parker1865
TCBF Member
Joined: September 2018
Posts: 1,325
|
Post by parker1865 on Mar 8, 2021 11:35:37 GMT -8
Why bother there.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 8, 2021 12:17:54 GMT -8
Because since I was a kid I've believed in fighting the good fight.
|
|
parker1865
TCBF Member
Joined: September 2018
Posts: 1,325
|
Post by parker1865 on Mar 8, 2021 12:30:34 GMT -8
The key is a good fight. What you are facing now is not a good fight. It is a rigged game and not a good fight.
Liston come to mind....
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 12, 2021 10:05:50 GMT -8
Once we learned that Long Term Care homes were responsible the MAJORITY OF DEATHS due to Covid-19 for the past year this is where MOST of our Covid-19 mitigation measures should have been focused.
Everyone argues that it's not possible to protect LTC homes better. That's the sound of failure talking  while subsidizing that failure with the lives of those who remain locked down even though they have minimal risk of suffering from Covid-19
To me, that's either just giving up or not having any imagination or intuitiveness to find better solutions.
While opponents have argued that more can't be done we all know that more can always be done.
I've always argued that it's just a matter of will and economics.
As always, time will tell and the truth always comes out.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 12, 2021 16:31:14 GMT -8
It's accepted by most of the general public that stay at home policies are the best way to prevent the spread of Covid-19 but there are many factors that influence the spread of Covid-19
I've personally believed since about late last summer that lockdown measures are not working as well as we would have hoped and that a new strategy is probably in everyone's best interests.
As time goes by there are emerging studies that are finding real world problems with the foregone conclusion that lockdown measures are the only way to limit the spread of Covid-19.
AbstractA recent mathematical model has suggested that staying at home did not play a dominant role in reducing COVID-19 transmission. The second wave of cases in Europe, in regions that were considered as COVID-19 controlled, may raise some concerns. Our objective was to assess the association between staying at home (%) and the reduction/increase in the number of deaths due to COVID-19 in several regions in the world. In this ecological study, data from www.google.com/covid19/mobility/, ourworldindata.org and covid.saude.gov.br were combined. Countries with > 100 deaths and with a Healthcare Access and Quality Index of ≥ 67 were included. Data were preprocessed and analyzed using the difference between number of deaths/million between 2 regions and the difference between the percentage of staying at home. The analysis was performed using linear regression with special attention to residual analysis. After preprocessing the data, 87 regions around the world were included, yielding 3741 pairwise comparisons for linear regression analysis. Only 63 (1.6%) comparisons were significant. With our results, we were not able to explain if COVID-19 mortality is reduced by staying at home in ~ 98% of the comparisons after epidemiological weeks 9 to 34.
------------------------------------------------------------
In conclusion, using this methodology and current data, in ~ 98% of the comparisons using 87 different regions of the world we found no evidence that the number of deaths/million is reduced by staying at home. Regional differences in treatment methods and the natural course of the virus may also be major factors in this pandemic, and further studies are necessary to better understand it.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 14, 2021 6:51:53 GMT -8
Masks have become highly politicized and weaponized in today's current climate.
Unfortunately, not all information being shared with the general public is pure science. A perfect example is how we were told not to wear masks, then we were told to wear masks and now we're being told we should wear TWO masks.
Sweden, while facing it's own problems is an example of a country that took a science only approach to the pandemic without weaponizing and politicizing it's fight against the pandemic, unlike the US and most Western countries. Sweden does not and HAS NOT recommended masks to fight off transmission of Covid-19.
This is a CDC statement with studies cited on the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical measures for the flu in non-healthcare studies from last May 2020.
