(I try to avoid Covid-19 comments or on molecular virology/biology on this forum, but this one seems appropriate given RoyProp's post. The use of Ct values is controversial, so don't assume anything I say is gospel, but plenty of studies are available to substantiate what I suggest. Look for Dr. Mina's work and other studies.)
Ct (cycle threshold) refers to the number of cycles needed to amplify viral RNA to reach a detectable level. ASK TO SEE YOUR VALUE when you get your test results. If they can't provide it, re-test somewhere else that can provide it. Or find a physician at a medical center who is informed enough to demand it, especially when undergoing "serial" testing.
We now know a strong link exists between this viral load marker and severity of disease or possibility of infection. Specifically, any Ct value = 38 or above (95% sensitivity) usually means the possibility doesn't exist of a infection state, or is extremely low. However, especially when someone has a Ct value of < 25 with age > 55, at least one comorbidity, or smoking, or chemo it is highly likely they are currently infected. (a high genomic viral load is a negative; it is a inverse of Ct values). In between 33-35 values experts differ.
Do your own reading on it. The use of this biomarker is not new. It isn't perfect, but it is far superior to the simplistic "positive/negative". Don't let anyone tell you otherwise or that it's use is confusing or not FDA approved.
Florida now requires reporting of Ct values on all tests. Even WHO agrees it should be used serially (unlike the US CDC).
Sharon
Written by
sharoncrayn
To view profiles and participate in discussions please or .
EXCELLENT Explanation, a friend that used to have a PCR Machine in his lab, retired now, did not explain so clearly to me. It really is something everyone should know.
We are headed very easily to 500,000 due to the US open influx policies which has spiked our case rate beyond normal statistical probabilities. If we continue and expand these policies, which I expect we will aggressively, we will invite in and confront new toxic variants that current vaccines cannot handle. Meaning re-infection is definitely possible if not probable if we look at Brazil and the UK as examples.
So 500,000 is coming sooner than 99.9% of us think.
The "new" plan? Some sort of sick joke? You mean the "task force" 7 point plan that blames the previous administration for everything.
Very simply it is "paper" nonsense.
Understand all the policy contradictions between 1) the attempt to force the opening of all public k-12 schools and most businesses by April 25th, 2) allowing 10-15,000,000 million new entrants into the country from around the world with massive amounts of internal/external cross contamination in less than a year, 3) the closing of about 1,000 of our smaller hospitals due to state/local lock downs on elective care thus driving them into BK, 4) the renewal of Fauci as virus czar even though he has proven himself totally incompetent, 5) the belief that wearing a mask will save us (masks must be "fitted" to be effective, otherwise they are worthless) 6) 100,000,000 vaccines in a 100 days will prove NOTHING unless they work, and 7) the proposed appointment of Dr. Walensky.
Dr. Rochelle Walensky, proposed choice to head CDC, is a Mass General/Harvard academic specializing in infectious diseases but who has no research or clinical/treatment background in SARS or any other virus.
The claim of her being a HIV "expert" by the media is rather bogus. She is a prolific writer (about 300 articles) but rarely is she the principal author (about 10% of the time), and if the lead author, she writes mainly about public health "philosophy". Her papers contain minimal data analysis.
She is a staunch advocate of masks, lock downs, and Chinese brute force methods such as facial recognition, vaccine ID cards, and forced contact tracing.
I fully expect the new administration to fudge the data going forward to make things look good. Take it to the bank.
Which vaccine? The VA is apparently having some problems in "processing" 18,000,000 million veterans. Understandable.
Interested to see if co-morbidities and age (40% of VA vets > 65) play a role in vaccine infection rates since probably 30% of veterans have at least one. Clinical trials never dealt with these issues for obvious reasons. Very poorly done in haste.
Should prove very interesting to see if we ever get a legitimate analysis from the VA or anyone else (like Pfizer or Moderna?). Highly doubtful. Way too touchy a subject with lots of $Billions at stake.
Probability of my having bad consequences from a vaccination are minuscule compared to the probability of bad consequences of my catching Covid, so I am not 1 of those who thinks anybody should wait for 100% of every question to be answered before vaccinations to place.
I am in total support of, "...advocate of masks, lock downs, ... facial recognition, and forced contact tracing" and the dreaded requirement of having to carry a vaccination ID card.
We need a 9/11 type or a Warren type commission to do an exhaustive examination of how the whole pandemic was handled in the US.
I have no political agenda here like you do. The previous administration made numerous mistakes. This administration will do so as well. Give them time. It is inevitable. Live in a bubble if you wish.
Brute force appeals to a few who know no other way, or who enjoy applying it. Most resent it. History proves it.
When the variants come, which they have and will, your vaccine, your vaccination ID card and mask won't protect you. But then you will complain about why the government/VA didn't protect you as they promised they would. They can't and won't.
"We need a 9/11 type or a Warren type commission to do an exhaustive examination of how the whole pandemic was handled in the US." These types of phony commissions really solved what really happened didn't they (not)? Looking backwards is a mindless exercise for people who spend their life looking out of the rear view mirror.
