earlier attempts to make a coronavirus vaccine. The newer vaccine technologies have not been tested on people and should have 5-8 years of testing before going to common usage.

    This exaggerrated coronavirus news is being used to push a vaccine certification for traveling to other countries.

    This is the first virus outbreak where US politicians show a preference for China's style of dictatorship powers to control the US population.

    This virus has become a leftist dream -- forcing people to stop driving and traveling, reducing carbon-dioxide emissions, promoting fraudulent vote counting, stopping entertainment venues, promoting censorship.

    This is the first virus outbreak being used as an opportunity to implement a Great Reset, as promoted by the World Economic Forum.

  • #2
    So, what's your theory?
    That the liberals had a part in the spread of this virus?
    Or that they saw it as a golden opportunity to further their leftist agenda?

    As my Cajun friends would say, "whereyagoinwiddis"?
    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

    Comment


    • #3
      The main theory is that this is part of a long line of opportunistic viruses. In a string of minor viruses, they pharmaceutical companies have come in with vaccines with bad side effects. So it seems that Pharma uses this to try to gain sales. Politicians use this opportunity to promote leftist controls on the people. There is too much attraction to China (like found with Joe Biden) in this.

      Comment


      • #4
        This is a good article. They source everything (that's important), and give some revelations about Fauci that I wasn't even aware of, and are pretty disturbing. I should also add, which the article does not but I feel is relevant, that Fauci in fact funded the lab in Wuhan China (which is kind of incredible to me few people know this or even discuss it), the one that credible folks are now suspecting was behind the manufacture and leak of this virus. It should get the conspiracy juices flowing.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by seanD View Post
          This is a good article. They source everything (that's important), and give some revelations about Fauci that I wasn't even aware of, and are pretty disturbing. I should also add, which the article does not but I feel is relevant, that Fauci in fact funded the lab in Wuhan China (which is kind of incredible to me few people know this or even discuss it), the one that credible folks are now suspecting was behind the manufacture and leak of this virus. It should get the conspiracy juices flowing.
          There may be a reason that not many people know "that Fauci in fact funded the lab in Wuhan China". The story was debunked back in April.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Stoic View Post

            There may be a reason that not many people know "that Fauci in fact funded the lab in Wuhan China". The story was debunked back in April.
            That's nice. You link to one of the most partisan biased sites you could possibly link to (Buzzfeed) to supposedly refute a story about NIH money funding research at the Wuhan lab in China by a source news that is, at best, bipartisan (Newsweek), only where does your bias source actually debunk the fact NIH funds went to fund research at the Wuhan lab? The only detail they include is that the money went through a third party and didn't just go to the Wuhan lab. Okay... and?

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by seanD View Post

              That's nice. You link to one of the most partisan biased sites you could possibly link to (Buzzfeed) to supposedly refute a story about NIH money funding research at the Wuhan lab in China by a source news that is, at best, bipartisan (Newsweek), only where does your bias source actually debunk the fact NIH funds went to fund research at the Wuhan lab? The only detail they include is that the money went through a third party and didn't just go to the Wuhan lab. Okay... and?
              You do realize that "Fauci funded the lab in Wuhan China" is a bit different from "NIH funds went to fund research at the Wuhan lab", right?

              I also find it interesting that you think that research like this is a bad thing:

              Source: https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/new-coronavirus-emerges-bats-china-devastates-young-swine

              A newly identified coronavirus that killed nearly 25,000 piglets in 2016-17 in China emerged from horseshoe bats near the origin of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), which emerged in 2002 in the same bat species. The new virus is named swine acute diarrhea syndrome coronavirus (SADS-CoV). It does not appear to infect people, unlike SARS-CoV which infected more than 8,000 people and killed 774. No SARS-CoV cases have been identified since 2004. The study investigators identified SADS-CoV on four pig farms in China’s Guangdong Province. The work was a collaboration among scientists from EcoHealth Alliance, Duke-NUS Medical School, Wuhan Institute of Virology and other organizations, and was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health. The research is published in the journal Nature.

              The researchers say the finding is an important reminder that identifying new viruses in animals and quickly determining their potential to infect people is a key way to reduce global health threats.

              © Copyright Original Source


              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                You do realize that "Fauci funded the lab in Wuhan China" is a bit different from "NIH funds went to fund research at the Wuhan lab", right?

