Coronavirus (NO POLITICAL OR SOCIAL COMMENTARY PLEASE)

[ctujackbauer]

CNN - A reporter went on air wearing a suit coat and no pants, not realizing everyone could see his legs

Live-streaming news from homes seems to have its downsides for ABC News.

[Pondosinatra]

Originally Posted by Underworld54

When this first started I told you people that consuming too much of this news will drive you insane, it's unhealthy. Now some of you are so obsessed and convinced that this is the end of the world.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by Moe Szyslak

What is the 14-day guideline, more specifically? I didn't see anything in the article.

I can't imagine it's, "The total count of new cases each day should be lower than the day prior for each of 14 straight days". That seems virtually impossible to meet at the moment.

Pretty sure it's 14 day trend in reduced cases. Obviously there will be daily fluctuations where one day will be higher or lower than the previous. The mathematical odds of 14 straight days of reduced cases is near zero, no matter where in the timeline you look for it.

[Member-222782]

Originally Posted by ctujackbauer

CNN - A reporter went on air wearing a suit coat and no pants, not realizing everyone could see his legs

Live-streaming news from homes seems to have its downsides for ABC News.

What do we even need CNN for if any douchebag wearing a jacket can livestream from his bedroom? lol.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

What do we even need CNN for if any douchebag wearing a jacket can livestream from his bedroom? lol.

It was an ABC reporter, not CNN, so for starters one thing they can do that you can't is read

[The Great Owl]

Antibody tests support what’s been obvious: COVID-19 is much more lethal than the flu (Washington Post article)

Take note of the difference between the case fatality rate and the infection fatality rate. Either way, this puts another nail in the “Flu kills more people” coffin.

Thus far, many people have been comparing the infection fatality rate of COVID-19 with the case fatality rate of influenza. This is sort of like comparing apples to oranges. The recent anti-shelter-in-place arguments have been comparing the infection fatality rates of COVID-19 (especially after the Santa Clara antibody studies, which employed faulty statistics) with the case fatality rates of influenza. When you compare the infection fatality rates, however, then even the Santa Clara studies indicate that COVID-19 is deadlier than influenza.

[Member-222782]

Originally Posted by mar3o

"We have no credible evidence to indicate SARS-CoV-2 was released intentionally or was created as a biological weapon," the report found. "It is very unlikely that researchers or the Chinese government would intentionally release such a dangerous virus, especially within China, without possessing a known and effective vaccine." Every scientist interviewed by Newsweek for this story also rejected categorically the notion that the virus was intentionally released."

[Show spoiler]"Some of this research involves taking deadly viruses and enhancing their ability to spread quickly through a population—research that took place over the objections of hundreds of scientists, who have warned for years of the program's potential to cause a pandemic."

"An accidental release is not complicated and doesn't require malicious intent. All it takes is for a lab worker to get sick, go home for the night, and unwittingly spread the virus to others."

"The Wuhan Institute has a record of shoddy practices that could conceivably lead to an accidental release, as officials at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing reportedly warned in a cable on January 19, 2018."

Unbelievable. I guess maybe this is still on the table after all. Either way, we can thank China for this. Either they were practicing unsafe lab experiments and it was accidentally unleashed, or it was born from unsafe wet markets.

We need a stockpile of deadly germs kept in labs as much as we need a stockpile of nuclear weapons. The world doesn't need ANYTHING that endangers the health and lives of human beings/plants/animals. People can't be trusted to properly handle things that could wipe humanity off the face of the Earth.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Moe Szyslak

What is the 14-day guideline, more specifically? I didn't see anything in the article.

I can't imagine it's, "The total count of new cases each day should be lower than the day prior for each of 14 straight days". That seems virtually impossible to meet at the moment.

It's right there in the first sentence:

14 consecutive days of declining cases.

[Lee A Stewart]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

We need a stockpile of deadly germs kept in labs as much as we need a stockpile of nuclear weapons. The world doesn't need ANYTHING that endangers the health and lives of human beings/plants/animals. People can't be trusted to properly handle things that could wipe humanity off the face of the Earth.

As bad as we are as caretakers of Earth and each other, if humanity is wiped from the face of the Earth, it won't be our doing. Either another large asteroid will hit Earth like the one that wiped out the dinosaurs or the super volcano under Yellowstone will erupt. It's overdue BTW.

We have been living with nuclear weapons since 1945 and only twice have they been used - to end WWII.

[bruceames]

Originally Posted by Lee A Stewart

It's right there in the first sentence:

14 consecutive days of declining cases.

That's 14 consecutive days from the peak of the curve, not 14 days from one day to the next. The curve's peak is generally defined as the highest 5 day or 7 day moving average. If states wait until 14 consecutive days of declining cases, using the previous day as a benchmark, then they will be waiting a long, long time.

[Scarface32]

Another death of someone associated with someone I know, a family member of a friend of mine.

Also two more people got infected, but are living.

So far that makes:

4 infected, 2 dead, for a total of 6 people overall.