We better go to Wuhan and somehow find out how Dr. Bat Woman created this toxic baby, or we will chase our tails till doomsday. Fauci, CDC, WHO, Pfizer, Moderna, AZ, J&J, etc. are basically clueless as to what she did.
This mess won't end well, if it ever actually ends.
It isn't meant to be encouraging. You have Fauci and Birx repeating their incompetence. Consistency can sometimes be a virtue, but this is the classic definition of insanity.
#1 Moderna's (mRNA-1273) special trial with variants was a failure. Antibody response was 600% less than with Sars-cov-2. IOW, it will provide only minimal resistance to reinfection from the variants. Take the blinders off.
#2 J&J's vaccine trial (ENSEMBLE) results FOR THEIR SINGLE DOSE vaccine are still a mystery. Massaging the data anyone? Make it look good at all costs.
J&J published results from their Phas1/2a trial on 01/13/2021. Never published (that I can find or my staff) results on antibody results on participants > 65. Sample size was way too small to be meaningful anyway. A joke. I expect FDA to approve it regardless.
#3 Sinovac's phase 3 trial included no one over 59! NO ONE. Clueless.
Thanks. From your post of 2 days ago, my take away was you're saying they may well not ever get in control of this virus-- or at least not with the current vaccines?
The toxicity level of the new variant will be the issue. Toxicity level means not just "more/less transmissible", but also the specific mortality/death rate impacting each age, gender, race group.
With sars-cov-2 about 92% of US deaths occur in the > 55 years old group. But only .018% < 24. The variants from Brazil, UK, and South Africa could easily change that demographic (both age, gender, and race) and probably will in ways we don't realize.
Yes, all 3 variants exist already in the US. For example, Brazil's P.1. is already confirmed in Minnesota. Our Open Influx policy allowed several people to enter MN (and elsewhere) from Brazil. In turn, this droplet of humanity will ultimately cause a massive wave of reinfections in the US months from now which the current vaccines will have little impact upon.
These sars-cov-2 variants are NOT zoonotic in nature such as the swine flu, west nile, rabies, lyme, etc. Nor are they sanitation and contamination related viruses such as Ebola which impacted W. Africa but never really impacted the US.
It is erroneous to believe that this virus and its variants originated in animals (zoonotic) and were somehow transmitted to humans. No way. It is man made.
I have heard some reporting from mainstream news sources that there is evidence that did not even originate in China -- and I'm not a conspiracy theorist.
The Bat Woman created the virus in China's Class 4 virology Lab in Wuhan starting in 2011 which UT at Galveston designed and the French helped build. Fauci and the US helped fund her research for years. UNC at CH and Duke sent people there for years. It was all incestuous for the $$$. The Holy Grail of "Gain of Function" research which we outlawed but lifted it in late 2017. The Chinese never banned it.
Specifically, on Dec 19, 2017, the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) announced that they would resume funding gain-of-function experiments involving influenza, Middle East respiratory syndrome corona virus, and severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus.
INSANE
She is (was?) the #1 genius world wide in virology. True sick genius. We have no one comparable to decipher her work.
I said back in late 2019 that the Wuhan lab lost control of the virus due to their sloppy quality control. They are as bad as the Russian labs. It was just a matter of time. Inevitable. 2+2=4.
"It was all incestuous for the $$$." What does this mean?
This is pretty dramatic and significant information. If this were true, there would be several hundred people (US citizens (accountants, etc.)) who would know about it. How come none of them have come forward?
The US was supporting the effort, but did not weigh in on the quality control?
If this is true, I don't imagine the Chinese government is going to allow anybody with first-hand knowledge to be running loose.
Naive. To an extreme degree. Most do not want to come forward. Those who have tried are buried or been silenced.
Let's look at the facts as to why it came from China:
#1 FDA via CDC and NIH fund BILLIONS of US$$$ for medical research.
#2 NIH medical research budget = $30 (2010) to $42 (2020) BILLION annually.
#3 $35,000,000,000 billion on average for last 10 years.
#4 GOF (gain of function) research is cutting edge science in virology both medically and militarily for all 3 superpowers.
#4 multiple types of GOF exist. Most producing higher yields for vaccines but also becoming more toxic for viruses.
#5 In the US alone, heated ethical and philosophical debate ensued over the danger of GOF projects, but not in China or Russia.
#6 Of primary concern were what is called “gain of function research of concern,” which includes the generation of viruses with properties that do not exist in nature. (sars-cov-2).
#7 from early on in the early 2000s, the US funded billions in virology research and its sub set called GOF research
#8 GOF funding was partially banned beginning in 2010 through 2017 in the US. Reinstated in 2018.
#9 To escape that partial ban in 2010, the US military and CDC moved much of GOF research $$$ to China without explicit approval.
#10 We began by building China's 1st class 4 virology lab in Wuhan and went from there facilitating and BUILDING MULTIPLE TIERED COLLABORATIVE AGREEMENTS especially in the US allowing a massive influx of Chinese scientists and students.
