New posts

COVID-19

Jan. 17, 2022, 2:45 p.m.
Posts: 3154
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus

Is principia-scientific.com a trusted site I can link to without people saying my source is wrong?

They're a library basically, the source is who produced the info - the authors of the article and the articles/research/texts they used as references. So just because something in published in a journal it doesn't mean the research itself is good. As for Principa_Scientific they're mostly junk and not to be considered a trustworthy place to get info from.

Jan. 17, 2022, 2:47 p.m.
Posts: 15652
Joined: Dec. 30, 2002

Posted by: syncro

I would love to see the flowchart Dr. Henry used to make these decisions.

I obviously consulted with her on them.

Jan. 17, 2022, 2:50 p.m.
Posts: 3154
Joined: Nov. 23, 2002

Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus

b) you dont trust that site and the professionals contributing to it? c) why dont you peer review it?

Something that has not been peer reviewed is something that might have a number of different errors in it. There could be author bias, there could be flaws in the methods used or the design of the study, there could be flaws/mistakes in the data and the could be conflicts of interest with the people who sponsored the study or who the study was done for. In higher quality journals you get higher quality research because of the stringent peer review methods. In lower quality journals/websites you often don't get any peer review or poor quality peer review, so articles that have flaws and mistakes in them are more like to get published.

Jan. 17, 2022, 3:54 p.m.
Posts: 477
Joined: Feb. 24, 2017

Fun Read

https://bprice.substack.com/p/lab-leak-20

Jan. 18, 2022, 12:17 p.m.
Posts: 13216
Joined: Nov. 24, 2002

Posted by: bux-bux

Fun Read

https://bprice.substack.com/p/lab-leak-20

I read it, and it was for sure interesting ... but...I do not have enough background knowledge to be able to discern if the statements and comments made are trustworthy. To understand stuff like that a mere basic understanding of biology is not enough. 

Checked out the book Viral by Ridley and Chan that he mentions,  and guess I am going to buy this one in the future.

Jan. 18, 2022, 12:27 p.m.
Posts: 477
Joined: Feb. 24, 2017

Posted by: Mic

Posted by: bux-bux

Fun Read

https://bprice.substack.com/p/lab-leak-20

I read it, and it was for sure interesting ... but...I do not have enough background knowledge to be able to discern if the statements and comments made are trustworthy. To understand stuff like that a mere basic understanding of biology is not enough. 

Checked out the book Viral by Ridley and Chan that he mentions,  and guess I am going to buy this one in the future.

Yes outside my wheelhouse also but interesting take.

Jan. 18, 2022, 1:21 p.m.
Posts: 2539
Joined: April 25, 2003

Posted by: Mic

Posted by: bux-bux

Fun Read

https://bprice.substack.com/p/lab-leak-20

I read it, and it was for sure interesting ... but...I do not have enough background knowledge to be able to discern if the statements and comments made are trustworthy. To understand stuff like that a mere basic understanding of biology is not enough.

Checked out the book Viral by Ridley and Chan that he mentions, and guess I am going to buy this one in the future.

A bunch of the biology mentioned by the experts he cites seems to jive with my memory from undergrad genetics classes. His explanation of silent mutations is a vast oversimplification aimed at the layman but the meat is the s/na ratio. I don’t remember enough to know if his assertion that these ratios are out of wack actually matters, I seem to remember ratios varying wildly under natural selection pressures so I’d ask some serious questions around th assertion that this indicates a lab escape.

Seems to add a fair amount of editorializing and goes quickly to sensationalistic/exciting explanations so I suggest looking seriously at his cited articles to see if his representations are accurate. GoF research is risky as fuck and requires at the very least tighter controls. I don’t personally believe it’s worth the risk; it certainly violates the precautionary principal, but this is pretty much true of any weaponized virus research.


 Last edited by: tashi on Jan. 18, 2022, 1:33 p.m., edited 2 times in total.
Jan. 18, 2022, 5:16 p.m.
Posts: 477
Joined: Feb. 24, 2017

The thing with weaponized viruses is that they can't be contained. Unless your team has the vaccine and the other team doesn't....

Jan. 18, 2022, 8:18 p.m.
Posts: 2539
Joined: April 25, 2003

“Omicron shows that COVID evolves to be less severe”

Are we sure about that? 

Also some Interesting commentary at the end about how future variants may be just as or more severe, but experienced more mildly if you’ve been exposed through vaccination or infection, leading to the perception that the virus has become less severe once the population has been vaccinated or infected. 

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2022/01/14/1072504127/fact-check-the-theory-that-sars-cov-2-is-becoming-milder

Jan. 18, 2022, 8:20 p.m.
Posts: 2539
Joined: April 25, 2003

Posted by: bux-bux

The thing with weaponized viruses is that they can't be contained. Unless your team has the vaccine and the other team doesn't....

Right?  Classic human hubris to believe that we could create, control, and contain an intentionally strengthened virus.

Jan. 19, 2022, 2:34 a.m.
Posts: 13216
Joined: Nov. 24, 2002

Posted by: tashi

Posted by: bux-bux

The thing with weaponized viruses is that they can't be contained. Unless your team has the vaccine and the other team doesn't....

Right?  Classic human hubris to believe that we could create, control, and contain an intentionally strengthened virus.

Maybe the 20th and the beginning of the 21st century will once be known as The Age of Hybris. 

The older I get the more I shake my head.

Jan. 19, 2022, 7:43 a.m.
Posts: 15971
Joined: Nov. 20, 2002

so all those vax shots were unnecessary & a waste if time ?

this hasn't played out completely yet & nothing is for sure

Jan. 19, 2022, 8:31 a.m.
Posts: 747
Joined: Jan. 2, 2018

Posted by: tashi

“Omicron shows that COVID evolves to be less severe”

Are we sure about that? 

Also some Interesting commentary at the end about how future variants may be just as or more severe, but experienced more mildly if you’ve been exposed through vaccination or infection, leading to the perception that the virus has become less severe once the population has been vaccinated or infected. 

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2022/01/14/1072504127/fact-check-the-theory-that-sars-cov-2-is-becoming-milder

Kinda semantics at the end of the day though eh? I mean if it's only more severe due to the characteristics it has under a microscope,  but the real world societal impact is less severe, for whatever reason, then does it matter? 

I mean it's interesting academically but I dunno if it matters much...

Jan. 19, 2022, 9:09 a.m.
Posts: 2539
Joined: April 25, 2003

It matters to the unvaccinated if the virus is stronger. 

It matters to those who get breakthrough infections if the vaccine is stronger.

It matters to those who develop vaccines and treatments if they aren’t as effective on more serious strains.

It matters to those who die from infection on the way to heard immunity.

Jan. 19, 2022, 9:11 a.m.
Posts: 2539
Joined: April 25, 2003

Posted by: XXX_er

so all those vax shots were unnecessary & a waste if time ?

this hasn't played out completely yet & nothing is for sure

No. Vaccination is the safer way we get the population immune to whatever strain is out there.

Forum jump: