coronavirus
- Thread starter eyephone
- Start date
morekaos
Well-known member
eyephone said:
Salvation lies within?
https://youtu.be/h4Wvj2_SXZA
Benefits of a classical education?
https://youtu.be/llS-Ceq63Wc
morekaos
Well-known member
It's not TX or FL but it was a lot stricter....virus gotta virus...
Israel is now the world's Covid hotspot: Cases soar despite country's trail-blazing vaccine roll-out - sparking fears other highly-vaccinated countries will be hit by another wave due to jabs' waning immunity
Israel recorded 1,892 cases per million people on Wednesday ? nearly 0.2% of entire population in single day
Despite being one of the most vaccinated nations in world, country is in midst of an unprecedented new wave
Fears Britain could now follow suit has led to growing calls for a mass booster vaccine rollout this winter
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9951117/Israel-worlds-Covid-hotspot-0-2-population-catching-yesterday.html
Israel is now the world's Covid hotspot: Cases soar despite country's trail-blazing vaccine roll-out - sparking fears other highly-vaccinated countries will be hit by another wave due to jabs' waning immunity
Israel recorded 1,892 cases per million people on Wednesday ? nearly 0.2% of entire population in single day
Despite being one of the most vaccinated nations in world, country is in midst of an unprecedented new wave
Fears Britain could now follow suit has led to growing calls for a mass booster vaccine rollout this winter
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9951117/Israel-worlds-Covid-hotspot-0-2-population-catching-yesterday.html
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
@morekaos:
Your posts are so misleading.
Remember, Israel lifted their restrictions around June once their vax rate among 16+ was around the 70% rate. But Delta is more transmissible and if you count the younger generation, total vax rate is actually less than 60% which isn't good enough against Delta.
Here, read something that doesn't fit your opinion:
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...d-israel-and-what-can-australia-learn-from-it
And since you don't like to read something that counters your view:
The positive is the high vax rate still minimizes the impact on the more susceptible population. We've also seen that everywhere else in that if you're vaccinated, hospitalization and death is much lower.
Also from the article:
It takes a combination of masks, vax, distancing and restrictions to get this under control. While you may think it doesn't work, there is non-opinionated science-based facts that it does.
After all, you keep bragging about getting Covid but doesn't that just prove the point that people who don't observe safety protocols will get it? And people like me and others who have been vax'ed and are being careful are more likely to not get it?
Your posts are so misleading.
Remember, Israel lifted their restrictions around June once their vax rate among 16+ was around the 70% rate. But Delta is more transmissible and if you count the younger generation, total vax rate is actually less than 60% which isn't good enough against Delta.
Here, read something that doesn't fit your opinion:
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...d-israel-and-what-can-australia-learn-from-it
And since you don't like to read something that counters your view:
The positive is the high vax rate still minimizes the impact on the more susceptible population. We've also seen that everywhere else in that if you're vaccinated, hospitalization and death is much lower.
Also from the article:
It takes a combination of masks, vax, distancing and restrictions to get this under control. While you may think it doesn't work, there is non-opinionated science-based facts that it does.
After all, you keep bragging about getting Covid but doesn't that just prove the point that people who don't observe safety protocols will get it? And people like me and others who have been vax'ed and are being careful are more likely to not get it?
morekaos
Well-known member
You miss my point...Half my family was vaxed and half were not...all got it...it did not matter. It's the reason CDC interviewed us twice and why the vax numbers in Israel really mean nothing. Look at whos Covid numbers are rising fastest now...all the states with stricter covid rules and mask mandates..Virus gonna virus... we are ALL going to get this at one point or another. I'm just happy I got it over with. All the precautions are really pointless in the long run.
morekaos
Well-known member
The public is accepting that fact...
More than six million people take to the skies over the Labor Day weekend - double the number who flew in 2020 despite COVID cases being up 300% from this time last year
U.S. airports were flooded with over 7 million travelers this past weekend despite increased concerns over the Delta variant
Despite a brief slow period in August, numbers significantly rose over the course of Labor Day weekend
The TSA reported that the spike in holiday weekend numbers doubled from 2020
Various destinations across the country reached pre-pandemic level crowds
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9964177/Labor-Day-weekend-sees-7m-Americans-skies-double-number-flew-2020.html
College football crowds are back to the max?
So great to have full crowds this year back in college football.
The media doesn?t want to celebrate how awesome it is to have packed stadiums again?
