covid foia lawsuit

https://insights.som.yale.edu/insigh...than-democrats
New research from Yale SOM points to another factor that puts people at greater risk of dying from COVID-19: party affiliation. The study finds that excess deaths during the pandemic were 76% higher among Republicans than Democrats in two states, Ohio and Florida. What’s more, the partisan gap in death rates increased significantly after vaccines were introduced.

There are none so blind as those who will not see. There's exactly zero evidence for a natural zoonotic origin for Covid yet nudniks here call others conspiracy theorists. It's ironic really as it's usually the same idiots screaming about Russia, Russia, Russia! Originally Posted by Ducbutter

Fauci is on Meet The Press right now debunking this zero evidence nonsense about natural immunity and the probability it being a natural occurrenceand the studiessupportingthat line of thinking.

Of course a man of DucButter stature is who we should listen to!

Has anyone taken a look at the deaths of Republicans who listen to the DucButter/Waco types vs Democrats who were vaccinated and listened to actual experts?

More vaccinated deaths from covid than non vaccinated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb2YMvfvm_M

Fauci is refuting nothing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FckD6qL76uA

I can only lead you to water, I can't keep you from shitting your pants

I'm off to look for the 2nd JFK assassin!

Fauci is on Meet The Press right now debunking this zero evidence nonsense about natural immunity and the probability it being a natural occurrenceand the studiessupportingthat line of thinking.

Of course a man of DucButter stature is who we should listen to!

Has anyone taken a look at the deaths of Republicans who listen to the DucButter/Waco types vs Democrats who were vaccinated and listened to actual experts? Originally Posted by WTF

your ability to drink the approved narrative is impressive! it's known now that Fauci did indeed suppress any attempt to find out if the origins of Covid was the Wuhan Institute of Virology.


speaking of that "Meet the Press" appearance ..


https://www.yahoo.com/news/fauci-cov...170424686.html


Olivia Olander
Sun, November 27, 2022 at 11:04 AM


Anthony Fauci, the retiring top official in the United States response to the Covid-19 pandemic, said Sunday he has "a completely open mind" about the origins of the respiratory virus.


"I have a completely open mind about that, despite people saying that I don't," Fauci said, when asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" about the theory that the virus may have leaked from a lab in China in 2019.


only now does he claim to have an open mind after two plus years of suppressing any reports that the virus came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.


Fauci acknowledged that a group of international, respected virologists has written that strong evidence shows the virus jumped from animals to humans, but said it "hasn't been definitively proven."


“Even when there’s nothing to hide, they act in a suspicious, non-transparent way," Fauci said of the Chinese government.


and yet Fauci was on record early that the Chinese had been "open and transparent" with their information about Covid. this of course ignores the fact that China did not inform anyone about the outbreak in Wuhan for at least a month if not more. there is evidence the Chinese knew as early as October 2019 and intentionally suppressed it from the World.


A report this fall from Vanity Fair and ProPublica, which said the Wuhan Institute of Virology dealt with an unspecified emergency at the time Covid-19 began, brought back to the forefront a debate about whether the virus might have come from a lab.


totally unrelated! a virology lab in Wuhan doing research into corona virus gain of function has a "unspecified emergency" and next thing you know Wuhan is the center of a outbreak! did i mention that very lab has a poor safety record? i did.


Speaking on CBS' "Face the Nation" in a separate interview Sunday, Fauci said he'd like to know "all of the details of what went on with the original people who were infected."


On "Meet the Press," he also criticized that government's strict ongoing response to Covid-19, which has sparked recent protests among people in China.


"Their approach has been very, very severe and rather draconian in the kinds of shutdowns without a seeming purpose," Fauci said to host Chuck Todd.


Ashish Jha, coordinator of the White House's Covid-19 response, added Sunday on ABC's "This Week" that "lockdown and zero Covid is going to very difficult to sustain."


Chinese government officials, under President Xi Jinping, have adopted a "zero Covid" policy against the disease, resulting in widespread lockdowns and travel restrictions in recent days.


Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union" he didn't yet know whether the protests would amount to a real threat against Xi's leadership.


“These dictators unfortunately have pretty sophisticated means of staying in power," Murphy said.

The conspiracy claim is the last refuge of dolts and always a reflection of real ignorance. To use the label in connection with Campbell is simply proof that the user of such invective didn't listen to Campbell therefore relieving us of the need to consider their worthless opinions.

your ability to drink the approved narrative is impressive! it's known now that Fauci did indeed suppress any attempt to find out if the origins of Covid was the Wuhan Institute of Virology.


speaking of that "Meet the Press" appearance ..


https://www.yahoo.com/news/fauci-cov...170424686.html


Olivia Olander
Sun, November 27, 2022 at 11:04 AM


Anthony Fauci, the retiring top official in the United States response to the Covid-19 pandemic, said Sunday he has "a completely open mind" about the origins of the respiratory virus.


"I have a completely open mind about that, despite people saying that I don't," Fauci said, when asked on NBC's "Meet the Press" about the theory that the virus may have leaked from a lab in China in 2019.


only now does he claim to have an open mind after two plus years of suppressing any reports that the virus came from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.


Fauci acknowledged that a group of international, respected virologists has written that strong evidence shows the virus jumped from animals to humans, but said it "hasn't been definitively proven."


“Even when there’s nothing to hide, they act in a suspicious, non-transparent way," Fauci said of the Chinese government.


and yet Fauci was on record early that the Chinese had been "open and transparent" with their information about Covid. this of course ignores the fact that China did not inform anyone about the outbreak in Wuhan for at least a month if not more. there is evidence the Chinese knew as early as October 2019 and intentionally suppressed it from the World.


A report this fall from Vanity Fair and ProPublica, which said the Wuhan Institute of Virology dealt with an unspecified emergency at the time Covid-19 began, brought back to the forefront a debate about whether the virus might have come from a lab.


totally unrelated! a virology lab in Wuhan doing research into corona virus gain of function has a "unspecified emergency" and next thing you know Wuhan is the center of a outbreak! did i mention that very lab has a poor safety record? i did.


Speaking on CBS' "Face the Nation" in a separate interview Sunday, Fauci said he'd like to know "all of the details of what went on with the original people who were infected."


On "Meet the Press," he also criticized that government's strict ongoing response to Covid-19, which has sparked recent protests among people in China.


"Their approach has been very, very severe and rather draconian in the kinds of shutdowns without a seeming purpose," Fauci said to host Chuck Todd.


Ashish Jha, coordinator of the White House's Covid-19 response, added Sunday on ABC's "This Week" that "lockdown and zero Covid is going to very difficult to sustain."


Chinese government officials, under President Xi Jinping, have adopted a "zero Covid" policy against the disease, resulting in widespread lockdowns and travel restrictions in recent days.


Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union" he didn't yet know whether the protests would amount to a real threat against Xi's leadership.


“These dictators unfortunately have pretty sophisticated means of staying in power," Murphy said. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

I watched the whole interview....my condolences on your inability to comprehend wtf was said...

The conspiracy claim is the last refuge of dolts and always a reflection of real ignorance. To use the label in connection with Campbell is simply proof that the user of such invective didn't listen to Campbell therefore relieving us of the need to consider their worthless opinions. Originally Posted by Ducbutter

Conspiracy Theorists usually have trouble distinguishing between possibility and probability.

For instance there is a possibility that you understood what was just said but the probability is next to zippity do dau...

I like to brush up on multiple expert opinions...in this regard Fauci seems more than honest in his accessments of orgin.

Conspiracy Theorists usually have trouble distinguishing between possibility and probability.

For instance there is a possibility that you understood what was just said but the probability is next to zippity do dau...

