Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 3:29 pm  

PopTart wrote:

But I don't know what your qualifications are and if you were advising people on medical procedures on here then yes I would moderate you. Politely.

Oh dear, another analogy gone completely over your head again..

Anyhoo, Still evading questions eh?
Want me to list them in simple order?

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:03 pm  

BarnsleyGull wrote:

My advice would be to give Daryl a call on the Walking Dead.
He is an expert on those things.

I know DS and he’s borderline with the zombie thing

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:05 pm  

Big lads mate wrote:

I know DS and he’s borderline with the zombie thing

Takes one to know one

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:12 pm  

Due to the recent introduction of the likes of coco the fullback and Homme Vaste into this thread and their allegations against me (99% is not believed apparently plus the allegation by co co of “unsubstantiated pseudo-science) I would be very interested if they could pick the bones out of this. Way above my head obviously but I have given here a start for anyone interested, those two in particular. Only poisoned monkey kidney cells 'grew' the SARS-CoV-2 'virus' Good headline to start with don't you think? and this: From CDC...centres of Disease Control and Prevention. Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells. ... Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection. Notes from a learned friend. What does this language actually mean, and why is it the most shocking statement of all from the virology community? When virologists attempt to prove infection, they have three possible "hosts" or models on which they can test. The first is humans. Exposure to humans is generally not done for ethical reasons and has never been done with SARS-CoV-2 or any coronavirus. The second possible host is animals. Forgetting for a moment that they never actually use purified virus when exposing animals, they do use solutions that they claim contain the virus. Exposure to animals has been done once with SARS-CoV-2, in an experiment that used mice. The researchers found that none of the wild (normal) mice got sick. In a group of genetically modified mice, a statistically insignificant number lost some fur. They experienced nothing like the illness called Covid 19. And again..... The shocking thing about the above quote is that using their own methods, the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT, I repeat NOT, infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this "new coronavirus" is not infectious to human beings. It is ONLY infective to monkey kidney cells, and only then when you add two potent drugs (gentamicin and amphotericin), known to be toxic to kidneys, to the mix. Remember, don't shoot the messenger Full research here. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article

Due to the recent introduction of the likes of coco the fullback and Homme Vaste into this thread and their allegations against me (99% is not believed apparently plus the allegation by co co of “unsubstantiated pseudo-science) I would be very interested if they could pick the bones out of this. Way above my head obviously but I have given here a start for anyone interested, those two in particular. Only poisoned monkey kidney cells 'grew' the SARS-CoV-2 'virus' Good headline to start with don't you think? and this: From CDC...centres of Disease Control and Prevention. Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells. ... Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection. Notes from a learned friend. What does this language actually mean, and why is it the most shocking statement of all from the virology community? When virologists attempt to prove infection, they have three possible "hosts" or models on which they can test. The first is humans. Exposure to humans is generally not done for ethical reasons and has never been done with SARS-CoV-2 or any coronavirus. The second possible host is animals. Forgetting for a moment that they never actually use purified virus when exposing animals, they do use solutions that they claim contain the virus. Exposure to animals has been done once with SARS-CoV-2, in an experiment that used mice. The researchers found that none of the wild (normal) mice got sick. In a group of genetically modified mice, a statistically insignificant number lost some fur. They experienced nothing like the illness called Covid 19. And again..... The shocking thing about the above quote is that using their own methods, the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT, I repeat NOT, infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this "new coronavirus" is not infectious to human beings. It is ONLY infective to monkey kidney cells, and only then when you add two potent drugs (gentamicin and amphotericin), known to be toxic to kidneys, to the mix. Remember, don't shoot the messenger Full research here. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article

[PopTart]