#11 China was the logical choice and only choice to offshore GOF for several reasons. (therefore sars-cocv-2 had to come from China).
+++#13 China didn't care about ethics.
+++#14 China had most of the best virologists and micro biologists in the world. UK, EU and Russia were far behind.
+++#15 China was willing for quid pro quo deals to do the "dirty work" (given the US's "not in my backyard please").
+++#16 Their military's use of this research was not seen as a threat
+++#17 We didn't want control on the ground; we only were concerned with the end products.
#18 million and billions of $$$ sloshing around from GOF insanity was seen by most universities, researchers, NIH/CDC types in virology as more than welcome. Besides China was our friend supplying us with everything.
So, I asked what your source was and instead of telling me where you got your information, you site as evidence such things as the CDC and NIH fund billions in medical research, that over the span of 10 years that funding increase by 35% (which it does every year) adjusted for inflation is not even an increase , and the US signed agreements allowing Chinese scientists and students to enter this country, as do scientists and students from all over the world.
Most significantly, that this was really a US project which the US outsourced to China in order to hide from public view????
That responsibility for this pandemic killing millions of people lands in the lap of the US where there have to be hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people with knowledge and or involvement and you're claiming that not a single 1 of from has enough ethical conscious to come forward????
If ever there was a random assortment of assertions, which when combined are exactly the kind of components of a conspiracy theory, this is it.
With all due respect you should stick to cellular biology.
As I predicted, CDC confirms all 3 primary variants have been detected to exist in the US via foreign nationals entering under our open influx/visa policies.
Disturbingly, these variants are widely distributed already: NY, MN, and SC. This distribution implies these variants exist already throughout most of the country and cannot be contained within a specific region.
Extrapolating data from covid-19, I would predict only about 700,000 total Covid related US deaths by the end of the year.
Why? Because most people who might die from these primary variants have already died. Those who are still alive probably have minimal viral loads (via antibodies) which protects them from any virus.
If we get real lucky, no new primary variants will develop. Anything is possible.
What I would really like is for everyone to open up, with instructions only to stay home if you have symptoms. That way the virus would likely mutate to something milder. My concern with the lockdowns is that spread is then mostly in hospitals which choose the variants that make people sickest.
It isn't meant to be encouraging. You have Fauci and Birx repeating their incompetence. Consistency can sometimes be a virtue, but this is the classic definition of insanity.
#1 Moderna's (mRNA-1273) special trial with variants was a failure. Antibody response was 600% less than with Sars-cov-2. IOW, it will provide only minimal resistance to reinfection from the variants. Take the blinders off.
#2 J&J's vaccine trial (ENSEMBLE) results FOR THEIR SINGLE DOSE vaccine are still a mystery. Massaging the data anyone? Make it look good at all costs.
J&J published results from their Phas1/2a trial on 01/13/2021. Never published (that I can find or my staff) results on antibody results on participants > 65. Sample size was way too small to be meaningful anyway. A joke. I expect FDA to approve it regardless.
#3 Sinovac's phase 3 trial included no one over 59! NO ONE. Clueless.
In order to keep us on the issue, I concede I don't know more than you and never will, nor do I have the contacts you do. I can tell the difference, though, between conjecture and facts. Considering the subject matter and your assertions, nothing is a fact without (your providing) proof.
I do not believe that is not possible that the variants will run a mock beyond our control. (I said as much last week or the week before.)
I agree the figure 700,000 is in the cards, but I would not use the words such as "... only about..." to describe 700,000 deaths.
Since the scientists are not being barred from holding press conferences in this current administration, I do not believe they will blatantly lie about the data whereas the previous administration took proactive steps to distort the data.
You've pointed out a few times that blames lie with foreign nationals entering our country. Travel is the only way a virus can spread around the world. Probably as many people in other countries have been infected by US citizens traveling abroad. It feels to me like you're blaming foreigners for the magnitude of our problem, when I think it's clear by any objective standard that inept handling of the virus to date is responsible for the magnitude of our problem.
Do you know what the scientific explanation would be that it was created in a lab?
If I could prove as you're claiming that it was created in a lab at the initiative of the US, I'd take my evidence to the DOJ and the New York Times. It would be the revelation of the century. You would go down in history as the most important whistleblower of all time.
Otherwise, you're just spreading rumors.
Do you sometimes comment under a different username?
#1 we are at 450,000 give or take. Another 250,000 in 11 months isn't much given the possibilities for an additional 3-5 more variants
#2 Some facts are never verifiable until much later, i.e. it took the VA years to acknowledge the true nature of Agent Orange and PTSD. They considered them benign.
#3 I never said anyone "lied' about GOF funding going to China..No one asked. Besides this is one reason why they went offshore to China, i.e. the CIA never lied about ops in Laos. They just never said anything.
#4 Data distortion has been more an issue at the local and state level than at the national level. Probably will continue.
#5 i never intimated or implied the previous administration didn't make mistakes. Just that Fauci and Birx aren't going to change colors.