[url]https://gutsmack.com/2021/09/college-football-crowds-are-back-to-the-max/[/url]
More than six million people take to the skies over the Labor Day weekend - double the number who flew in 2020 despite COVID cases being up 300% from this time last year
U.S. airports were flooded with over 7 million travelers this past weekend despite increased concerns over the Delta variant
Despite a brief slow period in August, numbers significantly rose over the course of Labor Day weekend
The TSA reported that the spike in holiday weekend numbers doubled from 2020
Various destinations across the country reached pre-pandemic level crowds
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9964177/Labor-Day-weekend-sees-7m-Americans-skies-double-number-flew-2020.html
College football crowds are back to the max?
So great to have full crowds this year back in college football.
The media doesn?t want to celebrate how awesome it is to have packed stadiums again?
[url]https://gutsmack.com/2021/09/college-football-crowds-are-back-to-the-max/[/url]
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
morekaos said:
Oh... so your globally representative sample size and your CDC interviews proves your self-fulfilling prophecy? You also bragged about not wearing masks and not observing social distancing, so vax'ed or not, of course your chances are higher of getting it.
You just proved my point, it's not just one thing, it takes a combination of things. You didn't even read my post about the vax rate in Israel.
And stop posting false facts, not "all states with stricter covid rules and mask mandates" are "rising fastest now". That's just what you want to believe so that you can be selfish and do whatever you want regardless of how it affects others.
We have no idea what "the long run" is going to be. Can you taste? Can you smell? How is your respiratory system going to hold up to simple things like the flu now that you've been compromised by Covid?
But it's okay, everything is roses in the morekaos universe... the CDC confirmed it.
morekaos
Well-known member
Oregon doing great huh?...Hawaii is the model, yes?...
Oregon?s Covid-19 Wave Is at Its Worst Despite High Vaccination Rate
Gaps in vaccination between urban and rural communities have led to overwhelming number of hospitalizations in the state
https://www.wsj.com/articles/oregons-covid-19-wave-is-at-its-worst-despite-high-vaccination-rate-11630674004
COVID-19 surge pummels Hawaii and its native population
Hawaii was once seen as a beacon of safety during the pandemic because of stringent travel and quarantine restrictions and overall vaccine acceptance that made it one of the most inoculated states in the country. But the highly contagious delta variant exploited weaknesses as residents let down their guard and attended family gatherings after months of restrictions and vaccine hesitancy lingered in some Hawaiian communities.
https://apnews.com/article/lifestyle-health-coronavirus-pandemic-hawaii-097137d852609f37e4aada899da5938f
The real world is a risky place...always has been. I recognize that. You should too.
Oregon?s Covid-19 Wave Is at Its Worst Despite High Vaccination Rate
Gaps in vaccination between urban and rural communities have led to overwhelming number of hospitalizations in the state
https://www.wsj.com/articles/oregons-covid-19-wave-is-at-its-worst-despite-high-vaccination-rate-11630674004
COVID-19 surge pummels Hawaii and its native population
Hawaii was once seen as a beacon of safety during the pandemic because of stringent travel and quarantine restrictions and overall vaccine acceptance that made it one of the most inoculated states in the country. But the highly contagious delta variant exploited weaknesses as residents let down their guard and attended family gatherings after months of restrictions and vaccine hesitancy lingered in some Hawaiian communities.
https://apnews.com/article/lifestyle-health-coronavirus-pandemic-hawaii-097137d852609f37e4aada899da5938f
The real world is a risky place...always has been. I recognize that. You should too.
nosuchreality
Well-known member
Of course if you read your own links, you would see the problem isn?t the virus or the inherent risk of the world, it is the unvaccinated that is responsible for the surge.
Seat belts.
Air bags.
Not driving drunk.
Getting a vaccine.
Simple safety precautions being ignored and causing harm.
Seat belts.
Air bags.
Not driving drunk.
Getting a vaccine.
Simple safety precautions being ignored and causing harm.
morekaos said:
morekaos
Well-known member
Of course i read them. Statistics are a slippery snake...
COVID-19 now a ?pandemic of the unvaccinated?? Not so fast
?A pandemic of the unvaccinated.?
That?s the misguided and dangerous statement that took hold last week nationwide as President Joe Biden and CDC Director Rochelle Walensky used it to describe the latest phase of the pandemic, with Biden going so far as to say, ?Look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated.?
Suddenly, headlines and cable TV news chyrons all screamed the pithy sound bite.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/covid-19-now-a-pandemic-of-the-unvaccinated-not-so-fast/
Either missed or ignored by the ?fact-checkers? is that this 95 percent number is not based on what is happening now or in the past few months, but includes data going back to January and ending months ago, a biased data set. The Kaiser Family Foundation published a chart, listing each state, reporting vaccination and hospitalization data beginning anywhere from mid-December or mid-January through anywhere from May through July. These are not ?current? real-time numbers.