From the article:
Face Masks
In our systematic review, we identified 10 RCTs that reported estimates of the effectiveness of face masks in reducing laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the community from literature published during 1946–July 27, 2018. In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.51–1.20; I2 = 30%, p = 0.25) (Figure 2). One study evaluated the use of masks among pilgrims from Australia during the Hajj pilgrimage and reported no major difference in the risk for laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infection in the control or mask group (33). Two studies in university settings assessed the effectiveness of face masks for primary protection by monitoring the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza among student hall residents for 5 months (9,10). The overall reduction in ILI or laboratory-confirmed influenza cases in the face mask group was not significant in either studies (9,10). Study designs in the 7 household studies were slightly different: 1 study provided face masks and P2 respirators for household contacts only (34), another study evaluated face mask use as a source control for infected persons only (35), and the remaining studies provided masks for the infected persons as well as their close contacts (11–13,15,17). None of the household studies reported a significant reduction in secondary laboratory-confirmed influenza virus infections in the face mask group (11–13,15,17,34,35). Most studies were underpowered because of limited sample size, and some studies also reported suboptimal adherence in the face mask group.
Disposable medical masks (also known as surgical masks) are loose-fitting devices that were designed to be worn by medical personnel to protect accidental contamination of patient wounds, and to protect the wearer against splashes or sprays of bodily fluids (36). There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 14, 2021 20:17:10 GMT -8
I've been saying this for about 3 months now.
Despite all states taking drastically different mitigation measures for the pandemic, infection and mortality numbers seem to correlate closer to population for most states than mitigation measures.
Florida and California are roughly similar in infection and mortality numbers even though California was under strict lockdown and Florida has been open for business since last summer. 
Meanwhile, Newsom in California continues to remind everyone what a great job California did mitigating the pandemic. 
What is even more interesting is that Florida has the oldest population of any US state and is fairing just as well as California.
Two of the worst states statistically (South Dakota and Connecticut) also share extremely different mitigation measures with similar statistics.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 15, 2021 18:41:24 GMT -8
Super interesting stuff continues to show up in the news but none of it is being run on mainstream media news in the West.
This news seems to align itself nicely with the proper reporting that does appear in the West.
Anybody notice a pattern here?
Peter Daszak seems to have his finger prints everywhere there is a controversy with the investigation.
A tale of obfuscation and deflection by both Peter Daszak and china in the investigation into the Covid-19 virus.
Meanwhile, there is no scientific evidence of the transmission of Covid-19 in frozen foods.
Daszak claims that ferret-badgers and / or rabbits could have been a pathway for how the virus could have gotten to Wuhan even though Australian geneticist Zhang Daoyu maintains that ferret-badgers and rabbit's ACE2 receptor cannont gind to the S1 spike protein in Covid-19
Daoyu states that "Transmission could occur in a laboratory with mice or rabbits that had been genetically modified to express the human ACE2 protein and had severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID)," although even that may be unlikely.
But the article also documents many scrubbed articles from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) that show that experimentation was done on 100's of such animals including ferrets "as a model to introduce the infection, pathogenicity, transmission and immune response of influenza disease in depth."
From the article:
What Daszak does not mention is that in 2019, a member of Shi Zhengli's team, assistant researcher Hu Ben (胡犇), embarked on high-risk GOF research on coronaviruses and chimeras in humanized mice at WIV. According to a researcher who goes by the pseudonym Billy Bostickson, and who is in contact with Taiwan News: "This research involved 'novel' bat coronaviruses inoculated into immuno-suppressed mice with humanized features, such as hACE2, and possibly humanized lungs, bone marrow, etc..."
No data for these studies has been released (including 100 unpublished sequences of Coronaviruses) and apparently the WIV databases have been offline since the pandemic started.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 15, 2021 19:05:53 GMT -8
An open letter signed by some world renowned scientists asking for a proper investigation into the origins of the pandemic.
Obviously many scientists are not satisfied with the investigation into the origins of the pandemic.
This letter was published in many leading papers.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 16, 2021 6:14:35 GMT -8
One year anniversary and this tweet says it all.
Not only was social distancing for 2 weeks or 2 months not true, not only is 6 feet apart not a proven scientific theory, not only are the cost of the lockdowns being ignored but the 'follow the science' crowd does exactly what they accuse their opposition of doing.
They follow it only when it's convenient.
Nuzzo is an Epidemiology and global health security policy expert with John Hopkins.