#6 Your timeline for cross contamination is erroneous. It came from China to northern Italy then to the rest of the EU first.
#7 I explained GOF research and what it means in terms of creating sars-cov-2 in simple terms to you several times.
any selection process involving an alteration of genotypes and their resulting phenotypes is considered a type of Gain-of-Function (GoF) research
"alteration" is the operative word
#8 DOJ and NYTimes would do nothing. I'm sure NYT and other sources have some material on Ft. Detrick's troubled past and closing in 2018 'for national security reasons" which is critical to understand (and then subsequently reopened).
#9 I have explained that most virologists saw nothing wrong with our connection to China.
#10 I never said we created sars-cov-2 or wanted to do so or intended to do so.
"The E.U. imposed export restrictions on vaccines made in the bloc on Friday after accusing a British-based vaccine maker, AstraZeneca, of favoring its home market." NY Times.
Just what we don't need -- parochial hoarding wars
Fauci on PBS News Hour re vaccines --- Fri night 1/29/2021 - 6 minutes
Summary: didn't blatantly lie, but did distort the real data
#1 basically repeated the press releases from the companies and your favorites (NYT and WaPo). Apparently he choose not to reference the detailed trial reports or never read them.
#2 Never discussed the lack of long term efficacy data leading the listener to assume 2 week efficacy (between shots) was equivalent to 6 month-12 month efficacy. It isn't.
#3 J&J vaccine would be a "value added, for sure" (even though trial results showed only about a 55-60% effectiveness on severe infections). IOW, in reality nothing special given the multiple limitations of the trial.
#4 "80-85% J&J effective rate against SA variant" is erroneous. Pure conjecture. Trial reports stated about 55% in SA participants.
#5 100% vaccinations will eliminate new variants? Wrong unless he is thinking about locking our borders and locking everyone in their home without visitors.
Hop on the phone ASAP and call the WHO and the White House. This a fake story. Expose it! Everyone is committed to global vaccinations and lock downs. Next thing you know the UK will hoard toilet paper masks (3 ply!) We can't let either happen.
When you say, "fake story" the implication is, it is an intentional misrepresentation. Do you believe the New York Times is part of the international cabal and has some ulterior motive?
Also, whenever anyone refers to a "global" situation, I brace myself for conspiracy theory because the implication is that there is collaboration around the world between countries, which stretches credulity.
Is there currently an international collaboration whereupon the participants all agree to the same talking points to mislead their citizens?
#1 NYT is almost meaningless in today's news cycle except for some diehards. They do have a pronounced "slant" or agenda, but those who subscribe prefer that slant." "Fake"stories contain bits and pieces of truth smothered in opinion.
#2 Fauci frequently talks about a "global" vaccination plan involving most countries with the direction by WHO. Don't see it happening in reality, but it isn't a conspiracy theory.
#3 Way beyond your scope, but Davos, WEF, WTO, WHO, G-20, UN, Paris Climate Accord, ICC,BIS, IMF, WORLD BANK, are all global in perspective with SPECIFIC AGENDAS often unrelated to the populace or the US. They don't agree on everything, but most of the time they do in principle. Transparency is generally a problem for obvious reasons.
The recent visit to Wuhan by several WHO followers was a photo op. No elite virologist, cell biologist, biochemist, class 4 lab director. Their wet market has been "bleached" and demolished. All studies (some 300+) no longer exist. The genius "bat woman" Shi Zhengli was nowhere to be found.
(the Scientific American articles in March and June, 2020 claimed 1) the virus came from bat bites(really?) and 2) 1st case in China was December 30, 2019 while Italy recorded them in October(?). The articles were basically written by Daszak.)
The WHO origins probe prominently included Peter Daszak - president of EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit group that has received millions of dollars of U.S. taxpayer funding via NIH/CDC to genetically manipulate via GOF the multitude of corona viruses with scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, but also 30 countries in Asia, Africa and the Middle East to discover new viruses in wildlife. Weird, very weird.
Of interest to you and how you think, Daszak drafted a February, 2020 statement in The Lancet on behalf of 27 prominent public health scientists which condemned "conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin."
I am open to believing the virus was created in a laboratory and that it escaped because of sloppy protocols, i.e., accidentally leaked. I accept that research in Wuhan was (indirectly) funded by the US and I acknowledge that Daszak is conflicted and I extend him 0 credibility.
Further, if it is established that these 3 things are true, I would assume that the government of China and probably the US will try to cover it up or minimize their culpability through spin.
The goal of the right wing is that the coronavirus was genetically manipulated for the purpose of infecting humans that is, the pandemic is intentional which at this point there is no more than speculation and way too far out. I am, actually, open to believing everything you say, but so far all of it is dot connecting between things that are merely associated so you should be careful not to make assertions that sound like facts.
The things you are asserting, if true, would amount to the single biggest scandal/travesty in the history of the world, so I, for one, need more than speculation from the right-wing media -- because the right-wing media spews patently ridiculous, ignorant, conspiracy theories monthly for financial gain.