                I also find it interesting that you think that research like this is a bad thing:

                Source: https://www.niaid.nih.gov/news-events/new-coronavirus-emerges-bats-china-devastates-young-swine

                A newly identified coronavirus that killed nearly 25,000 piglets in 2016-17 in China emerged from horseshoe bats near the origin of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV), which emerged in 2002 in the same bat species. The new virus is named swine acute diarrhea syndrome coronavirus (SADS-CoV). It does not appear to infect people, unlike SARS-CoV which infected more than 8,000 people and killed 774. No SARS-CoV cases have been identified since 2004. The study investigators identified SADS-CoV on four pig farms in China’s Guangdong Province. The work was a collaboration among scientists from EcoHealth Alliance, Duke-NUS Medical School, Wuhan Institute of Virology and other organizations, and was funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, part of the National Institutes of Health. The research is published in the journal Nature.

                The researchers say the finding is an important reminder that identifying new viruses in animals and quickly determining their potential to infect people is a key way to reduce global health threats.

                © Copyright Original Source

                Semantics is the best you have?

                Fauci was head of NIH at the time. Are you trying to imply he didn't know where the funding was going or cared what research was being funded? That's absurd. And I gave no personal opinions at all about the research one way or the other. You're flailing. But if you really want to go there, the Newsweek article points out that a multitude of scientists, in the hundreds, objected to the research Fauci was advocating because of the risks and dangers involved, which just adds more absurdity to the notion that the head of NIH was clueless as what research the funds were being used for and where.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by seanD View Post
                  This is a good article. They source everything (that's important), and give some revelations about Fauci that I wasn't even aware of, and are pretty disturbing. I should also add, which the article does not but I feel is relevant, that Fauci in fact funded the lab in Wuhan China (which is kind of incredible to me few people know this or even discuss it), the one that credible folks are now suspecting was behind the manufacture and leak of this virus. It should get the conspiracy juices flowing.
                  I thought since I got some push-back for my attacks on our buddy Fauci, I'd dig a bit deeper just out of spite and for fun, and so here's some more tidbits to add a bit of flavor (though the first issue was mentioned in the AIER source I had linked, I wanted to make sure it wasn't taken out of context). Fauci predicted that Trump would face an infectious disease crisis practically to the exact year, and apparently the "fact checkers" confirmed this was something he in fact said during a speech in 2017. How did he know this?

                  Secondly, according to Axios, he accurately guessed that the infectious spread in China was related to coronavirus as early as January 6th. How did he know this when no one else had a clue and Chinese authorities were lying about it?

                  Maybe as an expert he just got lucky both times, but when you add that on top of everything else, it gets quite dark.​

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Sorry, MW, if I'm hijacking your thread.

                    Let me know if I am and I'll request a separate thread.
                    Last edited by seanD; 01-07-2021, 09:15 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by seanD View Post
                      Sorry, MW, if I'm hijacking your thread.
                      It is okay. Fauci is one of the problems with COVID-19. The world would be a lot healthier without Fauci

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by mikewhitney View Post

                        It is okay. Fauci is one of the problems with COVID-19. The world would be a lot healthier without Fauci
                        I honestly had no clue about all this detail about him until now. I found out the same day I posted it.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by seanD View Post


                          I thought since I got some push-back for my attacks on our buddy Fauci, I'd dig a bit deeper just out of spite and for fun, and so here's some more tidbits to add a bit of flavor (though the first issue was mentioned in the AIER source I had linked, I wanted to make sure it wasn't taken out of context). Fauci predicted that Trump would face an infectious disease crisis practically to the exact year, and apparently the "fact checkers" confirmed this was something he in fact said during a speech in 2017. How did he know this?

                          Secondly, according to Axios, he accurately guessed that the infectious spread in China was related to coronavirus as early as January 6th. How did he know this when no one else had a clue and Chinese authorities were lying about it?

                          Maybe as an expert he just got lucky both times, but when you add that on top of everything else, it gets quite dark.​
                          Yeah, it's enough to be the basis of a conspiracy theory that will convince a lot of idiots.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                            Yeah, it's enough to be the basis of a conspiracy theory that will convince a lot of idiots.
                            I would definitely expect this to rub someone with cult-like Fauci fanboyism the wrong way. At the very least, it's shady as all get out, but a political hack or a Fauci cheerleader won't see it that way. I posted links to sources about the subject that anyone can read themselves and use the bits of information to connect the dots from there. Conspiracy theory or not is in the eye of the beholder, and most likely will be politically influenced.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Stoic View Post

                              Yeah, it's enough to be the basis of a conspiracy theory that will convince a lot of idiots.
                              The thing that will not convince idiots of Fauci's evil nature is the fact that Fauci said in 2017 that Trump would be facing a surprise pandemic in this country.

                              Comment

                              widgetinstance 221 (Related Threads) skipped due to lack of content & hide_module_if_empty option.
                              Working...
                              X