First vaccinations began in mid- to late-December, and those were few. I, as one of the few, receiving my first dose before Christmas. The CDC definition of fully vaccinated includes those at least two weeks beyond their recommended one or two doses, depending on which vaccine.
By this definition, less than 1 percent of individuals would be ?fully vaccinated? by the end of January when states began tracking breakthrough infections. But the clock was already ticking and the only people hospitalized had to be unvaccinated, beginning to skew the data.
Why is this important? No one was fully vaccinated when reporting began and every hospitalization in January would be classified as ?unvaccinated.?
Then coincidently, or not, the CDC stopped counting breakthrough cases among the vaccinated in mid-May, a time when only a third of Americans were fully vaccinated.
The 95 percent metric is falsely high because when the data were collected, few were vaccinated and, by necessity, the majority of those hospitalized were unvaccinated. Then breakthrough cases were no longer counted, yet states continued to collect data for another month or two. If breakthrough cases were being ignored, then only unvaccinated cases were counted, falsely creating that 95 percent figure.
COVID-19 now a ?pandemic of the unvaccinated?? Not so fast
?A pandemic of the unvaccinated.?
That?s the misguided and dangerous statement that took hold last week nationwide as President Joe Biden and CDC Director Rochelle Walensky used it to describe the latest phase of the pandemic, with Biden going so far as to say, ?Look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated.?
Suddenly, headlines and cable TV news chyrons all screamed the pithy sound bite.
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/covid-19-now-a-pandemic-of-the-unvaccinated-not-so-fast/
Either missed or ignored by the ?fact-checkers? is that this 95 percent number is not based on what is happening now or in the past few months, but includes data going back to January and ending months ago, a biased data set. The Kaiser Family Foundation published a chart, listing each state, reporting vaccination and hospitalization data beginning anywhere from mid-December or mid-January through anywhere from May through July. These are not ?current? real-time numbers.
First vaccinations began in mid- to late-December, and those were few. I, as one of the few, receiving my first dose before Christmas. The CDC definition of fully vaccinated includes those at least two weeks beyond their recommended one or two doses, depending on which vaccine.
By this definition, less than 1 percent of individuals would be ?fully vaccinated? by the end of January when states began tracking breakthrough infections. But the clock was already ticking and the only people hospitalized had to be unvaccinated, beginning to skew the data.
Why is this important? No one was fully vaccinated when reporting began and every hospitalization in January would be classified as ?unvaccinated.?
Then coincidently, or not, the CDC stopped counting breakthrough cases among the vaccinated in mid-May, a time when only a third of Americans were fully vaccinated.
The 95 percent metric is falsely high because when the data were collected, few were vaccinated and, by necessity, the majority of those hospitalized were unvaccinated. Then breakthrough cases were no longer counted, yet states continued to collect data for another month or two. If breakthrough cases were being ignored, then only unvaccinated cases were counted, falsely creating that 95 percent figure.
morekaos
Well-known member
...so if vaccines are so helpful why is this stat showing up now. A year ago few were vaccinated..now (it can be argued) 60% or so are vaccinated and yet....
New infections are up 316% from last Labor Day; first-responders not rushing to get vaccine: Live COVID-19 updates
Daily coronavirus infections are more than four times what the U.S. was seeing on Labor Day last year, or a 316% increase, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/09/06/doctors-face-life-death-decisions-icu-beds-covid-news/5744189001/
New infections are up 316% from last Labor Day; first-responders not rushing to get vaccine: Live COVID-19 updates
Daily coronavirus infections are more than four times what the U.S. was seeing on Labor Day last year, or a 316% increase, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2021/09/06/doctors-face-life-death-decisions-icu-beds-covid-news/5744189001/
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
You?re shooting yourself in the foot.
So are you now saying that restrictions work?
So are you now saying that restrictions work?
nosuchreality
Well-known member
morekaos said:
The stats are crystal clear. Masks work. The vaccine works.
No masks, no distancing and no vaccine is a problem.
Crystal
Clear
Stats.
morekaos
Well-known member
opinions vary...
Conclusion Regarding That Masks Do Not Work
No RCT study with verified outcome shows a benefit for HCW or community members in households to wearing a mask or respirator. There is no such study. There are no exceptions.
Likewise, no study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public (more on this below).