There have been a lot of studies of conspiracies and they conclude essentially that conspiracies of much more than a dozen people do not hold up because several hundred people or in this case scientists spread around the world, will not all jeopardize their reputation and integrity to participate in a grand lie for somebody else's benefit.
So, I need a number of wholly independent, credible sources, yes, such as the New York Times and others to all agree on the findings.
You are clueless about the eugenics-POPULATION CONTROL movement promoted by Buffet, Turner and Gates via birth control, one child limit, no babies by refugees, abortion drugs, etc.
Turner's cash has gone for such UN programs as “improving the reproductive health of adolescent girls in rural Bangladesh” ($1,063,705); Social licensing of reproductive health clinics in Honduras ($2,513,338); and “voluntary confidential counseling and testing for HIV⁄AIDS, distribution of condoms, treatment of sexually–transmitted diseases, family planning and HIV⁄AIDS and sexual education” in Mozambique ($2,751,000)
Interesting back in 2017 Bill and Melinda Gates wrote in their "Goalkeepers" report, which said in part that disease — both infectious and chronic — are the biggest public health threat the world faces in the next decade. They called it a pandemic as a result of possible BIOTERRORISM.
Forget looking in your NYT...it is all conspiracy theory.
UK finds B.1.1.7 is now become E484K and can evade current vaccines regardless of booster shots.
Harvard/MIT finds 48 new variants in human genome
Japan admits Brazil variant exists in Japan's migrant population
Covid creates unwanted angiogenesis in PD patients who are infected
New spike in diabetes and high bleeding risk linked to covid
Variants can resist current vaccines, Columbia University
Most in vitro covid cell studies are flawed, U of Illinois
UK admits "herd immunity" is impossible Paranoia alert #1
Dr.Hooman Noorchashm warns FDA/Pfizer about vaccinating nursing home residents and non-infected. Paranoia alert #2
IN PwP, the SARS-CoV-2 may gain access to the Central Nervous System (CNS) by the hematogenous route or axonal transport along with the olfactory neuroepithelium creating PD pathogenis. Paranoia alert #3!
You probably won't understand this concept but try to accept that thromboembolic complications, 10–20 days following activation of a vaccine induced antigen specific immune response, in elderly frail vasculopaths, will not register as “vaccine related complications”….but SARS-CoV-2 is a virus with tropism for the vascular endothelium….and the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines could easily direct an antigen specific immune attack to that very target organ.
If it is not in the public domain and you won't link to any articles, how do I know you're not just pulling this stuff out of your . . . ear or writing screenplays for science fiction movies? For example, I flipped through the Columbia University website and found no reference to your comment. That mutations might be resistant to the current vaccines is only obvious. Of course they might be.
Increased Resistance of SARS-CoV-2 Variants B.1.351 and B.1.1.7 to Antibody Neutralization
Pengfei Wang, Lihong Liu, Sho Iketani, Yang Luo, Yicheng Guo, Maple Wang, Jian Yu, Baoshan Zhang, Peter D. Kwong, View ORCID ProfileBarney S. Graham, John R. Mascola, Jennifer Y. Chang, Michael T. Yin, Magdalena Sobieszczyk, View ORCID ProfileChristos A. Kyratsous, Lawrence Shapiro, View ORCID ProfileZizhang Sheng, Manoj S. Nair, Yaoxing Huang, David D. Ho
The Covid-19 pandemic has ravaged the globe, and its causative agent, SARS-CoV-2, continues to rage. Prospects of ending this pandemic rest on the development of effective interventions. Single and combination monoclonal antibody (mAb) therapeutics have received emergency use authorization1,2, with more in the pipeline3–6. Furthermore, multiple vaccine constructs have shown promise7, including two with ~95% protective efficacy against Covid-198,9.
However, these interventions were directed toward the initial SARS-CoV-2 that emerged in 2019. Considerable viral evolution has occurred since, including variants with a D614G mutation10 that have become dominant. Viruses with this mutation alone do not appear to be antigenically distinct, however11.
Recent emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants B.1.1.7 in the UK12 and B.1.351 in South Africa13 is of concern because of their purported ease of transmission and extensive mutations in the spike protein. We now report that B.1.1.7 is refractory to neutralization by most mAbs to the N-terminal domain (NTD) of spike and relatively resistant to a number of mAbs to the receptor-binding domain (RBD). It is modestly more resistant to convalescent plasma (~3 fold) and vaccinee sera (~2 fold).
Findings on B.1.351 are more worrisome in that this variant is not only refractory to neutralization by most NTD mAbs but also by multiple individual mAbs to the receptor-binding motif on RBD, largely due to an E484K mutation, although some mAb combinations retain activity.
Moreover, B.1.351 is markedly more resistant to neutralization by convalescent plasma (~11-33 fold) and vaccinee sera (~6.5-8.6 fold). B.1.351 and emergent variants14,15 with similar spike mutations present new challenges for mAb therapy and threaten the protective efficacy of current vaccines.
(I already told you about E484K)
Yours for factual science, Crayola Girl, Ph.D Biochemistry, University of Chicago
I didn't realize this was an (intelligence) competition, but now that you've made that clear, I concede.
