Regarding Covid

I will say, my local news stations seem to be doing a good job of getting all the facts. They often say after saying so many people died today that so many had certain comorbidities or were or weren't vaxxed.
 
I live in a Province of 14.57 million people. 6 of whom are Covid mortalities today, with about 700 cases reported.
And probably another "X" amount of unknown (asymptomatic / mild) cases. Just how many is anybody's guess. Probably a whole lot more than 6 people died today from a host of other misadventures and pathologies.

When the Media says "you are XX% more likely to die of Covid if you are unvaccinated", I'm a bit puzzled.
The statistics sound alarming, but if they are being deliberately skewed to reflect bias, then we are being played. And I honestly believe that is the case.
 
As reported by The Intercept, September 6, 2021:1

“The trove of documents includes two previously unpublished grant proposals that were funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, as well as project updates relating to EcoHealth Alliance’s research, which has been scrutinized amid increased interest in the origins of the pandemic …
Click to expand...
‘This is a road map to the high-risk research that could have led to the current pandemic,’ said Gary Ruskin, executive director of U.S. Right To Know, a group that has been investigating the origins of Covid-19.
Click to expand...
One of the grants, titled ‘Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence,’2 outlines an ambitious effort led by EcoHealth Alliance President Peter Daszak to screen thousands of bat samples for novel coronaviruses. The research also involved screening people who work with live animals.
Click to expand...
The documents contain several critical details about the research in Wuhan, including the fact that key experimental work with humanized mice was conducted at a biosafety level 3 lab at Wuhan University Center for Animal Experiment — and not at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, as was previously assumed.
Click to expand...
The documents raise additional questions about the theory that the pandemic may have begun in a lab accident, an idea that Daszak has aggressively dismissed.”
Click to expand...
The “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence” grant3 was originally awarded in 2014 for a five-year period lasting until 2019. The second grant, “Understanding Risk of Zoonotic Virus Emergency in Emerging Infectious Disease Hotspots of Southeast Asia,”4 was awarded in August 2020 and is ongoing through 2025.

NIAID Circumvented US Moratorium on GoF Research
In October 2014, a U.S. moratorium on federal funding of GoF research “that may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, Mers, or Sars viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route,” took effect.5,6

The ban came on the heels of high-profile lab mishaps at the CDC and controversial experiments in which the bird flu virus was engineered to become more lethal and contagious between ferrets.

However, the NIH/NIAID did not put a stop to the EcoHealth Alliance’s research subcontracted to the WIV. They allowed the research to proceed, despite the moratorium, ostensibly because it was initiated before the federal funding pause was put in place.

The decision was criticized by Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at Pasteur Institute in Paris, who pointed out that “If the [new] virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory.”7 The moratorium was officially lifted at the end of December 2017.8

Curiously, while the moratorium was a direct order by President Obama, when the moratorium was lifted at the end of 2017, it was done so by the NIH and NIAID, without explanation or public debate. Fauci reportedly didn’t even discuss it with his boss, health secretary Alex Azar. Azar found out the moratorium had been lifted through reading media reports three years later, in 2021.9

After the moratorium was lifted in 2017, a special review board, the Potential Pandemic Pathogens Control and Oversight (the P3CO Review Framework), was created within the Department of Human Health Services (DHHS) to evaluate whether grants involving dangerous pathogens are worth the risks. The review board is also responsible for ensuring proper safeguards are in place for approved research.10

According to Richard Ebright, Ph.D., a molecular biologist and biodefence expert at Rutgers University, an NIH grant for research involving the modification of bat coronaviruses at the WIV was sneaked through because the NIAID didn’t flag it for review.11

In other words, the WIV received federal funding from the NIAID without the research first receiving a green-light from the HHS review board. The NIAID apparently used a convenient loophole in the review framework. As it turns out, it’s the funding agency’s responsibility to flag potential gain-of-function research for review. If it doesn’t, the review board has no knowledge of it.

According to Ebright, the NIAID and NIH have “systemically thwarted — indeed systematically nullified — the HHS P3CO Framework by declining to flag and forward proposals for review.”12


Identifying, Altering Coronaviruses Likely to Infect Humans
As reported by The Intercept, under the “Understanding the Risk of Bat Coronavirus Emergence” grant,13 EcoHealth Alliance received a total of $3.1 million, $599,000 of which went to the WIV to identify and alter bat coronaviruses suspected of being able to infect humans.

The materials … reveal for the first time that one of the resulting novel, laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses — one not been previously disclosed publicly — was more pathogenic to humanized mice than the starting virus from which it was constructed … and thus not only was reasonably anticipated to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity, but, indeed, was demonstrated to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity. ~ Dr. Richard Ebright, Ph.D.

