UPDATES on the COVID Virus

MacNfries

Male
Sweet & Cordial
Gold Member
From
NC, US
The covid is making some radical changes, its important to know what these changes ARE and how SERIOUS this new strand of Covid is. This is NOT meant to be a POLITICAL THREAD and will not become one. If you post information on this thread, please provide your source(s). If you wish to comment on this NEW VIRUS strand, avoid discussions of party politics as this thread is moving FORWARD, not BACKWARDS. If you post your OPINIONS, please identify your post as an opinion unless you can provide a printed source or link to back it up. Let's all PROVE we can have civil discussions, as adults, on topics affecting all of us TODAY!.
Web capture_20-2-2023_223948_www.jpg ......... cartoon_couple.jpg
 
Last edited:

For the past several months, Omicron subvariants BA.4 and BA.5 have dominated COVID-19 cases in the U.S. But now, there’s a class of new COVID subvariants on the rise and one in particular is getting plenty of attention. It’s called XBB—or Gryphon—and there’s a chance it could overtake everything else out there.​

XBB is getting a lot of buzz because it spreads fast—and seems to be able to evade immunity that people have built up from having a previous COVID-19 infection or getting the vaccine, says William Schaffner, M.D., an infectious disease specialist and professor at the Vanderbilt University School of Medicine. Still, Dr. Schaffner says, “it’s early days and we have a lot to learn.”​

Here’s what we know about XBB so far, and why doctors are keeping a close eye on it.​
XBB is one of the “new class” of Omicron variants that are spreading fast right now, says Thomas Russo, M.D., professor and chief of infectious disease at the University at Buffalo in New York. That includes BQ.1.1, BQ.1, BQ.1.3, BA.2.3.20, and XBB. “XBB is a hybrid version of two strains of the BA.2 form of Omicron,” explains Amesh A. Adalja, M.D., a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security. It’s currently “spreading efficiently in Singapore,” he adds.​
XBB is thought to have the best ability to evade antibody protections of these newly emerged COVID variants, according to a pre-print study from researchers in China. That study said that the new strains of Omicron, and XBB in particular, “are the most antibody-evasive strain tested, far exceeding BA.5 and approaching SARS-CoV-1 level.” (SARS-CoV-1, in case you’re not familiar with it, is the strain of coronavirus that causes SARS, a respiratory virus that can cause severe illness.)​
Meaning, the vaccine and having previously had COVID-19 are not thought to offer the same level of protection against XBB as they have with previous strains of COVID-19. Antibody ******* like Evusheld and bebtelovimab may also not be very effective against XBB, the pre-print study says.​
“These variants are evolving to evade protection,” Dr. Russo says. The bivalent booster is “likely going to be protective against severe disease” with XBB, but will be “imperfect against preventing infection," Dr. Russo says. “When it comes to evasion of vaccine protection, it’s important to recognize that vaccine protection is not all or none,” Dr. Adalja says. “Even with immune-evasive variants, vaccine protection against what matters most—severe disease—remains intact.”​

XBB variant symptoms

So far, symptoms of XBB seem to be similar to what they’ve been with COVID-19 in general. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), those can include:

· Fever or chills
· Cough
· Shortness of breath or difficulty breathing
· Fatigue
· Muscle or body aches
· Headache
· New loss of taste or smell
· Sore throat
· Congestion or runny nose
· Nausea or vomiting
· Diarrhea

How contagious is the XBB subvariant?
Like other strains of Omicron, XBB is thought to be very contagious. Singapore’s Ministry of Health notes that the variant now makes up 54% of COVID-19 cases in the country, up from 22% the week before. Singapore’s Ministry of health says that XBB is “at least as transmissible as currently circulating variants” but adds that “there is no evidence that XBB causes more severe illness.”

There are a lot of unknowns about XBB right now. While it’s been detected in the U.S., BA.5 and BA.4.6 continue to be the dominant variants in this country, per CDC data. Other variants are also started to spread at the same time, Dr. Adalja says, and it’s unclear which will displace BA.4.6 and BA.5 in the U.S., if they will at all. “It’s likely to spread to some degree in the U.S. but unclear if it—or some other related variant such as BQ.1.1—will become dominant,” he says.
 
Last edited:
I prefer to read what the scientists work to produce.

'Research published in April 2022 shows that there is no greater risk of developing heart inflammation after a Covid-19 vaccine than after other common vaccines, including the flu jab.

