Corona virus, China major city lockdowns, etc.

[Shaggy Hiker]

I took a look at the adenovirus to see how that worked. Its uses DNA rather than mRNA. Here's a good discussion:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41541-021-00356-x

DNA has an issue, in general, since it could end up being incorporated into your DNA. That's what OptionBase1 was concerned about near the beginning of this thread. As the article notes, that almost never happens with adenovirus. That 'almost' should give you pause. After all, with hundreds of millions of doses, a rare event becomes virtually certain. Still, that might not cause harm.

However, DNA doesn't do anything on its own. It gets unzipped and a strand of mRNA is created, which then gets to the ribosome to form the spike protein. In other words, the adenovirus vaccine is essentially an mRNA vaccine precursor. Instead of starting with the mRNA, it starts with the DNA that is translated into the mRNA. It does seem like it has a chance to be more effective, because the DNA might stick around cranking out mRNA for a very long time. Heck, if it got incorporated into your DNA, it could stick around cranking out mRNA for the rest of your life.

Still, the bottom line is that the immunization mechanism is the same: Create spike protein and show it to the immune system. Also, create spike protein by using the cellular ribosomes to translate mRNA into the amino acid sequence that makes up the spike protein.

[jpbro]

I won't judge if you want to go with the masses because you feel safer by doing so.

So I've finally come around and totally dig what you're saying. I really want to go the way you're going. What's the plan now?

[Eduardo-]

Yes I think so. I have a degree that says so. But it really isn't important because your talking about a massive conspiracy, not science.

Yes, it is important. They are reporting "what science says" all the time.

What degree do you have?

Companies selling us product is a conspiracy

They are manipulating people's thinking. That was the point.
And they do it, there are known techniques of propaganda.
If you don't know, then study.
It is not new, of course. But as everything, as any other field, they develop and polish over time.

You believe all that and then claim I'm afraid. Ecologists, gays, feminist, companies selling product don't scare me, BRING THEM ON. I'll fight them all with one hand behind my back. lol

LOL, you don't get the points, you must be more tired than I am.

[Eduardo-]

I'm well aware of that. You voted them out, voted in a technocrat who tried to fix some of the problems that de Kirchner caused, but that created short term pain, so he was voted out and you got de Kirchner again. There's pain coming because of bad actors in the past, who are back in the present, but the can will be kicked down the road yet a little longer.

I didn't vote them, I dislike (didn't want to say "hate", but "dislike" is too soft) them with all my heart.

They are criminals. And they lie all the time.
They do bad things in any aspect, like freeing criminals from jail, punishing policemen for doing their job, helping terrorists that are against our country.

I think that what I hate more is that they lie in your face, more than the billions of dollars that they stole from the state.

I could write a lot, tell the full story, but that would be too long.

[Eduardo-]

I took a look at the adenovirus to see how that worked. Its uses DNA rather than mRNA. Here's a good discussion:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41541-021-00356-x

DNA has an issue, in general, since it could end up being incorporated into your DNA. That's what OptionBase1 was concerned about near the beginning of this thread. As the article notes, that almost never happens with adenovirus. That 'almost' should give you pause. After all, with hundreds of millions of doses, a rare event becomes virtually certain. Still, that might not cause harm.

However, DNA doesn't do anything on its own. It gets unzipped and a strand of mRNA is created, which then gets to the ribosome to form the spike protein. In other words, the adenovirus vaccine is essentially an mRNA vaccine precursor. Instead of starting with the mRNA, it starts with the DNA that is translated into the mRNA. It does seem like it has a chance to be more effective, because the DNA might stick around cranking out mRNA for a very long time. Heck, if it got incorporated into your DNA, it could stick around cranking out mRNA for the rest of your life.

Still, the bottom line is that the immunization mechanism is the same: Create spike protein and show it to the immune system. Also, create spike protein by using the cellular ribosomes to translate mRNA into the amino acid sequence that makes up the spike protein.

And what is your understanding of the inactive virus vaccines, are they safer?

[Eduardo-]

So I've finally come around and totally dig what you're saying. I really want to go the way you're going. What's the plan now?

My plan? Their plan?

I really want to go the way you're going

What do you mean? Are you being serious or what?

[dilettante]

UK mask wearing... seems to be at low levels and even then often incorrectly.