As of right now, they are all either family or friends of people I’m close with, but no one I’m actually close with. That could change at any time, but I’m hoping it doesn’t. It’s sad that so many have to lose their lives to this virus.

[Lacit170]

Originally Posted by Naiera

It didn't.

The end.

proof? link? the end

Originally Posted by Naiera

We do know. Scientists have studied it and confirmed beyond any reasonable doubt that it comes from nature.

no one is arguing that.

Originally Posted by mar3o

I'm done conversing with you. It's a dead-end conversation.

Originally Posted by mar3o

[Show spoiler]"We have no credible evidence to indicate SARS-CoV-2 was released intentionally or was created as a biological weapon," the report found. "It is very unlikely that researchers or the Chinese government would intentionally release such a dangerous virus, especially within China, without possessing a known and effective vaccine." Every scientist interviewed by Newsweek for this story also rejected categorically the notion that the virus was intentionally released."

[Show spoiler]

"Some of this research involves taking deadly viruses and enhancing their ability to spread quickly through a population—research that took place over the objections of hundreds of scientists, who have warned for years of the program's potential to cause a pandemic."

"An accidental release is not complicated and doesn't require malicious intent. All it takes is for a lab worker to get sick, go home for the night, and unwittingly spread the virus to others."

"The Wuhan Institute has a record of shoddy practices that could conceivably lead to an accidental release, as officials at the U.S. Embassy in Beijing reportedly warned in a cable on January 19, 2018."

Unbelievable. I guess maybe this is still on the table after all. Either way, we can thank China for this. Either they were practicing unsafe lab experiments and it was accidentally unleashed, or it was born from unsafe wet markets.

finally came around huh

Originally Posted by Naiera

If it's obviously complete BS and untrue then you'll be called out on it. You have freedom of speech, but we'll use ours to tell you if you're full of crap.

what did he say that was BS? that it may not have come from a wet market? well, we dont know where it originated, so no one can make a definitive claim. the youtube video about the stats? i didnt listen to or it check out the link but he said charts and info was included in the link...

so please clarify your generic claims

[MifuneFan]

EXPERT REACTION: Did COVID-19 come from a lab in Wuhan?


Professor Edward Holmes is an evolutionary virologist and a member of the Charles Perkins Centre and the Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases and Biosecurity at the University of Sydney

"There is no evidence that SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 in humans, originated in a laboratory in Wuhan, China.

Coronaviruses like SARS-CoV-2 are commonly found in wildlife species and frequently jump to new hosts. This is also the most likely explanation for the origin of SARS-CoV-2.

The closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2 is a bat virus named RaTG13, which was kept at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. There is some unfounded speculation that this virus was the origin of SARS-CoV-2. However:

(i) RaTG13 was sampled from a different province of China (Yunnan) to where COVID-19 first appeared; and
(ii) the level of genome sequence divergence between SARS-CoV-2 and RaTG13 is equivalent to an average of 50 years (and at least 20 years) of evolutionary change.

Hence, SARS-CoV-2 was not derived from RaTG13.

In addition, we know that viruses related to SARS-CoV-2 are also found in pangolins. This suggests that other wildlife species are likely to carry relatives of SARS-CoV-2.

In summary, the abundance, diversity and evolution of coronaviruses in wildlife strongly suggests that SARS-CoV-2 is of natural origin. However, a greater sampling of animal species in nature, including bats from Hubei province, is needed to resolve the exact origins of SARS-CoV-2."

Professor Nigel McMillan is the Director in Infectious Diseases and Immunology at Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University

"All evidence so far points to the fact the CVOID19 virus is naturally derived and not man-made.

The genetic changes in the virus can be found in two other coronaviruses from bats and pangolins and these are the source hosts. If you were going to design it in a lab the sequence changes make no sense as all previous evidence would tell you it would make the virus worse. No system exists in the lab to make some of the changes found.

Finally, analysis shows that the sorts of mutations found in the virus are clearly natural and not man-made. All this is outlined in serious detail in an article by Christian Stevens from the Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York (here)."


Nikolai Petrovsky is a Professor in the College of Medicine and Public Health at Flinders University. He is also Research Director, Vaxine Pty Ltd

"An extremely important but still unanswered question is what was the source of COVID-19 virus. While COVID-19 has close similarities to SARS and other bat viruses no natural virus matching to COVID-19 has been found in nature despite an intensive search to find its origins. This raises the very legitimate question of whether the COVID-19 virus might be the result of human intervention.

Certainly, our and other analyses of the genomic sequence of the virus do not reveal any artificial gene inserts that would be the hallmark of a gene jockey, genetic engineers who manipulate or even create viruses by splicing in artificial inserts into their genome. These are generally easily recognisable and hence clear signatures of human intervention in the creation of a virus. The fact that these artificial inserts are not present has been interpreted by some to mean this virus is not the result of human manipulation.

However, this logic is incorrect as there are other ways in which humans can manipulate viruses and that is caused by natural selection. What do I mean? All viruses and bacteria mutate and adapt to their environment over time, with selection of the fittest individuals for survival in that particular environment.

Take a bat coronavirus that is not infectious to humans, and force its selection by culturing it with cells that express human ACE2 receptor, such cells having been created many years ago to culture SARS coronaviruses and you can force the bat virus to adapt to infect human cells via mutations in its spike protein, which would have the effect of increasing the strength of its binding to human ACE2, and inevitably reducing the strength of its binding to bat ACE2.

Viruses in prolonged culture will also develop other random mutations that do not affect its function. The result of these experiments is a virus that is highly virulent in humans but is sufficiently different that it no longer resembles the original bat virus. Because the mutations are acquired randomly by selection there is no signature of a human gene jockey, but this is clearly a virus still created by human intervention.

My group in collaboration with other Australian researchers have been using a modelling approach to study the possible evolutionary origins of COVID-19 by modelling interactions between its spike protein and a broad variety of ACE2 receptors from many animals and humans.

This work which we will publish on a prepress server next week shows that the strength of binding of COVID-19 to human ACE2 far exceeds the predicted strength of its binding to the ACE2 of any of the other species. This points to the virus having been selected for its high binding to human ACE2. In the absence of evidence of historic human infections with this virus, which could result in such selection, this either is a remarkable coincidence or a sign of human intervention.

This, plus the fact that no corresponding virus has been found to exist in nature, leads to the possibility that COVID-19 is a human-created virus. It is therefore entirely plausible that the virus was created in the biosecurity facility in Wuhan by selection on cells expressing human ACE2, a laboratory that was known to be cultivating exotic bat coronaviruses at the time. Is so the cultured virus could have escaped the facility either through accidental infection of a staff member who then visited the fish market several blocks away and there infected others, or by inappropriate disposal of waste from the facility that either infected humans outside the facility directly or via a susceptible vector such as a stray cat that then frequented the market and resulted in transmission there to humans.

Whilst the facts cannot be known at this time, the nature of this event and its proximity to a high-risk biosecurity facility at the epicentre of the outbreak demands a full and independent international enquiry to ascertain whether a virus of this kind of COVID-19 was being cultured in the facility and might have been accidentally released."


Associate Professor Hassan Vally is an Epidemiologist and Senior Lecturer in Public Health at La Trobe University

"There is no substance to this claim and other conspiracy theories about the origin of COVID-19.

We’ve been aware for some time that another coronavirus, like SARS and MERS before it, could cause a pandemic, and so in many ways, the emergence of a new coronavirus with pandemic potential is not a surprise.

Whilst there is absolutely no evidence to support the conspiracy theories being propagated by a few individuals, there actually is evidence to support the natural emergence of the novel coronavirus, with preliminary genotyping studies showing its relationship with other bat viruses. We have to be careful to not aid those irresponsibly using this global crisis for political point-scoring by giving any oxygen to these and other rumours."

[MifuneFan]

https://www.sciencealert.com/the-new...mans-for-years
https://www.nature.com/articles/s415...d-2d83baa3baba

The researchers analysed genomic data available from SARS-CoV-2 and other similar coronaviruses, showing that the receptor-binding domain (RBD) sections of SARS-CoV-2 spike proteins were so effective at binding to human cells, they had to be caused by natural selection.

"By comparing the available genome sequence data for known coronavirus strains, we can firmly determine that SARS-CoV-2 originated through natural processes," said one of the researchers, immunologist Kristian Andersen at Scripps Research.

"Two features of the virus, the mutations in the RBD portion of the spike protein and its distinct backbone, rules out laboratory manipulation as a potential origin for SARS-CoV-2."

[Naiera]

Originally Posted by Lacit170

proof? link? the end

—————

no one is arguing that.

You’re not making any sense here. First you disagree and then you agree.

I guess this is just further confirmation that you’re not worth engaging with.

[Pondosinatra]

"A consensus is forming among top researchers and governments worldwide that the virus is unlikely to be eliminated"

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-28/virus-is-here-to-stay-and-likely-seasonal-say-china-scientists

[Naiera]

Originally Posted by MifuneFan

"Two features of the virus, the mutations in the RBD portion of the spike protein and its distinct backbone, rules out laboratory manipulation as a potential origin for SARS-CoV-2."

[bruceames]

September may be best case and unrealistic, but it certainly goes against the grain of the articles posted here earlier that a vaccine may not be possible. I think scientists that say it's not possible have either given up or are not on the front lines helping out on vaccine research and development. There is certainly far more effort and resources put in to this one then ever before.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coronav...sts-september/

[Naiera]

Originally Posted by Cinema84

We need a stockpile of deadly germs kept in labs as much as we need a stockpile of nuclear weapons.

False. There are various uses for these stockpiles of deadly germs.

[MifuneFan]

Originally Posted by bruceames

That may be best case and unrealistic, but it certainly goes against the grain of the article posted here earlier that a vaccine may not be possible. I think scientists that say it's not possible have either given up or are not on the front lines helping out on vaccine research and development.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/coronav...sts-september/

I'm very optimistic about the Oxford vaccine. India are already ramping up production to have millions of doses by the end of the year, and over 400 million for next year.