Furthermore, if there were any benefit to wearing a mask, because of the blocking power against droplets and aerosol particles, then there should be more benefit from wearing a respirator (N95) compared to a surgical mask, yet several large meta-analyses, and all the RCT, prove that there is no such relative benefit.
Here are key anchor points to the extensive scientific literature that establishes that wearing surgical masks and respirators (e.g., ?N95?) does not reduce the risk of contracting a verified illness:
Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) ?Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial,? American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417 ? 419.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19216002
N95-masked health-care workers (HCW) were significantly more likely to experience headaches. Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.
Cowling, B. et al. (2010) ?Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic review,? Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456.https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...transmission-of-influenza-virus-a-systematic-review/64D368496EBDE0AFCC6639CCC9D8BC05
None of the studies reviewed showed a benefit from wearing a mask, in either HCW or community members in households (H). See summary Tables 1 and 2 therein.
bin-Reza et al. (2012) ?The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence,? Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257?267.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00307.x
?There were 17 eligible studies. ? None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.?
Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) ?Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis,? CMAJ Mar 2016https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567
?We identified six clinical studies ? . In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism.?
Offeddu, V. et al. (2017) ?Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,? Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 65, Issue 11, 1 December 2017, Pages 1934?1942,https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747
?Self-reported assessment of clinical outcomes was prone to bias. Evidence of a protective effect of masks or respirators against verified respiratory infection (VRI) was not statistically significant?; as per Fig. 2c therein:
Radonovich, L.J. et al. (2019) ?N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial,? JAMA. 2019; 322(9): 824?833.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214
?Among 2862 randomized participants, 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCW-seasons. ... Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.?
Long, Y. et al. (2020) ?Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis,? J Evid Based Med. 2020; 1- 9.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jebm.12381
?A total of six RCTs involving 9,171 participants were included. There were no statistically significant differences in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza, laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, and influenza-like illness using N95 respirators and surgical masks. Meta-analysis indicated a protective effect of N95 respirators against laboratory-confirmed bacterial colonization (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.78). The use of N95 respirators compared with surgical masks is not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza.?
Conclusion Regarding That Masks Do Not Work
No RCT study with verified outcome shows a benefit for HCW or community members in households to wearing a mask or respirator. There is no such study. There are no exceptions.
Likewise, no study exists that shows a benefit from a broad policy to wear masks in public (more on this below).
Furthermore, if there were any benefit to wearing a mask, because of the blocking power against droplets and aerosol particles, then there should be more benefit from wearing a respirator (N95) compared to a surgical mask, yet several large meta-analyses, and all the RCT, prove that there is no such relative benefit.
Here are key anchor points to the extensive scientific literature that establishes that wearing surgical masks and respirators (e.g., ?N95?) does not reduce the risk of contracting a verified illness:
Jacobs, J. L. et al. (2009) ?Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: A randomized controlled trial,? American Journal of Infection Control, Volume 37, Issue 5, 417 ? 419.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19216002
N95-masked health-care workers (HCW) were significantly more likely to experience headaches. Face mask use in HCW was not demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds.
Cowling, B. et al. (2010) ?Face masks to prevent transmission of influenza virus: A systematic review,? Epidemiology and Infection, 138(4), 449-456.https://www.cambridge.org/core/jour...transmission-of-influenza-virus-a-systematic-review/64D368496EBDE0AFCC6639CCC9D8BC05
None of the studies reviewed showed a benefit from wearing a mask, in either HCW or community members in households (H). See summary Tables 1 and 2 therein.
bin-Reza et al. (2012) ?The use of masks and respirators to prevent transmission of influenza: a systematic review of the scientific evidence,? Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses 6(4), 257?267.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/j.1750-2659.2011.00307.x
?There were 17 eligible studies. ? None of the studies established a conclusive relationship between mask/respirator use and protection against influenza infection.?
Smith, J.D. et al. (2016) ?Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis,? CMAJ Mar 2016https://www.cmaj.ca/content/188/8/567
?We identified six clinical studies ? . In the meta-analysis of the clinical studies, we found no significant difference between N95 respirators and surgical masks in associated risk of (a) laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, (b) influenza-like illness, or (c) reported work-place absenteeism.?
Offeddu, V. et al. (2017) ?Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis,? Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 65, Issue 11, 1 December 2017, Pages 1934?1942,https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/65/11/1934/4068747
?Self-reported assessment of clinical outcomes was prone to bias. Evidence of a protective effect of masks or respirators against verified respiratory infection (VRI) was not statistically significant?; as per Fig. 2c therein:
Radonovich, L.J. et al. (2019) ?N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial,? JAMA. 2019; 322(9): 824?833.https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2749214
?Among 2862 randomized participants, 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCW-seasons. ... Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza.?