[Eduardo-]

[Schmidt]

So I've finally come around and totally dig what you're saying. I really want to go the way you're going. What's the plan now?

Recognizing lies, as they were emitted by your government/public media, would be a good start...

Followed by speaking out, that they were indeed lies -
when you notice, that your colleagues or friends are still believing in them.

You will of course risk, being put into these "little boxes" then... (marked as a nut-case).
(so the "ahh, you're one of those conspiracists"-thing will of course happen to you).

Well, speak out against that idiotic practice (which seems to be the norm these days) as well...

In short, stop taking the "blue pill" - recognize and accept the harsh reality and learn to live with it -
consequences be damned.

Not willing to do that?... (putting your head in the sand)?
- because you don't want to risk loosing your job?
- because you don't want to be considered a nutcase by your friends?

Your choice - but in that case, at least don't try to "explain reality" to those,
who made a different decision (one, much harder to live with, in the corrupted systems western democracies became) .

Democracy at "state-level" is dead for a few decades already -
(the real important decisions at this level, are made by corporations and lobbies, which act more and more global).

Transparency at that level (how certain decisions came to be), is not given anymore.
(for example: only 3 or 4 countries worldwide, were releasing their Pfizer-contracts, Germany of course not among them)

Democracy still works (somewhat) at the communal level
(where it is a bit easier, to have "some transparency", fighting corruption) -
though for how much longer, remains the question.

Olaf

[wes4dbt]

They are manipulating people's thinking. That was the point.
And they do it, there are known techniques of propaganda.
If you don't know, then study.
It is not new, of course. But as everything, as any other field, they develop and polish over time.

Well, Duh. That's a little harsh but it's no secret or conspiracy. It's done in plain sight. They do it because it works. It works because most people are just to damn busy with work, family and the job of day to day living. I'm retired now so I got time to talk about things like this. Before I often wondered how people found the time to protest. I'm glad there are people that do. But as SH said once (I think it was SH) just because your protesting doesn't mean your right.

If your point is companies, politicians, billionaires .... lie and try to manipulate us, then I agree. But they are not all working as one organism in a joint conspiracy.

[Schmidt]

But they are not all working as one organism in a joint conspiracy.

Most who "dare criticise the system" are quite aware, that there's no "big conspiracy"
(on top of the "current corruption" - which does enough harm already, entirely on its own).

But still these critics are put into the "conspiracy-box" far too fast - and far too often -
it already became a kind of "officially sanctioned knee-jerk-reflex" these days -
(a convenient and quite broadly accepted dismissal-strategy, that "just works").

This is also a thing, pushed by public media-channels, who encourage this kind of "nut-case"-labelling,
showcasing and cherry-picking "small groups of raving lunatics" as examples for "wrong thinking",
to be able to then "lump in" everyone else who dares to speak an educated opinion, which strays too much
from the "streamlined and redacted, current official one".

Olaf

[FunkyDexter]

So overnight we've strayed into the following:-
The Great Reset
The Gay Agenda
The Feminist Agenda
The Ecologist Agenda
Bill Gates, George Soros, Peter Daszak, Anthony Fauci and Klaus Schwab conspiring in hotel rooms
Blue Pills and Red Pills

... did Q send you guys? I mean, where you came one you came all so it sure fits the pattern.

Most who "dare criticise the system" are quite aware, that there's no "big conspiracy"

Are you actually reading this thread? If the limit of your position is that corruption is a thing, media has bias and companies try to sell you stuff then you're not going to find anyone here who disagrees with you (though you would still be railing against an argument that is not being made). But that's not the limit of what's being pushed in this thread... by a long shot.

[baka]

I totally agree with Olaf, I couldn't explain it better, since my english is not that good.

the problem seems to be "or you are aware" or "you are not"

if you are not, it seems you are holding to everything you decided to "believe" in the past, no matter the reason why you decided that. even if wrong, you will do everything to hold on your belief, since you think that that "knowledge" you have is your own, and not fabricated, implemented, narrated by someone else.

