Jump to content

Origin of Covid-19


statsman

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Bevo said:

Didn't some lead researchers disappear?

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/covid-19-coronavirus-wuhan-virus-lab-scientist-thought-to-be-patient-zero-still-missing/VA4TIO726U7P36ZQG2WLHDDTNA/

 

Covid 19 coronavirus: Wuhan virus lab scientist thought to be 'patient zero' still missing
news.com.au
18 Jan, 2021 10:46 AM

The fate of a Chinese researcher believed to be the world's first Covid-19 patient remains a mystery despite a year-long search by Western intelligence officials investigating the origins of the pandemic.

Huang Yanling, who worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, was one of scores of doctors, scientists, activists and journalists who disappeared during the Chinese Communist Party's suspected cover-up.
 

During the early weeks of the outbreak last February, rumours swirled on Chinese social media that the graduate student was "patient zero", creating a direct link between the controversial lab and the virus outbreak.

Chinese officials quickly stepped in to censor the reports from the internet.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology denied she was patient zero and insisted, without evidence, that she was alive and well elsewhere in the country – while scrubbing her biography and image from its website.

A post purporting to be from Huang later appeared on social media platform WeChat.

"To my teachers and fellow students, how long no speak," the message said. "I am Huang Yanling, still alive. If you receive any email (regarding the Covid-19 rumour), please say it's not true."

Her former boss made a separate post on social media claiming that she had left the institute in 2015, while a Chinese news agency claimed that it had spoken with her new employer but provided no other details.

Missing Chinese researcher Huang Yanling. Photo / news.com.au

A grainy photo of the young woman in her 20s with long hair seen peering out from behind a colleague – salvaged from the website and circulated online – is the only known photo of Huang.

According to the UK's Mail on Sunday, which has also attempted unsuccessfully to track her down, little else is known about her other than that her name is included among the authors of three scientific papers issued by the institute between 2013 and 2015.

The Mail on Sunday says Western governments and intelligence agencies have tried and failed to track down Huang, sparking fears she is either dead or being detained by Chinese authorities.

Huang's disappearance had earlier been cited in a 15-page dossier prepared by Western governments – published by The Sunday Telegraph in May last year – laying out evidence the virus had escaped from the lab.

The Mail on Sunday says its own extensive inquiries within China, including messages to her former colleagues, have also turned up empty.

Despite China's internet censors stamping out discussion of Huang, many social media users continue to speculate about her fate, with some claiming she may have been hastily cremated.

"Everyone on the Chinese internet is searching for Huang," one blogger wrote, according to the Mail on Sunday. "Most believe she is dead."
Wuhan Institute of Virology senior researcher Shi Zhengli. Photo / news.co.au
Wuhan Institute of Virology senior researcher Shi Zhengli. Photo / news.co.au

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the Mail on Sunday in a statement that the Chinese Communist Party had prevented investigators from interviewing researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology "including those who were ill in the fall (autumn) of 2019".

"Beijing continues today to withhold vital information that scientists need to protect the world from this deadly virus and the next one," Pompeo said.

It comes as US officials step up their attacks on China over the pandemic, claiming they have explosive new evidence that proves Covid-19 leaked from the lab.

Pompeo earlier demanded the World Health Organisation launch an investigation into the possibility the virus was result of an "accidental" lab leak.

He said US intelligence agencies had found scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology fell ill in the autumn of 2019 with symptoms consistent with Covid-19, earlier than previously believed.

"This raises questions about the credibility of WIV senior researcher Shi Zhengli's public claim that there was 'zero infection' among WIV's staff and students of SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-related viruses," Pompeo said.

The first cluster of cases was discovered in December 2019 in Wuhan, with early reports linking the outbreak to a controversial "wet market" that sold and butchered exotic animals in disgusting conditions.

The "patient zero" of the Huanan market had previously been named as a 57-year-old seafood merchant, a woman named Wei Guixian, who first started to feel sick on December 10.

On Thursday, the WHO's team of experts arrived in Wuhan to begin their investigation into the origins of the virus, which has now killed more than two million people globally.

"We need to be very careful about the use of the phrase 'patient zero' which many people indicate as the first initial case," Maria Van Kerkhove, the WHO's Covid-19 technical lead, told a press conference.