Researchers from Singapore looked at the findings of 22 different studies, covering 405 million doses of different vaccines around the world, - including flu, smallpox, polio, measles, mumps and rubella. Overall the rates of myocarditis and pericarditis following Covid vaccines weren’t significantly different to other vaccines, including flu, although rates of myocarditis or pericarditis in young men were higher following mRNA-based Covid vaccines such as Moderna or Pfizer.

The researchers, writing in the Lancet medical journal, suggested that the rare cases of post-vaccine myocarditis and pericarditis might be connected to the overall immune response to vaccination, not specifically because of the Covid-19 vaccination or the spike protein it is based on. They suggested that the reports of myocarditis and pericarditis might be because of the large scale of Covid-19 vaccination and the close scrutiny it has had.

Based on these findings, the researchers said that the benefits of Covid-19 vaccines (including a reduced risk of severe illness or death) far outweigh the very small risk of myocarditis or pericarditis, which is also seen for other vaccines.'

 
Myocarditis is a real bitch
It IS no doubt, but saying its a major results of vaccines doesn't make it factual trustworthy unless you show documented reports as Subby just did to rebuttle your claim. All you have to do is show where you get your information, whether it is a trustful source or not. We just want to know that its not something you MADE UP and injected into the conversation. Some people RELY on what they hear or read, m&d. What if you knew that something you SAID or PRINTED resulted in harm to someone? Please use caution when posting your INFORMATION.
 
Last edited:
  • Based on topline data, three doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine met all immunobridging criteria required for Emergency Use Authorization
  • The third 3-µg dose was well tolerated among 1,678 children under 5 years of age with a safety profile similar to placebo
  • Vaccine efficacy of 80.3% was observed in descriptive analysis of three doses during a time when Omicron was the predominant variant
  • The 3-µg dose level, which is one-tenth the dose for adults, was selected for children under 5 years of age based on safety, tolerability and immunogenicity
 
It IS no doubt, but saying its a major results of vaccines doesn't make it factual trustworthy unless you show documented reports as Subby just did to rebuttle your claim. All you have to do is show where you get your information, whether it is a trustful source or not. We just want to know that its not something you MADE UP and injected into the conversation. Some people RELY on what they hear or read, m&d. What if you knew that something you SAID or PRINTED resulted in harm to someone? Please use caution when posting your INFORMATION.
Let's be real clear, YOU are not the arbiter of facts and truth. Also, something being a fact or fiction is NOT dependent on the information being posted with sources you find credible. Liberty and freedom take no heed of your caution. Freedom in general is a dangerous thing, but not as dangerous as tyranny.

People should refrain from taking medical advice from a social media or media in general. People should learn to evaluate information independently and should exercise individual sovereignty as much as possible. Maybe you should stop telling people what to think.
 
Let's be real clear, YOU are not the arbiter of facts and truth. Also, something being a fact or fiction is NOT dependent on the information being posted with sources you find credible. Liberty and freedom take no heed of your caution. Freedom in general is a dangerous thing, but not as dangerous as tyranny.

People should refrain from taking medical advice from a social media or media in general. People should learn to evaluate information independently and should exercise individual sovereignty as much as possible. Maybe you should stop telling people what to think.
Fair enough ... but as long as individuals, like yourself, discourage the public from following recommended CDC & doctor's directions for avoiding the covid virus, I think I'll just "continue", m&d. You're missing the whole point in having the requirement of sources & documentations when posting suggestions to the covid. It was you who was discouraging people from getting the vaccines because the vaccines could cause heart attacks. You provided NO additional information ... it took Subby posting the relationship between vaccines & heart attacks to tell more of the story. His post (with his documentation) might or might NOT be correct, but its for sure he didn't submit is OPINION as FACT, you basically DID by not providing readers with your sources for NOT getting the covid shots.

Too often, posters would post their OPINIONS as facts ... that simply is not the case in THIS THREAD. If you say covid vaccines cause heart attacks we expect you to provide your source(s) whether its a doctors study or a tabloid news. We want to know you're not pulling your information out of your posterior, as was the case with a "prior President".

Yes, liberty & freedom do carry weight in the final decision making, but let's be sure that what the readers receive in "information" is not biased. You may (I can't recall) be one of those who declare ALL MEDIA information skewed & biased. That's simply not the case, but it's a debate that can't be settled simply because by saying all media information is skewed & biased is basically unprovable in a debate. Your liberty & freedom allows you to make the call ... that's fine, but it doesn't give you the right to try swaying the opinions of others based upon your selective, limitations of the "TRUTH".

