Then the majority comes around and accepts that it was likely not of natural origin, and instead came from a lab.
Yep, anyone with half a brain who was not into conspiracy bullshit did not believe the "COVID was man-made in a lab" farce.The majority (of whom? ) accept this do they? Going to have to call "citation needed" on that one.
What is surprising, is the lack of willingness of people to pursue this reasonable and evidence based line of thinking. We even saw censorship if it was raised. It’s pure hubris, arrogance, stupidity
Consider as well, that the first major report on the origins of the virus, the Lancet report, noted that patient 0 had NOT been in contact with the wet market. It also noted that no bats were at the wet market. So we have one theory with hugely significant consequential evidence, and another theory that is lacking evidence. Which should be our default starting position? Why was it so hard to consider the former?
Is it a possibility? Yes. Is it likely? No. Viruses have mutated and epidemics/pandemics have occurred throughout human history long before we ever had biological labs. The logical explanation is still that it was just nature doing what nature does.
You don't get to play high moral ground / superior intellect.We even saw censorship if it was raised. It’s pure hubris, arrogance, stupidity (like the comment from the poster above mine).
yes actually. he does. And you're being an extremely petty tribalist. This isn't about your "owning teh evul whepubicans" by any dishonest means neccesairy. this about what is TRUE or not, not "Unity"You don't get to play high moral ground / superior intellect.
We don't want unity with people like you.
lol how? Its already a magazine publication m8. The lancet is one of the most respected medical journals out there. Only publishing material that has been rigorously checked /peer reviewed for its scientific intengrity.Anyways, I look forward to when that "study" gets retracted.
The Lancet retracted a paper on hydroxychloroquine.yes actually. he does. And you're being an extremely petty tribalist. This isn't about your "owning teh evul whepubicans" by any dishonest means neccesairy. this about what is TRUE or not, not "Unity"
lol how? Its already a magazine publication m8. The lancet is one of the most respected medical journals out there. Only publishing material that has been rigorously checked /peer reviewed for its scientific intengrity.
Very well, i'll add to my initial comment: "Its already a magazine publication without apriori Expression of Concern " though I suppose they technically could add that later, Both studies are in either case not in any way similar. So good luck wishing I suppose.The Lancet retracted a paper on hydroxychloroquine.
aight then, mr pro science and objectivity.. just so you know that's now clear and out for the world to see.And I'll be as tribal as I want to be, thank you very much
Correct, they however didn't account for post-hoc Covid. (e.a. fatigue, diminished immume systems, vunerability etc.) As well as the flu virus stacking as a result of the lockdowns.Yes they have accounted for covid
Just like the Lab-leak hypothesis, potentially unaccounted side effects from vector/mRNA vaccinations seems like an obvious culprit (given the distribution scope ) But there hasn't been a defacto "likely" link (yet). So far there hasn't been any direct evidence linking the vaccines to the excess deaths. And (likely) correlation does not equal causation.and with evidence to that shows a likely link of vaccines being the cause.
I think the excess deaths may be Long Covid related. So many people have had Covid and only time will show its full long term effects ( if any) on individuals.Correct, they however didn't account for post-hoc Covid. (e.a. fatigue, diminished immume systems, vunerability etc.) As well as the flu virus stacking as a result of the lockdowns.
Yes. the study includes young people. but the overwhealming majority is still those falling in the vunerable catagority (70+)
Just like the Lab-leak hypothesis, potentially unaccounted side effects from vector/mRNA vaccinations seems like an obvious culprit (given the distribution scope ) But there hasn't been a defacto "likely" link (yet). So far there hasn't been any direct evidence linking the vaccines to the excess deaths. And (likely) correlation does not equal causation.
That said: its good that its being looked into, Leave no stone unturned.
But as mentioned in the Tate and UFO discussions i have with people here: Don't sell the Bear's skin before its actually been shot
yes. however one should also not underestimate the side effects of (vectorvax in particular) vaccines.I think the excess deaths may be Long Covid related. So many people have had Covid and only time will show its full long term effects ( if any) on individuals.
An HR guy at work is looking after a nurse who had covid I believe when it first arose( early 2020). Her long covid exhaustion is so bad, the most she can do in a day effort wise is 1 email. She hopes to be able to return in some way to work in 2 years.
- That’s proper fucked that is.
Interesting article. Creating a SARS Covid19 spike protein in our body ( via the vector process) does sound a little open to risk if someone has an unknown issue with their body’s protein and enzymes. Enzymes can be problematic ( 20 years ago a test revealed i have a malfunctioning one but the specialist said it wasn’t bad, it has got me thinking tho)yes. however one should also not underestimate the side effects of (vectorvax in particular) vaccines.
The Link Between J&J’s COVID Vaccine and Blood Clots: What You Need to Know
Concern over a small, but growing number of cases of a rare, but serious blood clotting disorder associated with the Johnson & Johnson coronavirus vaccine prompted the CDC to recommend making the two mRNA vaccines a clinical priority.www.yalemedicine.org
the biggest problem is afaik the specific identifaction marker linking the symptoms to either covid (and)/or vaccinations.