I like to brush up on multiple expert opinions...in this regard Fauci seems more than honest in his accessments of orgin. Originally Posted by WTF

You know what the great part is? All the things you've accused me of are straw men. I'm vaxed and boosted, I've never argued against vaccines, only mandated vaccines and I've never debated the issue of myocarditis risks or any other vaccine related accident risks. I have argued against incessant boosters and data backs me up. You're so tribal that you projected all that shit based on my belief in a lab leak.
As for evidence of zoonotic origin, obtaining related viral sequences from animal sources would be the most definitive way of revealing viral origin. Thus far no fully formed or evolutionary intermediates have been discovered. So no imtermediary between Sars Covid2 and it's most closely related natural virus.Fauci admits it.
Once again, to use the term conspiracy theorist about John Campbell is just complete ignorance. The second video of his I posted is him talking about how he believed the idea of a natural origin and now regrets pushing those ideas based on new evidence revealed by Foia requests.
So, I don't believe a word about you brushing up on opinions from multiple sources. You don't seem to have the intellectual curiousity for that.
Just for kicks, take a look at the comments on the Yahoo news story posted by TWK. I think that's what they call a ratio. I'm sure you'll claim they're all right wing extremists. With no evidence.

Conspiracy Theorists usually have trouble distinguishing between possibility and probability.

For instance there is a possibility that you understood what was just said but the probability is next to zippity do dau...

I like to brush up on multiple expert opinions...in this regard Fauci seems more than honest in his accessments of orgin. Originally Posted by WTF

if you say so


https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2015.18787


Download PDF


Published: 12 November 2015

Engineered bat virus stirs debate over risky research

• Declan Butler

Nature (2015)Cite this article

• 123k Accesses
• 3 Citations
• 10062 Altmetric
• Metrics details

Lab-made coronavirus related to SARS can infect human cells.


An experiment that created a hybrid version of a bat coronavirus — one related to the virus that causes SARS (severe acute respiratory syndrome) — has triggered renewed debate over whether engineering lab variants of viruses with possible pandemic potential is worth the risks.


In an article published in Nature Medicine1 on 9 November, scientists investigated a virus called SHC014, which is found in horseshoe bats in China. The researchers created a chimaeric virus, made up of a surface protein of SHC014 and the backbone of a SARS virus that had been adapted to grow in mice and to mimic human disease. The chimaera infected human airway cells — proving that the surface protein of SHC014 has the necessary structure to bind to a key receptor on the cells and to infect them. It also caused disease in mice, but did not kill them.


Although almost all coronaviruses isolated from bats have not been able to bind to the key human receptor, SHC014 is not the first that can do so. In 2013, researchers reported this ability for the first time in a different coronavirus isolated from the same bat population2.


The findings reinforce suspicions that bat coronaviruses capable of directly infecting humans (rather than first needing to evolve in an intermediate animal host) may be more common than previously thought, the researchers say.


But other virologists question whether the information gleaned from the experiment justifies the potential risk. Although the extent of any risk is difficult to assess, Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, points out that the researchers have created a novel virus that “grows remarkably well” in human cells. “If the virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,” he says.


Creation of a chimaera


The argument is essentially a rerun of the debate over whether to allow lab research that increases the virulence, ease of spread or host range of dangerous pathogens — what is known as ‘gain-of-function’ research. In October 2014, the US government imposed a moratorium on federal funding of such research on the viruses that cause SARS, influenza and MERS (Middle East respiratory syndrome, a deadly disease caused by a virus that sporadically jumps from camels to people).


The latest study was already under way before the US moratorium began, and the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) allowed it to proceed while it was under review by the agency, says Ralph Baric, an infectious-disease researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a co-author of the study. The NIH eventually concluded that the work was not so risky as to fall under the moratorium, he says.


But Wain-Hobson disapproves of the study because, he says, it provides little benefit, and reveals little about the risk that the wild SHC014 virus in bats poses to humans.


Other experiments in the study show that the virus in wild bats would need to evolve to pose any threat to humans — a change that may never happen, although it cannot be ruled out. Baric and his team reconstructed the wild virus from its genome sequence and found that it grew poorly in human cell cultures and caused no significant disease in mice.