"We may never find who the patient zero was."

Western governments believe that the body has largely ceded control of the investigation to China, leading to fears of a whitewash.

"Unfortunately, this has become a political investigation," Singapore-based Australian virologist Wang Linfa told The New York Times in November. "Whatever they do is symbolic."

Yeah, it’s worse than I originally thought. God China sucks. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.heritage.org/public-health/commentary/covid-19s-origin-only-deeper-probe-intelligence-data-will-finally-get-us

COVID-19’s Origin: Only Deeper Probe Into Intelligence Data Will Finally Get Us to Truth
Jun 27, 2023

 

The Biden administration’s release Friday of a declassified nine-page intelligence report does not address COVID-19’s origins as either a Chinese lab leak or a natural occurrence.

It does repeat previous reports showing divisions within the intelligence community on the key issue of COVID-19’s origins.    

Solving the mystery of COVID-19’s origins will depend on the quality of American and allied intelligence, including cables, emails, and original documents.

In their joint statement on the new report, Reps. Brad Wenstrup and Mike Turner, both R-Ohio, said that it was a “step toward  full transparency” and lent “credence” to the lab leak hypothesis, and that congressional investigations would continue.  

And indeed, they must.

Journalists and others have been relying on “off the record” intelligence briefings. However, as The Telegraph of London reports, those have often been dismissed as “unprofessional” and “unscientific.”

Sworn congressional testimony under oath, either in executive session or in public, is the right way forward.  

Sunlight

Among 13 topic areas The Heritage Foundation recommended for congressional oversight, we called upon lawmakers to take a deep dive into China’s coronavirus research, tapping our best intelligence sources in the process. (The Daily Signal is the news outlet of The Heritage Foundation.)

The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic, especially, has done just that, taking sworn testimony from leading federal officials and emphasizing the sheer gravity of the mission.

For example, in his April testimony before the select subcommittee, David Feith, a former deputy assistant secretary of state, declared: “COVID was not some immaculate infection. It was not spontaneously generated. It came from somewhere. And the details matter. If it emerged naturally, it implies certain things about human interaction with nature, where the risks are sizable enough. (Consider the Spanish Flu of 1918 or the bubonic plague of the Middle Ages.)

“But if COVID-19 emerged from a lab, particularly one conducting “gain of function” virology experiments with technologies invented only a few years ago, then it was akin to a Hiroshima-level event, revealing new and modern high-tech risks to human civilizations and even our species.”  

Independent Revelations

Two recent media revelations give special urgency to the next stage of congressional oversight.

First, a team of independent American journalists claim to have identified the three initial COVID-19 patients as Wuhan lab researchers—Ben Hu, Yu Ping, and Yan Zhu—thus lending further credence to the view that the pandemic resulted from a lab leak.

That’s not the first such identification. Huang Yanling, also a Wuhan Institute of Virology researcher, was “rumored” to be “patient zero,” according to an April 2020 State Department memo, but her profile was removed from the institute’s website, and she simply disappeared, thus fueling speculation about foul play.

House and Senate lawmakers in their March resolution ordering the declassification of intelligence data specifically called for identification of Wuhan Institute of Virology researchers who became ill with COVID-19-like symptoms in the earliest stages of the pandemic. The administration’s report, however, names none of the researchers and claims the information concerning these illnesses neither “supports nor refutes” the competing hypotheses of COVID-19’s origins.

Second, Britain’s Daily Mail reported that Zhou Yusen, a top military scientist working on a COVID-19 vaccine, mysteriously “fell” from the roof of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in May 2020. Despite the man’s high-profile reputation as a leading scientist, who quickly launched China’s COVID-19 vaccination program, Chinese officials did not even acknowledge his death, and that has given rise to speculation that Zhou was also the victim of foul play.

Red Response

Any focus on Zhou is also a focus on the specific role of the Chinese military and the communist regime’s response during the early stages of the pandemic.

The best available account thus far is outlined in an exhaustive 301-page report, sponsored by Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kansas, and compiled by Dr. Robert Kadlec and a research team for the Senate’s Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.

