Starker on 16/6/2020 at 11:23
US congressman doesn't wear a mask because it mostly protects other people:
Quote:
WASHINGTON—Rep. Tom Rice (R., S.C.) said Monday that he has recovered from a mild case of Covid-19, the first Capitol Hill lawmaker to report contracting the disease since the nation began cautiously reopening from coronavirus-related shutdowns.
[...]
Mr. Rice said in an interview on Monday that he has no regrets about not wearing a mask on the House floor during votes. He was among a number of House Republicans who didn't cover their faces, despite the recommendation from Congress's attending physician that they do so.
“My understanding is that a mask doesn't really protect you as much as it protects other people,” Mr. Rice said. “I don't think it would have made much of a difference. That is, if I caught it on the House floor...I doubt that had anything to do with it.”
[...]
faetal on 16/6/2020 at 11:28
Quote Posted by bob_doe_nz
One of the two was showing theoretical symptoms and also lied about it. The other was (I think) asymptomatic.
That's infuriating. Who is so selfish that they'd travel to a country declared practically free of the virus, knowing that they might have the virus?
Self-centered beyond belief.
nbohr1more on 16/6/2020 at 13:59
Quote Posted by faetal
Instead of a YouTube video, how about a peer-reviewed article in Nature: (
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9)
Headlines:
* The idea that this is a lab-made virus is not plausible (lack of vector backbone sequence remnants is a pretty big indicator - I worked in a gene engineering business for several years and can confirm that absence of any vector makes it next to impossible this was engineered)
* Virus most likely passed from bats to pangolins, then to humans, where it mutated its virulence in humans
As a side note, coronaviruses in general have been known for some time ((
https://cmr.asm.org/content/20/4/660)) to be something a time bomb for being a threat to people, due to their high mutation rates, steady reservoir in bat populations and proximity to other species via animal markets. It was really only a matter of time.
Please forgive me if I start to doubt this paper when I do a search for the lead scientist and they have a Hollywood style website:
(
https://andersen-lab.com/people/)
that was created in 2015 and updated in December 2019 and has a rainbow coalition that is more stereotypical than a Benetton advert.
How many scientists have 8x10 glossy's and a dedicated PR page?
How dumb do the deep state think the general public are?
Scientists with a Hollywood style websites.
IT Company (Crowdstrike) with a Hollywood style website.
Why not try to be even a smidgen more plausible and have a scientist with a small youtube presence like thunderf00t?
Renzatic on 16/6/2020 at 15:33
Quote Posted by nbohr1more
Please forgive me if I start to doubt this paper when I do a search for the lead scientist and they have a Hollywood style website.
Guys, they've got a PR team and an advertising budget big enough to hire someone to make a website. They're probably deep state.
Kolya on 16/6/2020 at 15:50
If someone here agrees to be my PR guy I can make a website. Then we go deepstate.
Bring your own weapons.
Judith on 16/6/2020 at 15:51
Not sure what "holywood-style" is, but both the website and photos look rather casual and low budget. I've been doing corporate style portraits for a while, this isn't even close to cheapest corporate photography.
nbohr1more on 16/6/2020 at 16:01
This is what the website of an academic looks like:
(
http://community.dur.ac.uk/penelope.wilson/sais.html)
No professional formatting, plain text, plain images, 90's web standards.
Only movie producers imagine a world where scientists have the time and inclination to make a beautiful modern site to show their research.
Renzatic on 16/6/2020 at 16:08
Jesus Christ, you're a fucking idiot.
nickie on 16/6/2020 at 16:25
Sorry from a Brit, bob. As I understand it, the 2 people concerned were in quarantine and then 'released' and allowed to drive to see their mother, I think. The person who was positive and had symptoms, didn't make anything of them as the symptoms were something she regularly experienced with an underlying condition. I also understand there was a bit of a failure in the relevant protocol as apparently, people are supposed to be asked whether they have symptoms, listing each symptom separately. They were just asked if they were OK. Edit: (
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/16/new-zealand-records-first-new-covid-19-cases-after-women-arrive-from-uk-carrying-virus) This is a more detailed version than I read this morning.
I can't find the article I read at the moment as I've gotta go but I think it was in the Guardian coronavirus update blog this morning. I'll have a look later. Hopefully all will be well for your ski hill.
(
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-53061281) Coronavirus: Dexamethasone proves first life-saving drug