Long, Y. et al. (2020) ?Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks against influenza: A systematic review and meta-analysis,? J Evid Based Med. 2020; 1- 9.https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jebm.12381
?A total of six RCTs involving 9,171 participants were included. There were no statistically significant differences in preventing laboratory-confirmed influenza, laboratory-confirmed respiratory viral infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory infection, and influenza-like illness using N95 respirators and surgical masks. Meta-analysis indicated a protective effect of N95 respirators against laboratory-confirmed bacterial colonization (RR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.43-0.78). The use of N95 respirators compared with surgical masks is not associated with a lower risk of laboratory-confirmed influenza.?
morekaos
Well-known member
Not quite "settled science".
Masking: A Careful Review of the Evidence
The question on whether to wear a face mask or not during the Covid-19 pandemic remains emotional and contentious. Why? This question about the utility of face coverings (which has taken on a talisman-like life) is now overwrought with steep politicization regardless of political affiliation (e.g. republican or liberal/democrat).
Importantly, the evidence just is and was not there to support mask use for asymptomatic people to stop viral spread during a pandemic. While the evidence may seem conflicted, the evidence (including the peer-reviewed evidence) actually does not support its use and leans heavily toward masks having no significant impact in stopping spread of the Covid virus.
In fact, it is not unreasonable at this time to conclude that surgical and cloth masks, used as they currently are, have absolutely no impact on controlling the transmission of Covid-19 virus, and current evidence implies that face masks can be actually harmful. All this to say and as so comprehensively documented by Dr. Roger W. Koops in a recent American Institute of Economic Research (AIER) publication, there is no clear scientific evidence that masks (surgical or cloth) work to mitigate risk to the wearer or to those coming into contact with the wearer, as they are currently worn in everyday life and specifically as we refer to Covid-19.
https://www.aier.org/article/masking-a-careful-review-of-the-evidence/
https://youtu.be/oeglesB0qDk
Masking: A Careful Review of the Evidence
The question on whether to wear a face mask or not during the Covid-19 pandemic remains emotional and contentious. Why? This question about the utility of face coverings (which has taken on a talisman-like life) is now overwrought with steep politicization regardless of political affiliation (e.g. republican or liberal/democrat).
Importantly, the evidence just is and was not there to support mask use for asymptomatic people to stop viral spread during a pandemic. While the evidence may seem conflicted, the evidence (including the peer-reviewed evidence) actually does not support its use and leans heavily toward masks having no significant impact in stopping spread of the Covid virus.
In fact, it is not unreasonable at this time to conclude that surgical and cloth masks, used as they currently are, have absolutely no impact on controlling the transmission of Covid-19 virus, and current evidence implies that face masks can be actually harmful. All this to say and as so comprehensively documented by Dr. Roger W. Koops in a recent American Institute of Economic Research (AIER) publication, there is no clear scientific evidence that masks (surgical or cloth) work to mitigate risk to the wearer or to those coming into contact with the wearer, as they are currently worn in everyday life and specifically as we refer to Covid-19.
https://www.aier.org/article/masking-a-careful-review-of-the-evidence/
https://youtu.be/oeglesB0qDk
morekaos
Well-known member
zubs said:
?or if he lies about funding the very thing he is hired to fight?.
Fauci LIED to Congress by insisting US never funded gain-of-function research at Wuhan lab after newly unearthed grant proposal reveals how scientists studied bat coronavirus with American money
In May, Fauci said the US never funded any gain-of-function research in Wuhan
Gain-of-function research is when scientists modify an organism to change its functions and abilities
When studying viruses, it can mean making it deliberately more infectious to study how things and people would or wouldn't survive it
Some scientists believe that is what the Wuhan scientists did with COVID-19
In 2014, EcoHealth Alliance - a US health organization - was given a $3.3million grant by the National Institute of Health to study bat coronaviruses
Its idea was to try to pre-empt the next SARS or MERS viruses
EcoHealth ended up giving $600,000 to the Wuhan Institute of Virology
That is the lab that has been widely blamed for standing the pandemic
The theory that COVID could have leaked from a lab was initially dismissed and mocked by Democrats as Trump-backed lunacy
Months later, the World Health Organization released a report saying it was possible
[url]https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9966873/Rand-Paul-says-Fauci-LIED-Congress-insisting-never-funded-gain-function-research.html[/url]