That Senate Republican staff report clearly reveals that COVID-19 infection struck Wuhan residents in late October or early November 2019, and not December of that year, contradicting Beijing’s insistence that the outbreak occurred in December.   

Early Vaccine

Equally important, Zhou was the director of the 5th Institute at the Academy of Military Medical Sciences—in other words, a top-ranking scientist with the People’s Liberation Army.

According to the Senate staff report, Zhou had been working with Dr. Shi Zhengli (“the Bat Woman”) at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. According to the Senate report: “There is reason to believe that Zhou was engaged in SARS-related coronavirus animal vaccine research with WIV researchers beginning no later than summer or early fall of 2019. Zhou submitted one of the first COVID-19 vaccine patents on February 24, 2020.”  

Consider the timing and the substance of China’s COVID-19 vaccine patent submission. According to the Senate staff report: “The patent includes mouse-derived serological data from vaccine-related experiments, which experts—consulted with during this investigation—assess could not have been completed unless Zhou’s team began work on vaccine development before the known outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in late December 2019.

“The research required both access to the sequence of and the live SARS-CoV-2 virus. Several experts assessed that Zhou likely would have had to start this vaccine-development research no later than November 2019 to achieve the February patent submission date.”

Punishing Misinformation

As detailed in the Senate staff report (pp. 64-67), Chinese communist officials soon clamped down on the release of any relevant scientific data and crushed dissent.

On Jan. 1, 2020, they issued an order forbidding medical professionals and scientists from sharing any information related to the COVID-19 outbreak. Two days later, on Jan. 3, they issued an order forbidding the sharing of any information concerning the novel coronavirus without government approval and ordered the destruction of existing biological samples.

That was accompanied by inevitable social media censorship and the detention, disciplining, and humiliation of Chinese medical professionals who communicated truthful information online. Their offense: spreading “rumors.”

While the communist dictatorship was clamping down on data sharing and scientific dissent, prominent Western scientists and their media allies were busy discrediting the lab-leak hypothesis.

In the March 7, 2020, edition of The Lancet, a major professional medical journal, 26 specialists signed a letter of “solidarity” with China’s scientists—at least those in good standing with the regime.

It read, in part: “Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumors, and prejudice that jeopardize our global collaboration in the fight against this virus.”

Among the signatories was Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance of New York, a nongovernmental organization that had secured millions of dollars in American taxpayer funding for coronavirus research, including collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

The  Biden administration’s new declassified report does not address the relationship among the conflicted EcoHealth Alliance, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and what federal officials knew when exactly about American taxpayer dollars funneled into China’s coronavirus research.

After three years of obfuscation and worse, America and her allies need the truth.  

This piece originally appeared in The Daily Signal

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...

This obviously isn't going to close the book on study into COVID-19 origin but just saw that a paper was published in Cell (a very high quality journal) that supports origin of spread from the meat market. Very importantly, the paper does not state the the market actually is the source.

From a Nature release on the paper: "The study establishes the presence of animals and the virus at the market, although it does not confirm whether the animals themselves were infected with the virus."

I haven't read the paper because even if I did I wouldn't have a clue how to interpret / critique methodology or analysis but figured worth sharing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

This "new" paper is by the same team, plus others, that put out the proximal origins paper, reanalyzing the same data, and arguing the same thing.  There's not much new here.  

Yep, just rehashing the same dataset. It's kinda funny to watch. Same team that libeled the racoon dogs. Those mofos can't catch a break. 

Pretty funny to watch the social media cat fights though. Ebright is a total fucking dick, but this shit is funny. One of the chief casualties of the COVID era was confidence in the peer review system. It's been a while coming, but man some shit really came to a head across disciplines. Funny watching it all play out. 

 

 

 

Edited by Anastasis
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Serak The Preparer said:

@Anastasis and @bschoolprof - thanks for the context. I am not in science or academia but have exposure to that through family, disappointing that Cell is just repackaging existing work.

Dysfunction of the journal industry and the impact on public trust in science might be a fun discussion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Dysfunction of the journal industry and the impact on public trust in science might be a fun discussion. 

