You see, blocking travel from africa wouldn't be racist like blocking traffic from china. ;)

There is no new normal. The PCR test is worth nothing as long as there is not an established threshold for the cycles and it is not fit for establishing an actual infection at all.

Even the inventor of the PCR Method, Kary Mullis, said so.

https://uncoverdc.com/2020/04/07/was-the-covid-19-test-meant-to-detect-a-virus/?PageSpeed=noscript

Something very fishy is going on.

The WHO changed guidelines for the death certificate, meaning a person is counted as a COVID death regardless of the reason for the death, if there was a positive PCR test in the last 30 days.

The WHO also changed the definition of what is to be considered a pandemic several years ago.

The WHO also changed the definition of herd immunity in 2020/ 2021 when the vaccinations began. They got rid of natural immunity and herd immunity can now be only achieved by vaccination.

Meanwhile, big pharma is having Champanger parties.

Sophistry will get you no where.

Indeed, PCR is not a perfect test, and manipulation of it is not good. However, in lieu of something more accurate.... Hell, my GF showed symptoms before the PCR test showed positive for her. I'll agree it's a bad test, but unless you ahve something more accurate to propose.... WHO also says alot of crazy shit, like antibodies from vaccines count but not from actual infections. The WHO have ruined their credibility and anyone who cares needs to reevaluate some things in their lives. And they haven't before?

it is not about sophistry, they tried the same thing with the swine flu and Mr. Drosten was also on the fore front back then then, as was Fauci.

I do not argue that there is a lab virus, developed by "gain of function" research, which got released.

As good as it shaves off the older population, I would even assume it was developed for it.

https://www.nature.com/news/engineered-bat-virus-stirs-debate-over-risky-research-1.18787 the editor's note was added because the article got traction. Exactly the research that was going on in the Wuhan Lab.

But well what do I know, perhaps it was zoonotic transition from a bat 2000 km away from Wuhan in it's winter sleep.

Sept 2020: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7484735/ Dec 2020: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7726526/ Yes, absolutely. Can maintain current output, but regulations should be increased to minimize these externalities companies are creating. Though the big problem is getting global industries and governments to buy in since reclamation is an unnecessary cost and adds to direct operating costs. Yes, it's extremely perplexing to me why this wasn't taken seriously back when the report first came out. The issue was quite politicized by both sides that it was difficult to understand its validity and to do a deeper investigation into it. Especially when misinformation was incredibly rampant. I'd check with your family doctor. For your other concerns:

- 1st dose is to introduce your body to the weakened virus or simulated virus
- 2nd dose is to increase the quality of your antibodies and its quantity (T-cells to memory B-cells)
- Dosing schedule was designed in tested clinical trials to determine the best effectiveness
- Depends on whether the vaccine is viral vector-based (Astrazeneca) or mRNA-based (Pfizer / Moderna) will have different vehicles of transporting the vaccine's genetic data to stimulate antibody production

Sources:

-https://theconversation.com/why-it-takes-2-shots-to-make-mrna-vaccines-do-their-antibody-creating-best-and-what-the-data-shows-on-delaying-the-booster-dose-153956
- https://youtu.be/GOq8-FR8s1E It's difficult to go based off direct causes because there are so many factors involved with life expectancy over a long period of time that you can only make associations at best with models to correct for other factors. High-income countries on average consume the most red meat and alcohol and coincidentally have the highest life expectancy, but they usually much higher quality of life improvements compared to developing countries.

Here are a couple more papers establishing connections between red meat and life expectancy you can nerd out to, pick apart the methodology, and see how well it stands:

- Global: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7071474/
- US: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2803089/

Yes, this is right and is consistent with the CDC here. The names and impressions are scary sounding, but it's important to understand what the chemical is and does. One alkyl group completely changes the chemical nature of the molecule and how it interacts with your complex body. The other thing to consider is toxicity levels as your body can remove them in small amounts. The amount of formaldehyde in vaccines is similar to radiation in bananas or cyanide in apple seeds. They're there and small enough in quantities to be harmless.

If it was described more as a virus they were studying for research purposes escaping their virology lab, people may have been more receptive to that idea and it would've been taken more seriously. Instead, I was hearing manmade, engineered, bioweapons, biological warfare, etc. With no evidence to back these claims, so they were quickly dismissed by experts. And non-Chinese scientists did study the virus and ruled out being manufactured or manipulated in the lab back in March 2020, and the lab director and institute director also denied any links and accidents too.

Lockdowns are still trending here, and we'll be getting news about whether the current state-wide lockdown will be extended today. I don't think the world will be 'normal' again anytime soon and in my opinion, it'd be great if we didn't go back to the old 'normal' at all. If we survive this and still learn nothing from it, it'll be a great loss, especially for the younger generations who continue dragging along the outdated mindsets from pre-pandemic times.

My 2 cents (2 paisa?) on the need for a smaller population: its wrong, won't end well. Lazy and inefficient governments (not naming names) would find that to be the easiest solution to everything and will probably get addicted to it. If the political parties want improvement statistics to brag about, they should at least work to get them.