Facts provide an objective reality using documented data & studies. Opinions are simply a subjective statement of "judgement" or "belief" based upon assumptions but no documentation.

I don't think the differences of those two words can be explained any better than that. Maybe you just need to sit and "think about what it is saying".
But, I do appreciate your opinion as it gives me a chance to explain the difference of the two words. Just produce the information that says "its safer to not take the covid vaccine than it is to take it and we can start discussions from THAT point. OK?
 
Last edited:
Fair enough ... but as long as individuals, like yourself, discourage the public from following recommended CDC & doctor's directions for avoiding the covid virus, I think I'll just "continue", m&d. You're missing the point in the requirement of sources & documentations when posting suggestions to the covid. It was you who was discouraging people from getting the vaccines because the vaccines could cause heart attacks. You provided NO additional information ... it took Subby posting the relationship between vaccines & heart attacks to tell more of the story. His post (with his documentation) might or might NOT be correct, but its for sure he didn't submit is OPINION as FACT, you basically DID by not providing readers with your sources for NOT getting the covid shots.

Too often, posters would post their OPINIONS as facts ... that simply is not the case in THIS THREAD. If you say covid vaccines cause heart attacks we expect you to provide your source(s) whether its a doctors study or a tabloid news. We want to know you're not pulling your information out of your posterior.

Yes, liberty & freedom do carry weight in the final decision making, but let's be sure that what the readers receive in "information" is not biased. You may (I can't recall) be one of those who declare ALL MEDIA information skewed & biased. That's simply not the case, but it's a debate that can't be settled simply because by saying all media information is skewed & biased is basically unprovable in a debate. Your liberty & freedom allows you to make the call ... that's fine, but it doesn't give you the right to try swaying the opinions of others based upon your selective, limitations of the "TRUTH".

Facts provide an objective reality using documented data & studies. Opinions are simply a subjective statement of "judgement" or "belief" based upon assumptions.

I don't think the differences of those two can be explained any better than that. Maybe you just need to sit and "think about what it is saying".
But, I do appreciate your opinion as it gives me a chance to explain the difference of the two. Just produce the information that says "its safer to not take the covid vaccine than it is to take it and we can start discussions from THAT point. OK?
It does give me the right....thats the whole point of it.

Everyone....don't get COVID vaccine, it is rat poison and will do more harm than good in the long run.
 
... and AGAIN, that is YOUR OPINION unless you can come up with the credible sources that back your statement. Its your OPINION period. Its NOT factual whatsoever.
Covid vaccine is rat poison, I have previously given you supporting FACTS by Dr Robert Malone and testimony from a series of Doctors to the Tennesse legislature....you can choose to ignore but that doesn't change the facts.

I do not and will not trust the information of a for profit pharmaceutical company that literally pays royalties to the approving authorities who are ethically overseen by the wife of the head official. We have seen time and again that pharmaceutical companies will do whatever is in the shareholders interest over their customers.
 
I do not and will not trust the information of a for profit pharmaceutical company
That makes for another discussion but doesn't explain the rat poisoning claim. I would like to do some research, however, so we can discuss & resolve your claim. I wasn't aware that the CDC was a "for provit pharmaceutical company" ... not that it makes any difference in our discussion.
 
That makes for another discussion but doesn't explain the rat poisoning claim. I would like to do some research, however, so we can discuss & resolve your claim. I wasn't aware that the CDC was a "for provit pharmaceutical company" ... not that it makes any difference in our discussion.
I didn't say they were. The scientists there DO receive royalty payments. The chief ethics officer is married to Fauci. Where I come from that is called a conflict of interest. In fact, if you ever listen into some of their public calls the so called scientists state out loud potential conflicts.
 
Last edited:
New Phase of Covid Coming Because We Failed With First Phase


Early in the pandemic, proponents argued elimination was morally, scientifically and economically superior to so-called mitigation approaches, such as slowing the spread of disease through physical distancing and limiting social gatherings, or letting the virus loose among the young while protecting more vulnerable members of the population. Even outside China, elimination measures like stay-at-home orders proved politically unpopular and difficult to carry out. With some medical experts doubting whether airborne respiratory pathogens can be suppressed, global public health officials are now without a consensus on how best to contain new infectious diseases. As cases spread throughout the world, the full weight of the policy emerged, demanding strict border controls, lockdowns and extensive testing and contact-tracing. But it also required fast action and global coordination, which was difficult to achieve.​
China’s experience, marked by months-long lockdowns, isolation and family separations, showed simultaneously that elimination was possible and that it came at a cost too high for most countries, especially democratic ones, to bear. The first example was in Wuhan, where Covid pervaded the city in late 2019 and was wiped out less than five months later.​