At this point in our idiocracy, I'd be surprised if even 5% of the US population has read a single article in its entirety from any scientific journal in the last year. We're much  more comfortable building our opinions by listening to our favorite comedian's podcast (or AM talk radio for the olds). I'm not arguing the dysfunction of the industry, I just dont think it matters as it relates to public trust. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey! No new conclusive information! 

Quote

 "The study establishes the presence of animals and the virus at the market, although it does not confirm whether the animals themselves were infected with the virus."

Insert into Anastasializer

On 9/24/2024 at 9:01 PM, Anastasis said:

It came from the lab.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Blotto said:

At this point in our idiocracy, I'd be surprised if even 5% of the US population has read a single article in its entirety from any scientific journal in the last year. We're much  more comfortable building our opinions by listening to our favorite comedian's podcast (or AM talk radio for the olds). I'm not arguing the dysfunction of the industry, I just dont think it matters as it relates to public trust. 

If you are only including academic science journals (e.g., excluding Scientific American, Nat Geo, Popular Mechanics, etc.) then I doubt 5% of the US population (or 5% of adult US population even) has ever read a single article in a given year. It's a pretty small population who even has/had access to most journals, let alone the ability to go through methodology, analysis, etc. Without trying to do more rigorous analysis I would suspect that the percent of the population that has read a journal article / year has not changed significantly over the last century or so.

Now if you broaden to the popular magazines mentioned earlier, undoubtedly there is less readership than there used to be. This is problematic for a number of reasons, but science reporting has never been particularly good, at least in my lifetime.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 1 month later...
14 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Responsibility for the Covid pandemic?  Really?  Really Rand?

You cunt.  You pube-headed cunt.

If anyone wonders why rationals balk at anything put forth by conservatives on this issue, this pretty much explains it in a nutshell.

Calm down twice. This is a horrendous pardon. 

  • Fuck You 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

This is a horrendous pardon. 

Not really.  Too many people vowed to make him pay, even though they had 6-7 months in 2020 when they could have tried. Some of these same people are going to make a run at vaccines for school kids as well.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Responsibility for the Covid pandemic?  Really?  Really Rand?

You cunt.  You pube-headed cunt.

If anyone wonders why rationals balk at anything put forth by conservatives on this issue, this pretty much explains it in a nutshell.

 

I think he is talking about the coverup of responsibility. Rand Paul has repeatedly said that it came from the lab in Wuhan, which it did.

https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/media/reps/dr-paul-makes-case-for-lab-leak-at-first-full-senate-committee-hearing-on-covid-19-origins/

 

    Tuesday, June 18, 2024    

Dr. Paul Makes Case for Lab Leak at First Full Senate Committee Hearing on COVID-19 Origins

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, at the first full Senate committee hearing on the origins of COVID-19, which he helped secure, U.S. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), Ranking Member of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, examined and made the case for a lab leak. The bipartisan hearing, entitled “Origins of COVID-19: An Examination of Available Evidence,” featured scientists who presented evidence based on their professional expertise, marking a crucial step toward uncovering the truth about COVID-19’s origins. This hearing is the first of a series as part of the Committee’s joint investigation into threats posed by high-risk biological research and technology in the U.S. and abroad.

During the hearing, Dr. Paul presented key pieces of evidence supporting the likelihood that COVID-19 originated from a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). Dr. Paul referenced the recent assessments by the Department of Energy (DOE) and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), which emphasize the risky nature of coronavirus research at the WIV and suggest that the pandemic most likely resulted from a lab leak. He also noted that three WIV scientists reportedly fell ill with COVID-like symptoms in the fall of 2019, further supporting the lab leak theory. Dr. Steven Quay, a witness at the hearing, highlighted the longstanding history of safety issues at WIV, which resides in close proximity to the epicenter of COVID-19. Dr. Quay also pointed out that over 400 animals from the wet market were tested for SARS-CoV-2, and zero were infected.

Throughout the hearing, Dr. Paul showcased the concerning conduct of the inner circle of Dr. Anthony Fauci, the former Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID). For instance, Dr. Robert Garry, a witness in the hearing and one of the authors of the infamous Proximal Origin paper, made contradicting statements by privately agreeing with the lab leak theory while publicly promoting the natural origins narrative. Another witness, Dr. Richard Ebright, criticized the Proximal Origin paper for downplaying the lab leak theory, arguing that it was an opinion piece lacking proper research to substantiate its conclusions.