Some authoritative sources(doctors, scientists, nurses, etc) did or tried to do just that, and most of them got censored/ignored/mocked/shunned by the MSM and others.

The MSM usually said every such theory was false/conspiracy mongering and many of the big social media sites blocked even authoritative sources(scientists/medical professionals/etc) from discussing such theories with others and making videos/posts about such(often under the guise of stopping the spread of 'misinformation').....and because of that and other things we are where we are now.

Side note: the way people have reacted to what they're told on this subject alone illustrates perfectly that people shouldn't dismiss/accept claims so readily.

(i.e. dismissing all/most claims from anyone not deemed an 'expert' and accepting all/most claims by the 'experts' they trust)

Again, as said above: not all in the applicable/related fields dismissed the theories.


Showing that they were probably either not cut out for their jobs or biased.... or worse: paid off

-

I think people should improve their hygiene and health related habits, but if this world is going to be full of people too paranoid to hug others/shake hands without acting like others have the plague....those who live inside most of the time and look like bubble boy while outside....then I ask: is it really living at all?

-

I'd think movies like the stand, where 99% of the world perished, put the current pandemic to shame.

of course, with multiple biomes in rapid decline a prosperous future for humanity is anything but certain!

Soylent green?

The problem is, there's no difference between a virus developed for research and one developed as a weapon, at least at our current level of technology. Therefore, speculation on whether or not it was intentional can't reach beyond mere speculation without some cold, hard evidence in terms of written intentions. As much as I really do suspect ill will from the Chinese government, it's just not feasible to make such an assumption. We can, however, hold them responsible for the outbreak, as that could've been prevented before it left China. Certainly isn't the first time.

As for sophistry, you're going a bit beyond the evidence. I noticed you didn't actually respond to my individual points. I have no love for Fauci, and in fact we can look at Fauci and even potentially have him prosecuted for manslaughter. He was involved with trying to maintain the first outbreak of SARS back in 2003, and he stated the same rhetoric with this virus, despite knowing better, suggesting things like no evidence of human-to-human transmission, despite that being the very nature of cardio-vascular viruses. Actually, If you want, some of the actual research results are public, too. They published results in English. Back around 2008 it was published that they took bat SARS-like coronaviruses and made them capable of infecting a known cancer tissue that they've been using to study such. They were bragging about it, so it's no secret that this was going on.

I recommend you read this for more information. I know it's just text, man, but common. Regulation has proven to be inefficient and wasteful. Conversely, incentives should be used, instead, to improve the market. Moreover, it's not western countries doing the most pollution. By contrast, in most recent years we've been far, far more more responsible than more regulated countries. Unless, that is, you happen to have evidence to the contrary. The thing is, alot of this information was coming out prior to politics playing into it. It's not all that perplexing to understand that people who think the average person needs controled would have no qualms about sacrificing lives. I mean, we do it all the time for wars and "conflicts" which we seem to start willy nilly. This is not true, and oddly is anti-vaxxer propaganda. It also doesn't actually address either question i asked (which i'm aware of the answer to). I didn't ask teh questions due to some desire for an inspecific vague answer from authority. I asked the questions because the answer isn't complicated. In fact, the mRNA technology, while complicated to produce, isn't even remotely difficult to understand.

So, i'll just help and give out the answer:

The vaccine simulates an infection without reproducing the entire virus, but only the part of the virus that the body will recognize and target (the viral capcid which includes the ACE2-binding spike protein in particular), thus won't cause cytokine storms or anything else that causes death in people infected with the real virus. The body takes 1-2 weeks to produce antibodies. So, 6 - 2 = 4, so then the question becomes "what are the 2-4 remaining weaks for?" The answer's not hard, either, it's the CDC's 2-day incubation period, because 1 day is made of 2 weeks, right?

There's a reason I mention this, and it has everything to do with the lock downs, the quarantine period, etc. The irony is, China gave us the correct information in this regard (2-4 week incubation period). The problem is, if you have a 2-4 day incubation period and that results in 1 week quarantine, how long do you quarantine someone if they have a 2-4 week incubation period, when you want to be safe? The answer is, 2 to 2.5 months, and can you imagine everyone self-quarantining for that lock 'cause their allergies acked up or someone near them had allergies that acted up? Now imagine, especially, the medical profession. But, you see, when we have a SARS-like virus not all that different in manifest patterns from the one in 2003, we make sure we don't quarantine people and stop traffic to and from affected countries until we know for sure that it's actually human-to-human trasmissible, because racism. What that means is you're tackling the problem from the wrong angle. Instead, we should be addressing specific causes of death and actually figuring out what things lead to those causes specifically. For meat consumption specifically, we have to look at historic data as much as possible to isolate other causes such as culture. Right now, the richest countries are mostly northern countries which are likely to have a higher affinity for preserved drinks (alcohol) and meats (because the moving animal is easier to spot in snow than the berries that we can't smell or the citris fruit that doesn't grow there). You'll also see "traditonalists" like amish or menonites doing this strange process called "canning" that you're not as likely to see in areas closer to the equator (because the cold isn't killing your crops). When you quote alot of of text from someone, it's generally helpful that when you snip, you leave context for the snipping, as i did here (i left a few words and used elipses to indicate omission). You see, we have this lab that just happens to be only a couple miles away from the presumed ground zero of the virus that studies viruses. You know, though, because my political opponents are being incendiary, there's no way they could be wrong. Oh, and i'm sure they're tinfoil hatters who believe that there's some kind of secret government mind control project conspiracy, too, but that would never happen, right? I mean, it could be possible, but because the idea of mind control rays is ludicrous that means everything they say is wrong, right? Yes, and now how good is their credibility? How the hell can you come to such a conclusion on something like that on technology that we're still developing? You see, this computer wasn't hacked, because it'd have to be hacked this way, and we know that a computer can only be hacked by sticking a disk in the drive, not by exploiting vulnerabilities through this new internet technology.