Lets discuss why you refer to yourself in 3rd person.
I'll start us off.
Response No. 1, by Elsa Ronningstam, associate clinical professor of psychology at Harvard Medical School and author of Identifying and Understanding the Narcissistic Personality:
"Referring to yourself in the third person creates distance between "I" and "he." So if you have an exaggerated view of how great you are, you could be using this distance to make yourself even bigger. Or, if you've achieved major success suddenly, using the third person could be a way to adjust to the bigger role that's been assigned to you. It's a way to enlarge yourself to fit that role."
You identified Obama (classic pathological narcissist) who always used the pronoun "I", never admitted to any of his mistakes, had an excessive need for admiration and a complete and utter inability to deal with criticism. Otherwise, very charming, well spoken.
On the other hand, I run complicated clinical trials where "the team" is always the word used when writing or talking (or "we") because it takes a team to get things done at a very high level. It is never about "me, me, me" or "I, I, I".
I'm far from perfect, but certainly no narcissist.
Crayola Girl, bringing reality to those who deny it.
If we were to randomly select a thousand people from around the world and ask them who best fits your description "...narcissist) who ... never admitted to any of his mistakes, has an excessive need for admiration and a complete and utter inability to deal with criticism..." it could not be more clear who they would pick.
On many occasions you have written responses to things I did not say (and I've pointed that out several times.)
Pulling his name out of thin air (read; your subconscious) so that you could make disparaging remarks, tips your hand. When combined with your anti-mask, anti-vaccination conspiracy theories, sourcing your information from the fringe, and being so dogmatic, brings the jury in on you.
When ever your phony NYT theories are exposed as false, you ALWAYS change topic. Why is that? Your mode of thinking is called "Ad Hominem Absurd".
To refresh your memory, we were discussing why sars-cov-2 came out of China Wuhan's CLASS 4 virology lab, which it did, killing millions of people. Beyond any doubt.
Obama indirectly forced the transfer to China of our GOF research in 2012 by attempting to halt it in the US with tragic unintended consequences. Whoever advised him to do so is the real culprit because we lost any real oversight or control over Chinese experimental virology GOF which we ended up funding.
You just don't get it because the CHAIN OF EVENTS is too complicated. Not your fault.
"Whats the proof again that's so conclusive that it came from a wuhan lab? I think I missed that part?"
As a correction, Wuhan is a high toxicity Class 4 virology lab, not just any lab.
Try reading the the thread from the beginning. Only you can do it for yourself.
Every virologist I have talked to have said it came from Wuhan. The debate is whether or not it was GOF derived. The 3 existent primary variants suggest it was not a zoonotic to human transmission in China or globally.
If it isn't zoonotic, then it has to be man made. Zoonotic viruses from China or Africa have been easily controlled in the US beginning in the 1950s, i.e. Ebola although Ebola is still NOT considered zoonotic because no animal of origin has ever been identified.
Sharon, all what you say and reveal about US politics and its policy of science is very interesting. In the same vein ("Bringing Reality" as you put it), and since you mentioned the New York Times, what do you think of the following quote abscribed to a Bush's senior advisor:"People like you are still living in what we call the reality-based community. You believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality. That's not the way the world really works anymore. We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you are studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors, and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do." ?
It is no sin to be a bit "perfectionist". Studies show that most PwPs tend to be as such. Please let us note that a great philosopher such as Jiddu Krishnamurti also used to refer to himself in the third person, likely for the same reasons (one team, One World, etc.):latimes.com/archives/la-xpm...
"I didn't realize this was an (intelligence) competition, but now that you've made that clear, I concede."
It isn't a competition; it is about reality and truth. You hang your hat on the NYT which is hardly a reliable source for anything. Search out the truth. Embrace the truth. It won't hurt you. Open your mind to other worlds where someone may have a different viewpoint. Learn how to critically think. It is never too late.
To all following this thread, here is the current hot topic question of some importance:
Q. Should you mix (or add to) vaccines in the hope it will boost your immunity?
A. Hoping for the magic bullet, The UK has launched a trial suggesting the combination of Pfizer (1 shot) + AZeneca (1 shot) will boost your immunity. They will follow it with adding Sputnik V, Novavax, and presumably everything else available. Snape is running this trial. Dr Snape's principal areas of research relate to vaccines against childhood meningococcal, pneumococcal, influenza and Ebola diseases, and prevention of disease through maternal immunization. NOT the SARS family of viruses.
This "combo" theory is known as a heterologous prime-boost. Unfortunately it is more theory than actual implementation showing little or no conclusive improvement in other unrelated virus trials (especially HIV).
Once again for those who don't get it: The trial will NOT assess directly or indirectly how well the combinations protect participants against COVID-19 infection.
To all following this thread, here is the current hot topic question of some importance:
Q: Are India, Russia, and China falsifying their infection numbers (in relation to the US)?