Dr. Paul remains steadfast in his initiative to uncover the truth, implement necessary safeguards, and ultimately learn from COVID-19 in order to prevent future pandemics.

View the Ranking Member’s opening statement here, part one of his questioning here and part two here.

Opening remarks as delivered below:

Today, we are here to examine one of the most critical and debated questions of our time: Did COVID-19 originate in a lab? To answer this question, let’s revisit the early days of the pandemic and examine what some of Dr. Anthony Fauci’s inner circle said privately about the origins of the virus, discussions that were only revealed through FOIA litigation.

Kristian Andersen wrote, “the lab escape version of this is so friggin’ likely to have happened because they were already doing this type of work and the molecular data is fully consistent with that scenario.”

Ian Lipkin stressed the “nightmare of circumstantial evidence to assess” regarding the possibility of inadvertent release given the scale of bat coronavirus research pursued in Wuhan.

Bob Garry said, “ really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario when you get from the bat virus, or one very similar to it, COVID–19 where you insert exactly four amino acids, 12 nucleotides, and all have to be added at the exact same time to gain this function. I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature.’’ According to Garry, “it’s not crackpot to suggest this could have happened, given the gain of function research we know was happening in Wuhan.”

Even Ralph Baric, world-famous gain-of-function researcher and collaborator with Wuhan’s Dr. Shi, admitted, “So they [the Wuhan Institute of Virology] have a very large collection of viruses in their laboratory. And so it’s—you know—proximity is a problem. It’s a problem.”

Federal court orders reveal that even Dr. Fauci himself privately acknowledged concerns about gain-of-function research in Wuhan and “mutations in the virus that suggest it might have been engineered” just days before he commissioned the Proximal Origin paper.

Despite these private doubts, publicly, these so-called experts and their allies were dismissing the lab leak theory as a conspiracy. Within days, Anderson, Lipkin, and Garry were putting the final touches on what will be remembered as one of the most remarkable reversals in modern history.

In their Proximal Origin paper, these scientists concluded “we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible.” Privately they were saying one thing, publicly they were saying another. Media pundits parroted this narrative, while social media platforms censored discussion about the lab leak, labeling it as misinformation and stifling open discourse about the virus’s origins.

The cover-up went beyond public statements. Federal agencies and key officials withheld and continue to conceal crucial information from both Congress and the public.

For instance, Dr. David Morens of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) deleted emails that could have contained valuable insights into early discussions. When he deleted them, he made the comment, “I think we’re safe now.” He deleted emails. He said the early emails, “I’ve deleted to Peter Daszak at EcoHealth. I think we’re safe now.”

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) failed to comply with a law passed by Congress unanimously. One of the senators on this committee got it passed. We were going to declassify all of this and reveal it and the administration has refused.

HHS and NIH have not produced documents related to gain of function research that the Chairman and I requested nearly a year ago. I’ve been asking for two or three years as an individual member with some other Republican members and have not gotten these records. I’ve now asked with the Democrat Chairman and they’re still resisting.

They say it’s not gain-of-function. Well, let’s hear the debate. Did they debate at NIH whether it was gain-of-function in Wuhan? If there’s a debate, let’s hear the scientific arguments on both sides. They will not give us that information.

This has been a deliberate, prolonged effort to deceive the committee about certain gain-of-function research experiments that the agencies have been withholding. What we have found as we’ve gone through this is at every step there’s been resistance.

So the hearing today is to try and find out whether or not we can get to the truth. Do we know for certain it came from the lab? No, but there’s a preponderance of evidence indicating that it may have come from the lab. Do we know viruses have come from animals in the past? Yes, they’ve come from animals in the past.

But this time, there’s no animal reservoir. There’s no animal handlers with antibiotics. There’s a lot of reasons why there are indications that this could have come from the lab.

This is the discussion we’ll have today. This is a discussion that’s long in coming. It’s been over three years that we’ve been asking for this. But this is great. This is good. We’ll have scientists on both sides of this issue, and I hope we have a spirited debate. Thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Wouldn’t have been necessary if the incoming guy wasn’t a vengeful, ignorant piece of shit.