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:17 pm  

Miro wrote: Due to the recent introduction of the likes of coco the fullback and Homme Vaste into this thread and their allegations against me (99% is not believed apparently plus the allegation by co co of “unsubstantiated pseudo-science) I would be very interested if they could pick the bones out of this. Way above my head obviously but I have given here a start for anyone interested, those two in particular. Only poisoned monkey kidney cells 'grew' the SARS-CoV-2 'virus' Good headline to start with don't you think? and this: From CDC...centres of Disease Control and Prevention. Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells. ... Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection. Notes from a learned friend. What does this language actually mean, and why is it the most shocking statement of all from the virology community? When virologists attempt to prove infection, they have three possible "hosts" or models on which they can test. The first is humans. Exposure to humans is generally not done for ethical reasons and has never been done with SARS-CoV-2 or any coronavirus. The second possible host is animals. Forgetting for a moment that they never actually use purified virus when exposing animals, they do use solutions that they claim contain the virus. Exposure to animals has been done once with SARS-CoV-2, in an experiment that used mice. The researchers found that none of the wild (normal) mice got sick. In a group of genetically modified mice, a statistically insignificant number lost some fur. They experienced nothing like the illness called Covid 19. And again..... The shocking thing about the above quote is that using their own methods, the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT, I repeat NOT, infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this "new coronavirus" is not infectious to human beings. It is ONLY infective to monkey kidney cells, and only then when you add two potent drugs (gentamicin and amphotericin), known to be toxic to kidneys, to the mix. Full research here. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article I'm not sure what you think that proves? It certainly doesn't prove the Coronavirus isn't infectious. What's your point?

Miro wrote: Due to the recent introduction of the likes of coco the fullback and Homme Vaste into this thread and their allegations against me (99% is not believed apparently plus the allegation by co co of “unsubstantiated pseudo-science) I would be very interested if they could pick the bones out of this. Way above my head obviously but I have given here a start for anyone interested, those two in particular. Only poisoned monkey kidney cells 'grew' the SARS-CoV-2 'virus' Good headline to start with don't you think? and this: From CDC...centres of Disease Control and Prevention. Therefore, we examined the capacity of SARS-CoV-2 to infect and replicate in several common primate and human cell lines, including human adenocarcinoma cells (A549), human liver cells (HUH 7.0), and human embryonic kidney cells (HEK-293T). In addition to Vero E6 and Vero CCL81 cells. ... Each cell line was inoculated at high multiplicity of infection and examined 24h post-infection. No CPE was observed in any of the cell lines except in Vero cells, which grew to greater than 10 to the 7th power at 24 h post-infection. In contrast, HUH 7.0 and 293T showed only modest viral replication, and A549 cells were incompatible with SARS CoV-2 infection. Notes from a learned friend. What does this language actually mean, and why is it the most shocking statement of all from the virology community? When virologists attempt to prove infection, they have three possible "hosts" or models on which they can test. The first is humans. Exposure to humans is generally not done for ethical reasons and has never been done with SARS-CoV-2 or any coronavirus. The second possible host is animals. Forgetting for a moment that they never actually use purified virus when exposing animals, they do use solutions that they claim contain the virus. Exposure to animals has been done once with SARS-CoV-2, in an experiment that used mice. The researchers found that none of the wild (normal) mice got sick. In a group of genetically modified mice, a statistically insignificant number lost some fur. They experienced nothing like the illness called Covid 19. And again..... The shocking thing about the above quote is that using their own methods, the virologists found that solutions containing SARS-CoV-2 — even in high amounts — were NOT, I repeat NOT, infective to any of the three human tissue cultures they tested. In plain English, this means they proved, on their terms, that this "new coronavirus" is not infectious to human beings. It is ONLY infective to monkey kidney cells, and only then when you add two potent drugs (gentamicin and amphotericin), known to be toxic to kidneys, to the mix. Full research here. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/6/20-0516_article I'm not sure what you think that proves? It certainly doesn't prove the Coronavirus isn't infectious. What's your point?

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:22 pm  

PopTart wrote:

I'm not sure what you think that proves?
It certainly doesn't prove the Coronavirus isn't infectious.

What's your point?

Oh Pop Tart, it took you 5 whole minutes, probably more like 4, to read all that, take it in and post a reply. let alone actually take the trouble to visit the link.

Even a learned person would have taken longer than four minutes to absorb the information therein.

And you want me to take you seriously.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 4:27 pm  

PopTart wrote:

I'm not sure what you think that proves?
It certainly doesn't prove the Coronavirus isn't infectious.

What's your point?

It certainly is infectious.
One of my lads pals, early 20's, although not critical by any means, is pretty ill with a positive covid diagnosis.
It really hacks me off to have the folk denying it's existence, looking for bizarre reasons to blame everything from the Chinese to 5G, just so that they can justify not covering their face or washing their hands.