If science can justify this, they can justify anything and that's not science.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 16, 2021 6:49:46 GMT -8
Surprising decline after surge shows scientists still have much to learn about how the coronavirus moves through society
JOHANNESBURG—Earlier this year, doctors and epidemiologists in South Africa’s economic capital were bracing for the worst. A new coronavirus strain was surging across the country, thousands of holidaymakers were due to return from Covid-19 hot spots, and one in three coronavirus tests was coming back positive.
Then something unexpected happened: Covid-19 cases started dropping.
Since mid-January, confirmed Covid-19 infections in South Africa have fallen from a record of nearly 22,000 a day to around 1,000, without a large-scale vaccination campaign or stringent lockdown. Fewer than 5% of Covid-19 tests are finding traces of the virus, a sign that health agencies are missing fewer cases. The government has lifted most of its remaining virus restrictions for the country of 60 million people.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ditch Fahrenheit on Mar 21, 2021 7:17:54 GMT -8
Well, it looks like my state of California is on track to removing all restrictions on the vaccine by May 1st. Of course, it's anyone's guess as to how long it will take to vaccinate all those who want it out of the 32 million Californians who are left. Personally, I'm very anxious and excited to get the vaccine. I've dutifully followed all the rules, and they've been strict in CA, so I'll be happy when the state can return to some sense of normalcy (whatever that means). This virus is still very scary. I lost a relative to it at the end of September. I recommend that you don't take chances with it, even if you're young. I just read the sad story about Luke Letlow. He was 41, and had no underlying conditions. If I haven't said it before, I hope you are all in good health, and with every chance to stay that way.   |
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 22, 2021 10:35:19 GMT -8
This virus is still very scary. I don't think a single person I know has stated that the virus isn't scary or that we shouldn't be cautious.
But what is more scary than the virus is the dire predictions and fear mongering of the media driving people's decision making into ways that we never would have before. What has happened across society is unprecedented, and it was driven by fear which was fueled by the media. And it all started with video of people dropping like flies in China in the streets over a year ago.
We got so much wrong over the last year and nobody wants to talk about it.
Like nearly all US states, Georgia imposed a stay-at-home order in March 2020 in response to demands from public health officials claiming a stay-at-home order would lessen total deaths from covid-19.
But unlike most states, Georgia ended its stay-at-home order after only five weeks, and proceeded to lower other restrictions quickly.
The legacy media responded with furious opposition. For example, an article in The Atlantic declared the end of Georgia’s lockdown to be an “experiment in human sacrifice.” The Guardian approvingly quoted one Georgian who insisted the end of the stay-at-home order was “reckless, premature and dangerous.”
A few weeks later, other states began to end their stay-at-home orders and to end other restrictions as well. Florida was the largest among these states.
Shortly thereafter the Daily Beast declared that the scaling back of restrictions in Georgia and Florida was “terrifyingly premature,” and quoted one expert who insisted, “If you lift the restriction too soon, a second wave will come, and the damage will be substantial both medically and economically. We don’t want to throw away the sacrifices we have made for weeks now."
All this hyperbole about human sacrifice and recklessness leads us to conclude that states which ended lockdowns quickly must have experienced far worse numbers of deaths from covid than states which maintained lockdowns longer. Indeed, when it came to lockdowns, we were told, the longer the better. Ideally, lockdowns shouldn’t be loosened up at all until everyone can be vaccinated.
But things didn’t turn out that way. Experts have scrambled to come up with explanations for why this is the case, but the fact remains some of the most strict states (i.e., New York and Massachusetts) have covid deaths at far worse rates than the “reckless” states like Georgia and Florida.
Moreover, with little to show for their lockdowns in terms of “public health,” these states with extreme lockdowns also have some of the worst unemployment rates. This occurred in spite of the fact that experts insisted that a failure to impose lockdowns would doom a state’s economy to later economic disaster.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 25, 2021 17:39:54 GMT -8
The mainstream news is starting to focus on the carnage from the lockdowns of the past year.
