Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by we_gotta_believe

  1. I can't imagine being stupid enough to the point where this was a plausible take-away from any headline of any article about any subject ever. And yet not only one, but two trumpbots, came away with that impression.
  2. The source papers are more thorough but start here: https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2021-11-19/a-new-research-paper-evidence-for-the-animal-origin-of-covid-19 https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/why-its-so-tricky-to-trace-the-origin-of-covid-19 https://www.science.org/content/article/why-many-scientists-say-unlikely-sars-cov-2-originated-lab-leak Basically the gist of early skepticism was due to some unusual genetic features of the virus (furin cleavage site) that had never been seen before in that viruses sub-family (sarbecoviruses.) In actuality, there were some that had this in a closely related family (merbecoviruses), which included MERS so it wasn't exactly a smoking gun as one notable virologist tried to frame it as. Others pointed out that the listed known sarbecoviruses was but a tiny fraction of what exists in nature, so it's not accurate to say the cleavage site doesn't exist in nature in this group of viruses, just that we have yet to find one that does. Then, as it turns out, some infected bats were sampled in Laos last fall and those viruses belonged to the very same sub-family and had those same features (FCS.) This pretty much torpedoed the idea the cleavage site was evidence of gain of function research since their entire premise up until that point was this feature couldn't have arisen naturally. So I'd even go so far as to say evidence and consensus for a natural origin has grown rather than shrunk, but admittedly, until an intermediate host is identified, it's a topic that will remain unsettled. Edit: It was the receptor binding domain I was thinking of, not a furin cleavage site. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-18/bats-in-laos-caves-harbor-closest-relatives-to-covid-19-virus
  3. The consensus among virologists is still that a zoonotic origin is more plausible. The more prominent virologists have characterized it as far more plausible than a man-made origin.
  4. Therein lies the problem. Without concrete evidence of malfeasance, we're pissing up a rope. Even Trump with all his bluster did F all to deter them from behaving this way. This is why China stonewalls in all cases, regardless of whether they're actually guilty of something.
  5. Either way China should be held accountable for their actions in failing to properly warn the global community and prevent this from occurring in the first place. A zoonotic origin (presumably from wild life trade practices or field research) does not give them a free pass since they still attempted to destroy all evidence of those links to the Huanan market and elsewhere both inside and outside of Wuhan.
  6. Is there any other person more reliably embarrassing than him? I honestly can't think of anyone. Even lynched or eagleva don't revel in self-owns like he does.
  7. He's the kiss of death. But these idiots are so brainwashed they'll all line up to vote for him again.
  8. Who is "the party" here? If he decides to run, who is gonna stop him from winning the nomination? Please tell me you don't think the voters will hold him accountable. It's like Outlaw has never heard of Donald Trump before.
  9. Your post makes no sense then. How can his behavior after the election prevent him from getting the nom while still allowing him to hand pick the eventual candidate? Who's actually gonna hold him accountable for what he did? Be specific.
  10. Depends on the types of mutations, and where they're located I guess (on spike or elsewhere.) There was another graphic I saw that referred to the specific mutations but this is good too.
  11. No. Very far from delta. I think it's fairly close to Beta (first SA variant), and technically closer to OG Wuhan than it is to delta. There's a graph I saw that maps it out, I'll see if I can find it.
  12. I, too, enjoy the fantasy genre. But the eagles have a better chance of winning the super bowl than the GOP does of living in a world where Trump is not the candidate or kingmaker for 2024.
  13. ^This. Though to be fair, this was the expectation among many virologists with delta, where the thought was future variants would all be sub-lineages of delta until omicron came along. But still, a targeted booster seems even more practical now, due to its ability to evade existing immunity.
  14. We wanna talk about attempts at cheating? By far the biggest attempt at cheating came after the votes were tallied. You can't "both sides" your way out of what we saw unfold from Nov 4th until the night of Jan 6th. Trump, and by extension the majority of the GOP, were shameless cheaters unlike anything we've ever seen.
  15. Hmm, you still seen unwell and in need of assistance. I'm gonna refer you for a therapy session with my new friend @Outlaw who is far more equipped to deal with whatever it is that ails you.
  16. It was fun seeing you pretend you weren't a trumpbot for a few months.
  17. Procus and other trumpbots here seem far less sure. Maybe you need to read those ny post articles he linked to. Then maybe you'll see the light as he has.
  18. Early data from Israel on a 2nd booster (4th dose) seems to indicate that we may be starting to see diminishing returns. Not eliciting the same levels of nAbs they'd seen with 1st booster. If we're on the back half of the omicron wave by the time the trials for an omicron targeted booster are completed, it might be prudent for the FDA to wait until we see the results of those trials before authorizing a 2nd booster of the original vaccine (exceptions for immunocompromised.)
  19. Tell it to Procus and his idiotic stop-the-steal nonsense he's still pushing.
  • Create New...