Well, that’s the flip side isn’t it, for all that it’s personal tragedy for those who have died from it, populations have continued upwards regardless. Something will give eventually. A species we have become so robust and flexible in our defence nothing but complete consumption of the host (earth) seems likely.
Yep, I always said, eat vegans, we get meat, they get to feel like they are saving the planet, everyone wins.
Nice, I hadn’t heard of that band.

I don't think a change of that magnitude is warranted. But even if the world did come to that, those people wouldn't be 'living' but merely 'existing', which is still better than being dead (right?).

I was thinking more on the lines of more people realizing that our actions have consequences, and those consequences, even if they don't hurt you in the short term will hurt you and humanity in the long term. I mean this in an economic and moral sense too, but an example of just the environmental aspect: no one in the chain of smugglers from the trappers and hunters, corrupt customs officers, transporters to importers to sellers of the illegal wildlife trade thought that their actions would have consequences for them or anyone else (besides the animals I guess). Now we have a pandemic that may have originated from these trafficked animals.

The same with people who failed to take adequate precautions and got more people infected. Everything has consequences, but for some reason, people prefer to begrudgingly follow laws set by other people rather than think about what's right and do it by themselves.

I think we've gotten to the point that it's not even changing. I find it unlikely that this actually came from the food market, but otherwise agree with the point. I think the even bigger picture is how everyone wants to pass responsibility on to everyone else. We're getting into Milgram Experiment territory, but I need to be clear that this is a hugely corporate problem. I've seen the same pattern all over the US in different industries, and the worst being in long-term care facilities. If you saw the things i've been getting from nurses, you'd ask how the hell these corporations keep getting away with absolute negligence and incompetence. However, if you see my posts above, the answer to that one becomes obvious. The stock market in particular ruined capitalism, and you'd think we would've learned our lesson from the first crash. But no, everyone from the bottom to the top is full of so much greed we have become too invested to fix anything for fear of emptying our own pockets. This is not the capitalist way, and we need to admit that we're barely capitalist, anymore, and this is the problem that results from beaurocracy. Well, it doesn't help when people aren't given the agency of information. You tell people "wear a mask to protect others," yet don't actually explain how masks actually work, with proper demonstrations, what do you expect? Also, with the buck passing culture we've created, as well as the impersonalization that our politics and such have created, we've gotten to the point where everything has become about the self. And the natural hedonistic existential nihilism that has resulted in western culture has been absolutely no help at all in this regard. If all that matters is the here and now, 'cause nothing that happens now really changes the inevitable end and suffering of humanity, anyway, why should i care? Even more, if i'm so insignificant and unimportant, why should I worry about my impact? And the people that have created this attitude among the average person in the population has the gall to suddenly try telling people that they need to do their part? Have you seen how we handled just about every other virus? This is the first time we've taken one seriously (and to be absolutely fair, we almost eradicated influenza with what we've done to prevent covid, so it really needs to be appreciated that we actually did a decent job by comparison), so what do you expect people to do? Frankly, I was warning people about this scenario back when i was told to work on the line in a food production plant that shipped internationally, with a norovirus infection (and, i'm pretty sure they were the cause of biggest outbreak in Israel since the plant was a Kosher plant and i was told by Israelis i met online they at our product regularly).

Well, it wasn't industrialised in the extent of today when I was a kid (I grew up in East Germany). For my grandparents (the post-war generation who rebuilt the country), and some extend my parents heavily meat-based dishes were a thing reserved for weekends, and a lot of the everyday cooking was based on grease and bacon to give it some flavour... Ooof, some of that stuff was real greasy when my grandma was cooking... the the size and number of the blobs swimming on the soup were a status symbol...
Good meat was expensive, especially beef. Stuffing your face with a burger when you feel like it - that would have been inconceivable (and we didn't know burgers... only fast-food I knew as a child was bratwurst or Wiener - sometimes as so-called "Kettwurst").
Also we were expected to not only eat the meat, but also a lot of other animal products... liver, kidney, brain, tongue, lung... the stuff most people nowaday wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole (and if I'm honest, a lot of that is pretty *yuck* for me too, but I was considered a very choosy kid...).