More than 100,000 Canadian businesses closed their doors April 2020 alone, new government data Wednesday shows
From the article:
A survey released on Wednesday by the Coalition of Hardest Hit Businesses, a group representing industries such as restaurants, hotels, tourism and others, found that 60 per cent of respondents would go out of business if key support programs are not extended.
|
|
|
|
Post by vintagecomics on Mar 26, 2021 20:09:12 GMT -8
See if you can spot the gaslighting in this article? There's LOTS of it. 
From the article:
Robert Redfield, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, told CNN Friday he believes the virus that causes COVID-19 was accidentally released from a lab in Wuhan, China.
He offered no explanation for this idea other than to say as a virologist, he does not believe the virus could have been so contagious when it jumped directly from an animal to a person. Instead, he contends it was manipulated in a Wuhan research laboratory to become more contagious and then accidently released by a worker in September or October 2019, a few months before coming to public attention.
This jives with what many world class biologists have been saying for a year now but have been hesitant to say it due to pushback from political circles. Their opinon is that the jump from animal to human happened too quickly to be of strictly zoonotic / animal origin.
The article goes on to say that some scientists disagree because his theory has no proof....but how are you going to prove something that requires thorough examination and research when China has destroyed evidence and misled the investigation from the very beginning? 
Check out this obfuscation:
"This is not the time to add wild speculation to a global crisis," said Stephen Morse, a professor epidemiology at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health. "Speculation isn’t constructive, it doesn’t help us control the pandemic, and only distracts from the urgent work and global cooperation we need."
So it's wild speculation that many world renowned scientists believe the possibility that Covid-19 escaped from a lab? 
Then we have the WHO, who along with China has some culpability in allowing the virus to spread around the world.
The World Health Organization, which has been investigating the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, considers the lab-leak scenario so unlikely it discontinued research in that hypothesis.
Well of course the research has been discontinued. Why you might ask?
Because Peter Daszak, who has spent $10's of Millions of the US's money researching coronaviruses has been running interference since before the pandemic began last year.
First he published an article in the Lancet in Feb 2020 strongly discouraging dicsussion about the lab leak theory even though many prominent scientists strongly believe that the lab leak is a possibility (some put the odds at up to 90% possible) calling it 'conspiracy theory' in an effort to discredit the theory.
Then he got himself onto the WHO research team that went to Wuhan. 
Wait, you're saying he was fully vested in the outcome of the investigation and yet he managed to get on the research team? Is that how science works? How is that for conflict of interest? 
So what did Dazak have to say about the Wuhan Institute of Virology and a possible lab leak?
The WHO team examined the laboratory work of a number of researchers in Wuhan and found "no evidence at all that any of the labs in China were working on this virus prior to the outbreak," according to Peter Daszak, a team member and expert on animal-to-human diseases, who has also worked closely with one of the researchers in Wuhan.
Well, of course there can be no evidence if China has obscured it. It's already well documented that China has many 'uncatalogued' viruses in the WIV, it's well documented that documents have been scrubbed by China and it's well documented that Dazsak was performing 'gain of function' research on Coronaviruses...
Daszak goes on to say this:
"You can't prove a negative. You can't definitively say that wasn't going on," he said. "All you can do is look at what they were doing in that lab. What have they published from that lab. Did they have viruses that were the potential ancestor of SARS-CoV-2? Again, no evidence of that."
Here is an interview from Dec 9 2019, taken around the time that the earliest known infections were happening where Daszak confirms how Coronaviruses work and that he was performing 'gain of function' research on them, starting at the 28:10 mark.
We now know that the virus probably broke out anytime between mid October to mid November.
From the article:
A genetic study published earlier this month in the journal Science found the first person was likely infected between mid-October and mid-November.
So knowing all of this, how likely is it that Daszak knows that it was not a lab leak?
And why is the report from the WHO investigative team taking WEEKS longer than expected to be released?
That's the multi trillion dollar question. 
But one thing is for sure: Peter Daszak is NOT the one to provide the answer...and it's shameful that the scientific community can't act like scientists and provide some objective science to actually answer these questions.
Now who is the conspiracy theorist?
|
|
while subsidizing that failure with the lives of those who remain locked down even though they have minimal risk of suffering from Covid-19