I think people need to differentiate about "accumulated" knowledge from others to your "guts" feeling.
I criticize everything, its called "critical thinking", and its not just to criticize others, but also myself and my own belief.

that means, that Im also aware and that my own knowledge could be faulty and incorrect. I need to evaluate all the time.
its not easy, since the media is pushing with "data" that are coordinated to make the best impact so that I will "follow" the narrative.

of what I understand, is that I need to do a lot of "back and forth" thinking, and try to puzzle together things and not just focus on one perspective or direction.
an "holistic" perspective, that I need to zoom in and out all the time.

will that make me an expert on the details? no, I have little knowledge of each part, since I focus to put together as much possible to get to that "holistic" vision.

for me, the pandemic is not interesting if I don't put together a lot of other things, such as the economy, the healthcare issue, elderly care, warfare, energy issues, environment etc etc.
its the whole thats interesting, as I see the world as an organic living entity that will try to survive at all costs.

[Schmidt]

Are you actually reading this thread?

I do - and I see far too many postings from people,
who simply parrot "the official lines" from "official media-channels" without questioning them in the least.
(including the parroting of the offical "shoot-them-down-argument",
applying the "nut-case labels" to everyone who's not parroting the "official stance" you choose to believe in).

You personally still do that kind of parroting in your replies to "inconvenient guys, who have a different opinion".

Olaf

[Niya]

In short, stop taking the "blue pill" - recognize and accept the harsh reality and learn to live with it -
consequences be damned.

You might like the Manosphere community. Though 90% of their content is about male/female relationships and some of them go too far with their zealous beliefs I'd rather listen to them than mainstream "blue pill" propaganda on certain topics like you get out of media like CNN, CNBC etc. For example things like the wage gap has been proven to be a myth though you'd never know this if you only listen to the garbage on CNN. I've learned to despise mainstream media over the last 15 years or so.

[Eduardo-]

Well, Duh. That's a little harsh but it's no secret or conspiracy. It's done in plain sight. They do it because it works. It works because most people are just to damn busy with work, family and the job of day to day living. I'm retired now so I got time to talk about things like this. Before I often wondered how people found the time to protest. I'm glad there are people that do. But as SH said once (I think it was SH) just because your protesting doesn't mean your right.

If your point is companies, politicians, billionaires .... lie and try to manipulate us, then I agree. But they are not all working as one organism in a joint conspiracy.

OK. I see we are understanding each other.

The part of the conspiracy is the hardest, because we only can see the effects but not the actions.
And I still am trying to figure it. But for me everything points in that direction.

It is like trying to figure black holes, dark matter or neutron star, you only see the effects and you need to figure with a bit of guessing how they must work. You cannot go there, or see directly.

But knowing the laws of physics and watching what effects they produce, 2 + 2 = 4, you can figure things.

What Olaf said, of being labeled as a nut-case, is obviously one of the most effective tactics. Nobody normal wants, even to risk, being labeled as a nut-case.

If there is one thing human fear, more than any virus, is the scorn of other people.

So no surprise they are using it in their social engineering. It is also in the box of control-by-fear.

Of course I'm not talking of this things with everybody, for what? As you said, people are too busy with works and other things, don't have time for this.

Also, in my case I still didn't have much time to talk because I'm coming to this conclusion just lately, and I'm still not enough clear.

About to confront the fear of being labeled as a nut-case for saying something that you know is true, that's not new to me.
If you mention the Bible, or say you believe in Jesus Christ, you immediately risk being labeled as a nut-case.

Do you think that many people like to be said things like: you believe in Santa Claus, or you believe in pink flying elephants, you believe in the Boogeyman or in goblins? But those are the labels that they are afraid to be labeled with.

I'm not talking all the time of these things if I think there will be no purpose, because I don't want to risk being labeled as a nut-case for nothing, as any sane person.
But sometimes, if I think it could serve to someone I do, because I want to put my grain of sand. And about the Bible, it is the will of God to take the gospel (His message) to others.

[baka]

I saw an interview with our epidemiologist (that got almost celebrity star popularity) where he answered different questions from normal people.

so, one or two questions where: "I got sick awhile ago and I test every week to see my count, and I have good amount of antibodies, but they don't give me the "covid-certificate" so that I can visit restaurants, travel etc"

of course he didnt answer. he said: you will get good protection if you take the vaccine.

and he repeated that again with a similar question later.

but later, he explained that its too bothersome to allow covid recovered the certificate because there will need a lot of tests to be sure the person has antibodies.

I mean, do he really believe that himself? you need to be quite stupid to not understand its BS.