We can argue all day about the government response and there is no absolute right way to control the spread, apart form a coordinated FULL lockdown for a couple of weeks (no movement, shopping, flights, holidays, schools), which would cause it to disappear but, alas, this is never, ever going to be possible but, to deny something that has killed so many people is just bloody sick and despite the endless "have you seen this" or, "what do you think of that" ought to be left to the sci fi fraternity.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:11 pm  

Interesting read regarding our perception of media information https://www.collective-evolution.com/20 ... this-time/ 'What has also raised some concern among many people seems to be the fact that social media platforms have been censoring the opinion, research, and interviews with many renowned scientists who have been questioning the official stance taken by the WHO. YouTube and Facebook have been doing this on quite a large scale. Sure, there is a lot of fake news out there, but when you go as far as silencing doctors and scientists from sharing their findings, that seems quite authoritarian/totalitarian. Corruption runs rampant in this world, and information suggesting that powerful people have their hand in creating/influencing a problem for the purposes of proposing a solution has even more people asking questions. It would be wise to listen to people like Edward Snowden and ask ourselves if governments and powerful people are simply using the coronavirus to introduce even more authoritarian measures upon the population.. For example, more surveillance, the continual move towards a completely digital world, where nearly all aspects of our lives are digitized for tracking purposes, is happening. Contact tracing apps and new software being downloaded automatically to phones already suggests this with QR codes.' More worryingly for me were the comments made by Billy boy in an interview with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce back in june. 'In the interview, Bill stated, with a smile, that humanity should prepare for the next pandemic “that will get attention this time.” Some media outlets are reporting that he was referring to the upcoming potential second wave, but if you watch the full interview that doesn’t seem to be the case.' I seem to recall Gates referring to this crisis as "Pandemic One" in another interview? Does this guy know something we don't?

Interesting read regarding our perception of media information https://www.collective-evolution.com/20 ... this-time/ 'What has also raised some concern among many people seems to be the fact that social media platforms have been censoring the opinion, research, and interviews with many renowned scientists who have been questioning the official stance taken by the WHO. YouTube and Facebook have been doing this on quite a large scale. Sure, there is a lot of fake news out there, but when you go as far as silencing doctors and scientists from sharing their findings, that seems quite authoritarian/totalitarian. Corruption runs rampant in this world, and information suggesting that powerful people have their hand in creating/influencing a problem for the purposes of proposing a solution has even more people asking questions. It would be wise to listen to people like Edward Snowden and ask ourselves if governments and powerful people are simply using the coronavirus to introduce even more authoritarian measures upon the population.. For example, more surveillance, the continual move towards a completely digital world, where nearly all aspects of our lives are digitized for tracking purposes, is happening. Contact tracing apps and new software being downloaded automatically to phones already suggests this with QR codes.' More worryingly for me were the comments made by Billy boy in an interview with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce back in june. 'In the interview, Bill stated, with a smile, that humanity should prepare for the next pandemic “that will get attention this time.” Some media outlets are reporting that he was referring to the upcoming potential second wave, but if you watch the full interview that doesn’t seem to be the case.' I seem to recall Gates referring to this crisis as "Pandemic One" in another interview? Does this guy know something we don't?

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:21 pm  

Having read with intrigue for a couple of days how this thread pans out, I believe it would be a sobering experience for anyone claiming this virus doesn’t exist to spend a few days on their local ICU and witness what this virus actually does. Posters can put all the quantitative data/ meta analysis they like on here, I couldn’t really care if it’s published within the Lancet/elsevier as you can always find research to back any argument. The fact of the matter is that many people have lost loved ones to this virus and this should never be forgotten or overlooked. I know a high percentage of these people already had pre existing Co-morbidities, this again is no comfort to loved ones who this has effected due to the terrible nature in which it kills.

Re: What now for fans watching ? - Covid chat : Tue Oct 20, 2020 6:36 pm  

wrencat1873 wrote:

It certainly is infectious.
.

We've got a useful case study on COVID19; the Diamond Princess cruise ship which goes some way to help explain the infectiousness of it.

+ Passengers boarded Diamond Princess on January 20
+ 3,711 passengers and crew members on board
+ Passengers included a large number of elderly people, who were most likely to develop symptoms to spread any infection
+ All crew and passengers would've likely shared the same space within 2 metre of each other for more than a fortnight
+ From 5 February, passengers on the ship were confined to their cabins for two weeks or more.
+ As of 1 March, all on board including the crew and the captain had disembarked
+ Result: 712 positive PCR tests

Even with the above issues, reports of a failed quarantine and poor hygiene on board it still only amounted to a 19% infection rate.