JAMA recently published the study findings out of India showing an alarming discrepancy between reported infections and actual. The differences are staggering indicating far wider infection rates than reported. The study also found no difference between rural and urban populations.
I strongly suspect the same holds true for Russian and especially China who no longer reports or very little. All 3 countries' per capita death numbers are ludicrously low.
In the beginning of the pandemic I had a phone conversation with a Russian friend who lives in a city with over 1 mil population in Asian part of Russia. She told me about people there dying from covid and I was surprised to hear that because at that time the Worldometer was showing only 8 death in Russia!
Does anyone die nowadays from flu, pneumonia, bronchitis, cold? They must be under control as I haven't heard about these illnesses at all since COVID existence.
The US CDC (National Center for Health Statistics) provides this data by state and nationally. Several other web sites provide this data in easier to understand formats.
Numerical Interpretations vary regarding what is called "excessive deaths due to Covid". On a per capita basis (100,000 by month), increases have been much smaller than one would expect. However, the total Covid death count is alarming.
Before Covid, "flu, pneumonia, bronchitis, cold" have never been a primary factor IN CAUSE OF DEATH. In contrast, with Covid influenza and pneunmonia are listed 44% of the time as a comorbidity.
All deaths involving Covid = 11.9% of "deaths from all causes"
"In-hospital mortality was higher in patients with COVID-19 than in patients with influenza (15,104 [16.9%] of 89,530 vs 2,640 [5.8%] of 45,819)...Lancet Dec 2020.
Mortality related to Covid by age cohort, gender, race has remained remarkably consistent over 12 months. Variants may change this.
A CLASSIC CASE OF WHAT I HAVE SAID USING AN OBSCURE CITATION:
I have repeatedly stated It is a fact that U of Texas at Galveston did the design on the Wuhan Virology lab, but you never know it unless you heard about it in my "grapevine" and put 2 and 2 together. But, you can find it if you know how to do it on the internet.
"UTMB has provided laboratory safety and security training for scientists and operations personnel in more than 45 countries, including China. The relationship with Wuhan Institute of Virology and the GNL dates back to 2013 and has been facilitated through an ongoing dialogue co-sponsored by the Chinese Academies of Science and U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine, with cooperation from the Chinese CDC and others. "
"April 16, 2020 -- The Galveston National Laboratory, located on the campus of the University of Texas Medical Branch, is one of two university-based maximum containment (BSL-4) laboratories in the U.S. focused on the study of highly infectious diseases and the development of medical countermeasures."
They spell it out. You can't miss it. You don't need my contacts, my expertise. They handed it out, and the NYT and WaPo didn't look for it (for obvious reasons).
This info isn't in the plain-as-day "public domain". A lot of it comes from my Chinese staff, lab personnel, contacts, networking, attending private meetings and seminars, and knowing the back roads.
It is all about the truth, whether we want to know it or not. Trust me. I know this stuff backwards and forwards.
Do you understand the design flaws in any of these vaccine trials? You think you do by posting a link or two. Obviously you don't understand their short comings, and you never will.
Only 2.2% of the sample population were infected at baseline, most of them in the PLACEBO group. How incredibly convenient.
Evaluation of effectiveness covered 1st 14 days (between 1st and 2nd dose), and then 60 days later (60% of sample). WOW. I am impressed. Earth shattering for the gullible.
Only 24% of sample were 65 or older. Yet USA mortality in >65 and older = 81.2% as of CDC on 02/05/2021. How stupid can you get? Why bother sampling the under 45 age group who account for only 2.5% of all covid deaths?
You won't understand, but this trial was seriously flawed for a reason.
Wallowing in ignorance, I made the radical decision and had my 1st dose of Pfizer vaccination Saturday at the VA. No side effects. They were vaccinating 100 (old) guys/hour. (I can feel the microchip working its way through my veins and arteries. I had this creepy feeling last night that Bill Gates (and Mark Zucjerberg) were watching me sleep.) Ozzy Osbourne said it was OK.
glad you asked. always start with your major medical databases.
I generally use peer reviewed scientific journals and pre-peer reviewed studies. easily available except the subscription material. use your med ctr affiliation or faculty ID to log in on the latter
pre-peer reviewed are cutting edge, but they are not in the major data bases.
Thank you, but I meant where do you get your information about the virus being created in a lab and about connections to US funding, etc., that is, information excluding the clinical trial data. (The stuff that is known because someone is reporting it.)
Excellent question. Here is your answer with me taking my valuable time in subzero temp to give you an example along with a beloved "down in the bowels" citation! No one else can do it but me. You are so lucky.
HERE IS A CLASSIC CASE OF WHAT I HAVE SAID USING AN OBSCURE CITATION:
I have repeatedly stated It is a fact that U of Texas at Galveston did the design on the Wuhan Virology lab, but you never know it unless you heard about it in my "grapevine" and put 2 and 2 together. But, you can find it if you know how to do it on the internet.
