|
Post by bsutrack on Jul 12, 2023 21:41:51 GMT -6
Kennedy represents what the centralist portion of the Democratic Party used to be. Sometimes referred to as "Blue Dogs" the policies advocated by JFK and Robert Kennedy no longer represent what today passes as the Democratic Party. Except for his borderline crazy conspiracy theories and anti vax views. The GOP may be more unrecognizable. Those past GOP leaders would today be reviled as RINO. They created NATO, advocated free trade, governed by seeking workable compromise with the opposition, had leaders with high character and personal morality. You mean "borderline crazy conspiracy theories" like Donald Trump being an agent of Russia? The one the Mueller led commission comprised of Democratic Hacks couldn't find any evidence of after 3 years of searching. The source of which was the Steel Dossier funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign. As for free trade, that's turned into a one-way win for China. But of course when we have a grifter in the White House who has taken millions from the CCP, what would you expect.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 18, 2023 10:53:54 GMT -6
They reported, not surprisingly a repressive autocrat suppressing news. China at that time denied any problem with COVID. Whatever the source. Just as did our own would be strongman autocrat. That observation of an unknown amount of unreliable Chinese man on the street belief was hardly conclusive about a lab leak. Repression of those rumors prove repression not truth of the rumor. I did not say it was "one unreliable Chinese man" on the street talking to others. There were many. There were multiple workers who left the lab infected. They all interacted with others who spread the word. The evidence is at best mixed for lab leak, with little hard evidence available, making the "best" evidence mostly anecdotal. That's because China hasn't made data available. Which doesn't really mean they are covering up anything, they cover up everything... There is very very little reason to suspect a bio weapon, but very very much evidence labs could have improved their safety practices. So ti's certainly possible, even if not negligent or nefarious
Biggest issue is we can't just gloss over the problem with the lab leak theory in explaining how much linkage there is with Covid spread from the market. That spread is far away physically from areas where lab leak would be expected to be a vector. There is a problem of lack of hard statistical evidence with the market theory but the data is better. We can't and won't be able to prove either theory is the sole source of infection since we have relatively poor record of the early spread.
The conclusion in the article is right on point, there is little to gain by finger pointing at any of the scientists, but a lot to gain in guarding against both these two explanations. With either one being possible and little chance to definitively find a sole cause we need to focus on policy.
WE must Insist labs are budgeted adequately for safety and continuie to invest much more to study the extremely likely possible that illness is transferred from animal population to humans.
|
|
|
Post by villagepub on Jul 19, 2023 6:41:27 GMT -6
I did not say it was "one unreliable Chinese man" on the street talking to others. There were many. There were multiple workers who left the lab infected. They all interacted with others who spread the word.
WE must Insist labs are budgeted adequately for safety and continuie to invest much more to study the extremely likely possible that illness is transferred from animal population to humans.
WE? Once that investment money is sent from the US to the administrators of a foreign lab, WE lose control of how that money is allocated. Insist all you wish, money contributed to the Wuhan lab will be budgeted how the Chinese see fit. That doesn't always include ensuring securing procedures that are standard in the US.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 19, 2023 9:25:20 GMT -6
WE must Insist labs are budgeted adequately for safety and continuie to invest much more to study the extremely likely possible that illness is transferred from animal population to humans.
WE? Once that investment money is sent from the US to the administrators of a foreign lab, WE lose control of how that money is allocated. Insist all you wish, money contributed to the Wuhan lab will be budgeted how the Chinese see fit. That doesn't always include ensuring securing procedures that are standard in the US. That's not exactly true. But it should be a concern. Most scientists seeking grant money want to be able to get future grants and most do comply with required reporting and the grant often dictates the safety measures required in the RFP. It is costly, we need to allocate more money for research to make sure we have safety.
Some foreign labs are quite reliable. Research is expensive and I suspect both international politics and lower expenses give some grant proposals from foreign labs an advantage. US labs might not even submit proposals due to greater expense required.
The issue is partly that Congress has cut funding for science and the agencies have the dilemma of NOT funding necessary or desirable research adequately if they emphasize safety. So the answer here is to allocate more money for research and insist it is budgeted for safety.
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Jul 19, 2023 11:05:52 GMT -6
So the answer here is to allocate more money for research and insist it is budgeted for safety.
I've been trying to stay out of this, but I have to laugh at this statement.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 19, 2023 12:09:35 GMT -6
So the answer here is to allocate more money for research and insist it is budgeted for safety.
I've been trying to stay out of this, but I have to laugh at this statement. Science is not free. Safety not free. What's the choice?
|
|
|
Post by villagepub on Jul 19, 2023 12:30:35 GMT -6
WE? Once that investment money is sent from the US to the administrators of a foreign lab, WE lose control of how that money is allocated. Insist all you wish, money contributed to the Wuhan lab will be budgeted how the Chinese see fit. That doesn't always include ensuring securing procedures that are standard in the US. That's not exactly true. But it should be a concern. Most scientists seeking grant money want to be able to get future grants and most do comply with required reporting and the grant often dictates the safety measures required in the RFP. It is costly, we need to allocate more money for research to make sure we have safety.
I'll show whatever set of books and reports you want to see as long as you keep pumping money my way.
|
|
|
Post by Lurkin McGurkin on Jul 19, 2023 13:39:26 GMT -6
I've been trying to stay out of this, but I have to laugh at this statement. Science is not free. Safety not free. What's the choice? Is the only choice an unlimited budget?
