SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus (COVID-19)

Agreed, it would need the backing of a strong health system to get those who are strong enough over the line yet cull out those who were not strong enough to survive. Those that consider the Covid 19 virus is nothing more than the flu soon change their mind when they become infected. The same as those who don't believe in wearing face masks, as soon as there is an outbreak anywhere close to them, then everyone else has to wear the face mask and stay away from the all important one who believes they are superior to any virus because they are just perfect ...... The pommie prime minster soon changed his tune when he caught the virus, I guess it will be the same for the rest of them, culling the herd might not only clear out the physically weak, but maybe the mentally weak as well

T1 Terry

 

The problem still remains with this odd single-minded use of the word "strong". There are people who are in many ways "strong" (athletes, sailors, health icons, name whoever you regard that way) who will be culled by CoVID-19 because their immune systems don't happen to have the best quirks for surviving this particular novel virus. Your post-'culling' society will then consist of a lot of people whose immune systems did have the best quirks for surviving this particular virus, and who may or may not otherwise fit into any other idea of 'strong' or 'fit' or 'good for the workforce/for society' that you might happen to subscribe to.

 

The theories here look interesting and could possibly explain a lot about COVID.

https://elemental.medium.com/coronavirus-may-be-a-blood-vessel-disease-which-explains-everything-2c4032481ab2

 

i was reading about that yesterday, very interesting.

cbs news: 'dr. fauci said by the beginning of 2021, we hope to have a couple million doses of vaccine'

the hill: 'who says there is no evidence that the coronavirus is mutating in any way that would make it more virulent or more easily transmissible.'

cnbc: 'who resumes trials of hydroxychloroquine after examining safety concerns'

'lancet and nejom question data used in study'

'doctors report damage is reversible'

the hill: 'who officials push back against italiandoctor who claims virus is losing its potency'

 

safety concerns .... a drug used successfully for decades, reported by a few heart specialist - rather than immunologist, & then inexplicably relied upon by the WHO. Surprise surprise. Welcome to old news - back in May - maybe said over a week earlier - post #252 video. Don't shoot the messenger "just because".

.

 

yeah, don't bring that rona here, we're sterile

 

There also seems to be a commercial air war between the U.S. and China. U.S. says China has violated an agreement to allow United and Delta to resume flying to China, so U.S. will now retaliate by blocking Chinese carriers from flying to U.S.

I don't know enough of the backstory to have any comment.

 

I read a story where China was permitting airlines to resume to a level of flights from sometime in March, long after the US had shut down. They allowed the US airlines one flight per week.
I read yesterday that the YS is banning flights to and from China until they agree to permit more flights from the US airlines.

 

during these weird times of communicable disease, certainly there could be a lot worse things then restricting travel & the potentiall infections therefrom.
.

 

i honestly can't believe passenger planes across nations are already flying

 

Oh, well. Here goes politicized science... I really hate when this happens.

Lancet retracts major Covid-19 paper that raised safety concerns about malaria drugs

EDIT: I edited the link above by request of SFO to remove list manger tracking. I hope this is better now.

 

Is there a link that doesn't involve mailchimp, or list manager tracking?

 

Not having read the original papers, I have no opinion one way or the other. Did you read the original papers?

Bob Wilson

 

Not sure what you are asking? Are you talking about link other than STAT site?

 

Yeah, that paper was talk of the week from the both side of arena as soon as it was published. @hill commented on it a few page back of this thread. SARS-CoV-2 Coronavirus (COVID-19) | Page 103 | PriusChat

I am not sure retraction is official yet. You can still access the full article. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext#articleInformation

Here is link to NEJM paper: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007621

 

Yes, that STAT site link. Never heard of it before, and it appears to work as a tracking service, in this case for mailchimp.

Thought you might want to link to a random article, like this example : Authors retract major COVID-19 paper on effects of hydroxychloroquine | TheHill

Please insert your favorite news source, as the above link was the first result that popped up, and it may be biased (aren't they all).

 

Is this sufficiently stripped of tracking?
Lancet, NEJM retract Covid-19 studies that sparked backlash