Fauci perjured himself. Other high ranking officials have before, and haven’t been prosecuted. It’d be a shame to have some govt accountability.  
 

Then there’s the elephant in the room. What did he know about long term effects of vaccine and when? Did he suppress that? These are big public health questions. 
 

And before you whiners complain here’s a serious MD, Biden/Clinton backer. 
 

 

From interview with Mark Halperin. 

  • Fuck You 24
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fauci perjured himself. Other high ranking officials have before, and haven’t been prosecuted. It’d be a shame to have some govt accountability.  
 
Then there’s the elephant in the room. What did he know about long term effects of vaccine and when? Did he suppress that? These are big public health questions. 
 
And before you whiners complain here’s a serious MD, Biden/Clinton backer. 
 
 
From interview with Mark Halperin. 

There it is….TURBO CANCER! TREAT IT WITH IVERMECTIN!!!!
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, No Mames Guey said:

Check the guy’s CV Brisket.

I checked his CV. He owns a newspaper, which means he’s part of the globalist MSM propaganda machine. And you and other sheeple are falling for their elitist lies hook, line, and sinker. 

  • Haha 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

I checked his CV. He owns a newspaper, which means he’s part of the globalist MSM propaganda machine. And you and other sheeple are falling for their elitist lies hook, line, and sinker. 

And he's also been gobbling Trump crank for a year or more.  And he's South African.  And a grifter deluxe.  https://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/patrick-soon-shiong-taxes-nanthealth-foundation-236728

  • Hook 'Em 2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

No it isn't.  What's horrendous is the demands for prosecution for a government official, who has official immunity, incidentally, and an apparent willingness of the president-elect to prosecute.

The pardon is a symptom, not the disease.

And Rand Paul is a full-time cunt about everything, always.  Ask his neighbor.

I'm sick of these fuckers.

I'm more appalled that moderna/pfizer, etc. got legal immunity for something that was quasi-mandated to put in your body more than the preemptive pardons. I think the pardons was smart and good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

I'm more appalled that moderna/pfizer, etc. got legal immunity for something that was quasi-mandated to put in your body more than the preemptive pardons. I think the pardons was smart and good.

Guess how long such immunity has been around?  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/300aa-22

The point is that vaccines serve a greater public good, even if they are not perfect and even if some people are injured by them.

8 minutes ago, No Mames Guey said:

I guess whatever it takes to help you disregard what he says. 

Guess whatever it takes to support a position you want to support.

Notorious librul rag questioning the calls for Fauci's prosecution https://reason.com/2022/12/16/what-do-republicans-want-to-prosecute-fauci-for-exactly/

And, no one sane is calling for Fauci to be prosecuted, it's only performative assholes like Rand, Ted Cruz, MTG, Biggs and the rest of the fuckwad squad.  They're not serious people.

Edited by TwiceHorn
  • Hook 'Em 7
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

Right, I get it. I was commenting how I don't like it.

Although it is a form of corporate welfare, I can't say that I really disagree with it.  It's a policy that applies to all vaccine developers and manufacturers, and, although Pfizer and Moderna made out financially, I'm not sure that's true for all vaccines and I think the landscape would be considerably different without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

Guess how long such immunity has been around?  https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/300aa-22

The point is that vaccines serve a greater public good, even if they are not perfect and even if some people are injured by them.

Guess whatever it takes to support a position you want to support.

Notorious librul rag questioning the calls for Fauci's prosecution https://reason.com/2022/12/16/what-do-republicans-want-to-prosecute-fauci-for-exactly/

And, no one sane is calling for Fauci to be prosecuted, it's only performative assholes like Rand, Ted Cruz, MTG, Biggs and the rest of the fuckwad squad.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say not all is known or public knowledge surrounding the vax rollout. By the same token, 

IMG-4131.jpg

 

But thanks for sharing a Reason piece from over two years ago that says they could potentially prosecute Fauci for perjury but it would be difficult. There’s also been a trickle of revelations since then.  