"UTMB has provided laboratory safety and security training for scientists and operations personnel in more than 45 countries, including China. The relationship with Wuhan Institute of Virology and the GNL dates back to 2013 and has been facilitated through an ongoing dialogue co-sponsored by the Chinese Academies of Science and U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine, with cooperation from the Chinese CDC and others. "
"April 16, 2020 -- The Galveston National Laboratory, located on the campus of the University of Texas Medical Branch, is one of two university-based maximum containment (BSL-4) laboratories in the U.S. focused on the study of highly infectious diseases and the development of medical countermeasures."
They spell it out. You can't miss it. You don't need my contacts, my expertise. They handed it out, and the NYT and WaPo didn't touch it (for obvious reasons).
This info isn't in the plain-as-day "public domain". A lot of it comes from my Chinese staff, lab personnel, contacts, networking, attending private meetings and seminars, and knowing the back roads.
It is all about the truth, whether we want to know it or not. Trust me. I know this stuff backwards and forwards.
"To refresh your memory, we were discussing why sars-cov-2 came out of China Wuhan's CLASS 4 virology lab, which it did, killing millions of people. Beyond any doubt."
"The Bat Woman created the virus in China's Class 4 virology Lab in Wuhan..." With support from and in collaboration with the US and there has been an elaborate, international cover-up of which the NYT is a part?
So, your response to my asking for your sources and evidence is, "... it comes from my Chinese staff, lab personnel, contacts, networking, attending private meetings and seminars, and knowing the back roads." -- In other words, a grapevine.
Really?? Is that all you got? (No links? No studies? No papers? No scientific explanation? ) Just 'take my word for it."
I sincerely hope that readers see that (Sharon) who prides herself on legitimate resources has basically dodged your question and replied in a very condescending manner.
@parlepark. Just report the profile and if all of us raise an objection to any member who conducts oneself disgracefully, that profile will be blocked. Please act on your own conscience.
The anti-mask, anti-vaccination crowd believe it's a matter of their personal freedom, yet seem to have no problem blockading the Dodger Stadium vaccination center, thereby interfering with other people's personal freedom to be vaccinated.
Birds of a feather flock together. Because of the wisdom of that old adage and those who are active anti-vaccinationers, I'd be hesitant to be associated with this crowd if I were you.
You are sounding more and more like crazy Tom Friedman. Is this deliberate? I am beginning to wonder because Ozzie is crazy as well and your doctor. (brain shot to bits with drugs and never got vaccinated).
I never said I was anti-vaccine, but you never think to ask. You conclude without thinking like Friedman. His comments about Maryland's vaccine program back in JANUARY were typically stupid. Din't know Hogan was governor. Thinks we should have a bullet train like China. We have airplanes. What a dunce.
I prefer trains because; They're better for the environment. The scenery is more interesting. They reduce congestion. They create jobs. The seats are roomier and more comfortable. You can bring more luggage. You can charge your phone. I prefer staying on the ground.
To all following this thread, here is the current hot topic question of some importance and politically charged, although not for PwPs:
Q. The WHO released report this week stating that the virus causing Covid-19 came from an animal. What was their explanation for arriving at this conclusion?
A. WHO and their Chinese counterparts didn't give any explanation because this panel was NOT scientific in terms of expertise in virology, class 4 high toxic labs, GOF research or personnel make up.
In direct contradiction to many virologists such as Dr. Li-Meng Yan, a former researcher at the Hong Kong School of Public Health, who posted several papers that she claims shows how SARS-CoV-2 was man made, Peter Ben Embarek, the spokesperson for WHO, a food scientist by education and career and not virologist, disagreed. However,he did say the panel agreed it didn't come from Chinese bats, dead or alive.
His comment about bats essentially puts an end to the very, very popular bat theory.
Did the visit by WHO end the debate over whether the virus was zoonotic or GOF derived? Doubtful since virologists know of at least 3 primary (toxic) variants of the sars-cov-2 virus.
The existence of these primary variants (with more to come) from different parts of the globe make it highly unlikely the virus came from some unknown animal. Logic alone says it didn't.
Which leaves us back at Wuhan's Class 4 lab and the Chinese delay in alerting the world to this killer. Senseless.
New research by the agency shows that transmission of the virus can be reduced by up to 96.5 percent if both an infected individual and an uninfected individual wear tightly fitted surgical masks or a cloth-and-surgical-mask combination.
Not again. Stop citing 2nd and 3rd level questionable or biased sources as if they are meaningful. They aren't. Go to the actual studies such as:
Community Use Of Face Masks And COVID-19: Evidence From A Natural Experiment Of State Mandates In The US
"Mandating face mask use in public is associated with a decline in the daily COVID-19 growth rate by 0.9, 1.1, 1.4, 1.7, and 2.0 percentage points in 1–5, 6–10, 11–15, 16–20, and 21 or more days after state face mask orders were signed, respectively."
Content on HealthUnlocked does not replace the relationship between you and doctors or other healthcare professionals nor the advice you receive from them.
Never delay seeking advice or dialling emergency services because of something that you have read on HealthUnlocked.
Perception/Sinking
Parkinsons and bipolar 
Calling for B6 test results in PD: Unveiling the dosage dilemma