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 19, 2023 16:07:37 GMT -6
Science is not free. Safety not free. What's the choice? Is the only choice an unlimited budget? Who said unlimited...I said larger for scientific research.
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 19, 2023 16:08:49 GMT -6
That's not exactly true. But it should be a concern. Most scientists seeking grant money want to be able to get future grants and most do comply with required reporting and the grant often dictates the safety measures required in the RFP. It is costly, we need to allocate more money for research to make sure we have safety.
I'll show whatever set of books and reports you want to see as long as you keep pumping money my way. You apparently have never been involved in a research grant application or review.
|
|
|
Post by villagepub on Jul 20, 2023 8:00:24 GMT -6
I'll show whatever set of books and reports you want to see as long as you keep pumping money my way. You apparently have never been involved in a research grant application or review. Apparently, you've never been on the receiving end of a grift.
|
|
|
Post by villagepub on Jul 20, 2023 8:00:57 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by 00hmh on Jul 20, 2023 14:06:42 GMT -6
You apparently have never been involved in a research grant application or review. Apparently, you've never been on the receiving end of a grift. And with no experience in the process how exactly are you so sure it is characterized as fraudulent?
My comment was directed to the idea you expressed that grant agencies don't do due diligence in both awarding the grant and requiring and reviewing results.
Do things always work out as expected? Of course not. Are there cases of mistakes being made in awards, supervising and auditing of work done? Of course. I know of no human endeavor where the process is perfect or completely efficient.
|
|
|
Post by bsutrack on Jul 27, 2023 20:56:29 GMT -6
We probably all saw that LeBron James' son had an episode of cardiac arrest a few days ago. www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/bronny-james-cardiac-arrest-update-lebron-james-son-at-home-after-usc-freshman-discharged-from-hospital/Here's what Dr. Peter McCullough, a leading American cardiologist, had to say about the incident: "Bronny James' 18-year-old USC teammate Vince Iwuchukwu collapsed on the court during a summer 2022 workout at the Galen Center. USC, who mandated COVID-19 vaccines for students, had training staff rush to shock his heart into normal rhythm and he later received an ICD and returned to playing. Now Bronny James himself, who attended Sierra Canyon high school where strict COVID-vaccine mandates were enforced, was reported to have a cardiac arrest and prompt recovery. LeBron James himself indicated that he and his family after doing their research were fully COVID-19 vaccinated. This was about three months after the US FDA put out myocarditis warnings on mRNA vaccines. We are seeing a wide range of vaccine associated collapses among on screen reporters, athletes, and many others that can be caused by POTS (postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome) which has a benign prognosis all the way to myocarditis and ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation which can be fatal. Details regarding the COVID-19 vaccine taken, when the doses were administered, the initial cardiac rhythm at the time of collapse followed by cardiac testing including ECG, blood tests, and MRI are all needed to ascertain the prognosis."
|
|
|
Post by nazcard on Jul 27, 2023 23:47:44 GMT -6
We probably all saw that LeBron James' son had an episode of cardiac arrest a few days ago. www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/bronny-james-cardiac-arrest-update-lebron-james-son-at-home-after-usc-freshman-discharged-from-hospital/Here's what Dr. Peter McCullough, a leading American cardiologist, had to say about the incident: "Bronny James' 18-year-old USC teammate Vince Iwuchukwu collapsed on the court during a summer 2022 workout at the Galen Center. USC, who mandated COVID-19 vaccines for students, had training staff rush to shock his heart into normal rhythm and he later received an ICD and returned to playing. Now Bronny James himself, who attended Sierra Canyon high school where strict COVID-vaccine mandates were enforced, was reported to have a cardiac arrest and prompt recovery. LeBron James himself indicated that he and his family after doing their research were fully COVID-19 vaccinated. This was about three months after the US FDA put out myocarditis warnings on mRNA vaccines. We are seeing a wide range of vaccine associated collapses among on screen reporters, athletes, and many others that can be caused by POTS (postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome) which has a benign prognosis all the way to myocarditis and ventricular tachycardia/fibrillation which can be fatal. Details regarding the COVID-19 vaccine taken, when the doses were administered, the initial cardiac rhythm at the time of collapse followed by cardiac testing including ECG, blood tests, and MRI are all needed to ascertain the prognosis." My questions and concerns regarding the putative covid crisis/vacicines are rather complex; I spent 40 years of my life in the medical, diagnostics, and pharmaceutical industries. I have many questions/doubts, here are just a few: 1) Why did Pfizer (major covid vaccine producer) request 75 years before their clinical data (re. covid) be released? My last project before my position was eliminated (it happens) was the development of a drug to treat non-hodgkins lymphoma; all of our data had to to be available for review before moving to the next phase (i.i RD to development, then to clinical, etc.). If ant of our data were deficient it was a stop; before releases for sale the drug had to be approved by the FDA. What was Phizer's game? 2) During the so-called pandemic, why were there 98% fewer deaths due to flu than in previous years? Were those deaths attributed to covid? If so, why? 3) The confirmatory assay (PCR) for covid did not distinguish between the covid and flu virus; why? On purpose it was designed that way; in my time working in PCR, had I designed PCR primers that would not distinguish between those viruses, I would not have a viable diagnostic assay and probable cause for dismissal.
|
|