  • Fuck You 16
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TwiceHorn said:

Although it is a form of corporate welfare, I can't say that I really disagree with it.  It's a policy that applies to all vaccine developers and manufacturers, and, although Pfizer and Moderna made out financially, I'm not sure that's true for all vaccines and I think the landscape would be considerably different without it.

Like anything, it's just a spectrum of the agency problem I guess. I mean, I disagree and don't like it, but I'm not going to do anything about it or care more than just notate it on a messageboard. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, No Mames Guey said:

Check the guy’s CV Brisket. Or don’t. But the concern is moving well past the fringes of medicine. 

Check out Halperin’s background while you’re at it.  The guy is a real piece of shit, and should have actually been prosecuted.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, No Mames Guey said:

I’m going to go out on a limb and say not all is known or public knowledge surrounding the vax rollout. By the same token, 

IMG-4131.jpg

 

But thanks for sharing a Reason piece from over two years ago that says they could potentially prosecute Fauci for perjury but it would be difficult. There’s also been a trickle of revelations since then.  

Wait, you mean the rollout of Trump's vaccine?  Operation what was it?

You never prosecute for perjury unless you can prove the absolute untruth of what was said.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/25/2024 at 11:09 PM, Blotto said:

At this point in our idiocracy, I'd be surprised if even 5% of the US population has read a single article in its entirety from any scientific journal in the last year. We're much  more comfortable building our opinions by listening to our favorite comedian's podcast (or AM talk radio for the olds). I'm not arguing the dysfunction of the industry, I just dont think it matters as it relates to public trust. 

Agreed.  It's the bozos on those podcasts and AM radio programs constantly belittling education and experts that have caused Joe T. Dumbass to lose trust in the hard sciences.  I think evangelicalism plays an outsized role as well, but all of these kind of go hand in hand in terms of their target audience. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, No Mames Guey said:

I guess whatever it takes to help you disregard what he says. 

Because motive is never a part of critical thinking when examining why a person said what they said, right?  God, you cultists are dense.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, No Mames Guey said:

I’m going to go out on a limb and say not all is known or public knowledge surrounding the vax rollout. By the same token, 

IMG-4131.jpg

 

But thanks for sharing a Reason piece from over two years ago that says they could potentially prosecute Fauci for perjury but it would be difficult. There’s also been a trickle of revelations since then.  

Are you gonna post this again when the orange shit stain pardons the J6 guys? Nah….  

Edited by Gatorubet
  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Gatorubet said:

Are you gonna post this again when the orange shit stain pardons the J6 guys? Nah….  

That's the crux of it isn't it? What would things look like today if a bunch of preemptive pardons were made by Trump when he left office the first time? What will things look like in the future when every president uses preemptive pardons and they become mainstream? I'm actually surprised @TwiceHorn is so cavalier and shortsighted in his thinking on the issue. And just for clarity on my opinion, I like Fauci.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bevo said:

That's the crux of it isn't it? What would things look like today if a bunch of preemptive pardons were made by Trump when he left office the first time? What will things look like in the future when every president uses preemptive pardons and they become mainstream? I'm actually surprised @TwiceHorn is so cavalier and shortsighted in his thinking on the issue. And just for clarity on my opinion, I like Fauci.

Well shit is uber fucked now, so get used to the new world order. Nothing will ever again be as it was. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Vegas64 said:

Like anything, it's just a spectrum of the agency problem I guess. I mean, I disagree and don't like it, but I'm not going to do anything about it or care more than just notate it on a messageboard. 

That's not an agency rule.  It's a statute passed by Congress nearly 40 years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Bevo said:

That's the crux of it isn't it? What would things look like today if a bunch of preemptive pardons were made by Trump when he left office the first time? What will things look like in the future when every president uses preemptive pardons and they become mainstream? I'm actually surprised @TwiceHorn is so cavalier and shortsighted in his thinking on the issue. And just for clarity on my opinion, I like Fauci.

What would things have looked like if an incoming president and his cronies hadn’t promised retribution and reprisals?

Edited by DDD Dad
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, DDD Dad said:

Maybe if an incoming president and his cronies hadn’t promised retribution and reprisals this wouldn’t have happened. 

Fucking this. Fuck this country. The majority is too stupid to live. Covid proved it unequivocally.

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
  • Rage+1 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...