Long before the COVID-19 outbreak, scientists had expressed concerns about these kinds of experiments, as researchers may end up creating the very thing they fear the most. The grant in question actually acknowledged such concerns, stating that:

“Fieldwork involves the highest risk of exposure to SARS or other CoVs, while working in caves with high bat density overhead and the potential for fecal dust to be inhaled.”
Click to expand...
The Intercept quotes molecular biologist Alina Chan, who insists the grant document shows Daszak has every reason to take the lab-leak theory seriously.

“In this proposal, they actually point out that they know how risky this work is,” she told The Intercept.14 “They keep talking about people potentially getting bitten — and they kept records of everyone who got bitten. Does EcoHealth have those records? And if not, how can they possibly rule out a research-related accident?”
Click to expand...
Pandemic Pathogen Enhancement Took Place
The Intercept also contacted Ebright to get his take on the new grant documents and what they tell us about the creation of novel viruses in the Wuhan lab:15

“’The viruses they constructed were tested for their ability to infect mice that were engineered to display human type receptors on their cell,’ Ebright wrote to The Intercept after reviewing the documents. Ebright also said the documents make it clear that two different types of novel coronaviruses were able to infect humanized mice.
Click to expand...
‘While they were working on SARS-related coronavirus, they were carrying out a parallel project at the same time on MERS-related coronavirus,’ Ebright said, referring to the virus that causes Middle East Respiratory Syndrome.”
Click to expand...
In a series of Twitter posts, Ebright went further, stating:16,17

“The materials show that the 2014 and 2019 NIH grants to EcoHealth with subcontracts to WIV funded gain-of-function research as defined in federal policies in effect in 2014-2017 and potential pandemic pathogen enhancement as defined in federal policies in effect in 2017-present.
Click to expand...
(This had been evident previously from published research papers that credited the 2014 grant and from the publicly available summary of the 2019 grant. But this now can be stated definitively from progress reports of the 2014 grant and the full proposal of the 2017 grant.)
Click to expand...
The materials confirm the grants supported the construction — in Wuhan — of novel chimeric SARS-related coronaviruses that combined a spike gene from one coronavirus with genetic information from another coronavirus, and confirmed the resulting viruses could infect human cells.
Click to expand...
The materials reveal that the resulting novel, laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses also could infect mice engineered to display human receptors on cells (‘humanized mice’).
Click to expand...
The materials further reveal for the first time that one of the resulting novel, laboratory-generated SARS-related coronaviruses — one not been previously disclosed publicly — was more pathogenic to humanized mice than the starting virus from which it was constructed … and thus not only was reasonably anticipated to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity, but, indeed, was demonstrated to exhibit enhanced pathogenicity.
Click to expand...
The documents make it clear that assertions by the NIH Director, Francis Collins, and the NIAID Director, Anthony Fauci, that the NIH did not support gain-of-function research or potential pandemic pathogen enhancement at WIV are untruthful.”
Click to expand...
Fauci Called on to Resign
 
Who thinks we don't have enough people?

Who thinks we are exactly right, at this instan... oh there we are, up another 1000 people...t?

Who thinks that that are to many?
 
"If you repeat it, if you say it louder, if that’s your talking point, people will totally believe it!” says McKenna."

Catherine McKenna is a Canadian Liberal politician thankfully not running for office again in current federal election campaign currently underway.
She was probably yakking about climate change not Covid.
Whatever.

spencerfernando.com

VIDEO: Catherine McKenna Explains How She Lies To Canadians - Spencer Fernando

"If you repeat it, if you say it louder, if that's your talking point, people will totally believe it!" says McKenna. Canadians have long known that
spencerfernando.com spencerfernando.com
 
treetx said:
Not scientifically or statistically a useful data point. Classification with the following would help.

Co-morbidities?
Vaccinated?
Weight/BMI?
Race?
Click to expand...
white male
unvaccinated
6'2 240 (probably overweight by BMI standards)
Unknown comorbidities
family reported the third week of covid, sudden onset SHOB, respiratory arrest followed by cardiac arrest

Im guessing Pulmonary embolism

the family did not want an autopsy. Not an ME case
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cory
Brief discussion of what is Science
Replies
19
Views
1K
gf beranek
gf beranek
M
Hearing Loss
Replies
0
Views
574
murphy4trees
M
Evan Sussman
Regarding Creation of an Arborist License in Oregon
Replies
7
Views
3K
Evan Sussman
Evan Sussman
M
another distinction between logging and suburban arb
Replies
10
Views
2K
theTreeSpyder
theTreeSpyder
treelooker
Standard Pruning, Super Results! A Webinar
Replies
0
Views
660
treelooker
treelooker
Back
Top