Proof of Concept
“It was quite a revelation that China was able to stop transmission in 2020 in Wuhan,” said Baker, who recently became the director of the Public Health Communication Centre in New Zealand, a non-profit group designed to improve the way medical information and research is conveyed. “That was the proof of concept.” China Hits Zero Covid Cases with a Month of Draconian Curbs
Per-capita death rates in Covid Zero countries came in far below those that opted for mitigation, also known as flattening the curve. Japan and South Korea, which didn't pursue elimination but where social distancing and masking were followed closely, also fared well in suppressing deaths.​
Even governments that decided against elimination, opting instead to flatten the curve, struggled to persuade people to follow basic control methods. In the US and many parts of Europe, topics like mask-wearing and immunizations for high-risk people became political quagmires, despite studies showing they slowed infections and saved lives. It was particularly difficult to persuade people to accept things like online schooling and social isolation without knowing how long the pandemic would last. Especially in the early stages, health officials were unsure which mitigation measures would prove successful or how long it would take to develop pharmaceutical interventions.​

“We were hoping we could switch this thing off,” with immunity from vaccination or previous infection preventing transmission of the virus, said Jodie McVernon, director of epidemiology at the University of Melbourne’s Doherty Institute. “Those hopes were relatively short lived. We moved on from the idea that we can immunize the world and turn the infection off.” The nature of Covid, with its mutations and hyper-infectivity, made elimination particularly challenging.​

“When you are dealing with omicron, there is no threading the needle,” McVernon said. “Once omicron was out of the bottle, there was no squeezing the genie back in.”​
.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................​
MUCH MORE TO READ HERE ... gives good "history lesson on fighting covid before it mutates past our ability to stop it​
 
Last edited:
New Phase of Covid Coming Because We Failed With First Phase


Early in the pandemic, proponents argued elimination was morally, scientifically and economically superior to so-called mitigation approaches, such as slowing the spread of disease through physical distancing and limiting social gatherings, or letting the virus loose among the young while protecting more vulnerable members of the population. Even outside China, elimination measures like stay-at-home orders proved politically unpopular and difficult to carry out. With some medical experts doubting whether airborne respiratory pathogens can be suppressed, global public health officials are now without a consensus on how best to contain new infectious diseases. As cases spread throughout the world, the full weight of the policy emerged, demanding strict border controls, lockdowns and extensive testing and contact-tracing. But it also required fast action and global coordination, which was difficult to achieve.​
China’s experience, marked by months-long lockdowns, isolation and family separations, showed simultaneously that elimination was possible and that it came at a cost too high for most countries, especially democratic ones, to bear. The first example was in Wuhan, where Covid pervaded the city in late 2019 and was wiped out less than five months later.​

Proof of Concept
Maybe they should have NOT created the virus in the lab to begin with. This entire article is bereft of factual data, just people stating their opinions and observations.

Your commentary is hysterics, weak. Maybe you should apply for a job on CNN with Lemon being shuffled away for his agist and sexist attacks.
 
Maybe they should have NOT created the virus in the lab to begin with. This entire article is bereft of factual data, just people stating their opinions and observations.
To whom are your referring?
I assume this is the "moderna created the virus story, right?"


If not, please tell me a nighttime story so I can sle.ep easy tonight.

........."Probably died of corona vaccine!"
..........."Its ok, cats have nine lives"

gif_catWithSIGN.gif ..... gif_cat.gif
 
Last edited:
To whom are your referring?
I assume this is the "moderna created the virus story, right?"


If not, please tell me a nighttime story so I can sle.ep easy tonight.
No, China created it in a lab in Wuhan with funding from the US and funneled there by EcoHealth Alliance and the head of EcoHealth Alliance is on record saying "he had done on it" in an email bragging. All the grant funding information is well established fact. The lab leak theory is as plausible as natural occurrence and is one of the leading theories.

Now go to bed, you been schooled
 
Your arrogance makes me bite my tongue to avoid the desire to return to the "old way" of insults.
I won't allow you to sway me, however, maybe my wish for infestation of bed bugs & dog fleas in your bed will come true. gif_Yellowball-CrossingFingers.gif
 
Last edited:
Back
Top