“The only impact of this work is the creation, in a lab, of a new, non-natural risk,” agrees Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist and biodefence expert at Rutgers University in Piscataway, New Jersey. Both Ebright and Wain-Hobson are long-standing critics of gain-of-function research.


In their paper, the study authors also concede that funders may think twice about allowing such experiments in the future. "Scientific review panels may deem similar studies building chimeric viruses based on circulating strains too risky to pursue," they write, adding that discussion is needed as to "whether these types of chimeric virus studies warrant further investigation versus the inherent risks involved”.


Useful research


But Baric and others say the research did have benefits. The study findings “move this virus from a candidate emerging pathogen to a clear and present danger”, says Peter Daszak, who co-authored the 2013 paper. Daszak is president of the EcoHealth Alliance, an international network of scientists, headquartered in New York City, that samples viruses from animals and people in emerging-diseases hotspots across the globe.


Studies testing hybrid viruses in human cell culture and animal models are limited in what they can say about the threat posed by a wild virus, Daszak agrees. But he argues that they can help indicate which pathogens should be prioritized for further research attention.




Without the experiments, says Baric, the SHC014 virus would still be seen as not a threat. Previously, scientists had believed, on the basis of molecular modelling and other studies, that it should not be able to infect human cells. The latest work shows that the virus has already overcome critical barriers, such as being able to latch onto human receptors and efficiently infect human airway cells, he says. “I don't think you can ignore that.” He plans to do further studies with the virus in non-human primates, which may yield data more relevant to humans.


References

1. Menachery, V. D. et al. Nature Med. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nm.3985 (2015).
2. Ge, X.-Y. et al. Nature 503, 535–538 (2013).

More vaccinated deaths from covid than non vaccinated.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jb2YMvfvm_M Originally Posted by Ducbutter

I did not have time to listen to the whole video but this seems to be an example of statistics being misleading.

Yes, the number of people dying from Covid are approximately equal these days between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. But when you take into account that 80% of the people in this country are vaccinated against Covid the actual death rate among unvaccinaated people is much higher than among vaccinated people.

"Taken at face value, these numbers may appear to indicate that vaccination does not make that much of a difference. But this perception is an example of a phenomenon known as the base rate fallacy. One also has to consider the denominator of the fraction—that is, the sizes of the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. With shots widely available to almost all age groups, the majority of the U.S. population has been vaccinated. So even if only a small fraction of vaccinated people who get COVID die from it, the more people who are vaccinated, the more likely they are to make up a portion of the dead."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...inated-people/

I did not have time to listen to the whole video but this seems to be an example of statistics being misleading.

Yes, the number of people dying from Covid are approximately equal these days between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. But when you take into account that 80% of the people in this country are vaccinated against Covid the actual death rate among unvaccinaated people is much higher than among vaccinated people.

"Taken at face value, these numbers may appear to indicate that vaccination does not make that much of a difference. But this perception is an example of a phenomenon known as the base rate fallacy. One also has to consider the denominator of the fraction—that is, the sizes of the vaccinated and unvaccinated populations. With shots widely available to almost all age groups, the majority of the U.S. population has been vaccinated. So even if only a small fraction of vaccinated people who get COVID die from it, the more people who are vaccinated, the more likely they are to make up a portion of the dead."

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...inated-people/ Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Please watch the video and get back to me. The entire point of posting it is to demonstrate that Campbell's approach is one of caution. Even where he has an issue with the data he doesn't claim the CDC are manipulating data, only wishes they would have been more clear.

The Scientific American article does not look at the historical aspect of the rising death rates amongst the vaccinated.
In Sept 2021 the deaths among the vaccinated was 23% and 42% in Feb 2022. It's currently 58%. The question would be how much vaccination rates have changed in that span.
Campbell's only claim is that the risk/benefit analysis is changing. Which it is. Does that sound like a conspiracy to you?