[sapator]

In accordance with dday, I couldn't have said it better myself.
I just want to point out that when I was alone here "fighting" with 5-10 people , almost everyone (I'm sure an exception was Shaggy) was linking me to systemic media , Fox,CNN,Reuters the lot and when I used other sites they where telling me that those are fake news sites, so in the end I had to "fight" them with their own system media news.Now they whistle saying that they don't trust systemic media. Whatever.
The whole thing goes like this:
If you have created an opinion and you stubbornize it then there is nothing that will change your mind.
It's like:
Elephants are pink! No they are not they just paint them pink.
But pink elephants don't wash out in the rain.Oh yes they do, they just use special water resistant colors.
But we have washed and scrubbed the skin and the "color" won't come out.No they have used fake industrial skin that is glued to them.
But the glue should have come out with dissolveatron X . No this is a special glue that does not come out with dissolves.
But such a glue is not known.Well they have secretly created one that does the job.
So in the end you admit that elephants are not pink and be done with it.

Edit: Also I see that many countries have the same "issues" we have here, of course here those issues are x10 but, Greece, what can you do.

[Niya]

To be honest, I think that is why long view podcasters are becoming more popular; they let people discuss their ideas, they push back when needed, and let the person try to explain their point of view.

I myself have become a fan of certain podcasts and I specifically avoid any that smells of the mainstream river of thought. I've heard a lot of things on "alternative media" podcasts that I often knew to be true but couldn't speak of because people would think I'm insane. These days I've grown very fond of listening to Andrew Tate speak when he makes guest appearances on various podcasts around YouTube. It feels really good to know that there are still people like him out there that can think for themselves instead of parroting the same brainwashing delusional garbage that's constantly sold to the world by the mainstream media.

[Shaggy Hiker]

And what is your understanding of the inactive virus vaccines, are they safer?

That seems to depend on two questions:

1) Are they really inactive?
2) How are they delivered?

I would guess that both of these questions have been answered pretty well, by now. Bad answers to both of these questions caused a lot of problems in the past, but that past is many decades back, by now. If you want to scare people about vaccines, you can't do much better than the polio vaccine that killed and paralyzed children because it was made incorrectly.

When you have a killed or attenuated virus vaccine, you have to be very careful to get it right. An attenuated virus could end up mutating back to full strength, and a dead vaccine...well, you have to be sure that it's ALL dead. I would hope that such things are well understood and protocols are carefully followed, but are they? The Sinovac vaccine uses the dead virus approach. China has a truly deplorable record of lapses in pretty nearly every safety protocol from food to buildings to the economy. Are they being more careful with the vaccine? I sure hope so.

The Sputnik vaccine uses the attenuated virus strategy. Frankly, I trust Russia more than I trust China, in this regard, but I trust an attenuated virus approach a whole lot less than I trust a dead virus approach. Russia doesn't have the lengthy track record of scandals involving tainted products, though that could easily just be because they never make the news.

[FunkyDexter]

The data so far has shown that SARS-COV-2 is evolving like most other viruses in that it is becoming much more contagious and much less severe. It is also much less likely to be picked up by the vaccine, mRNA or traditional. Yet, if you look at the corporate media's take on this they're still pushing people to get vaccinated. The vaccine was originally sold a year ago as "safe and effective" and you need to get vaccinated to get us to a "new normal". Then delta came out and the corporate media changed the narrative a little bit to safe and mostly effective against contracting it, but if you do have a breakthrough case it'll be less severe. Now with omicron the corporate media's narrative has changed on the vaccine again, now saying that you absolutely need to get the vaccine and the booster because even if you get a breakthrough case you certainly don't want long COVID, also your children need to get the vaccine now so that we can make it safe for school (completely ignoring that it is a statistical anomaly for a child to get seriously ill from COVID).

That's not accurate and disingenuous in a number of ways.

The vaccines were never sold as 100% effective. Percentages of efficacy were being cited from the word go.
The possibility of an escape variant has been acknowledged from the word go and the WHO were campaigning for vaccines to be sent to poorer countries instead of being hoarded in the West for exactly this reason.
Epidemiologists have indeed said that breakthrough cases would be less severe and that has proven to be true.
The risk of long Covid has been recognised from the early stages the pandemic, Omicron hasn't added anything to the rhetoric in this regard
The purpose of vaccinated children isn't about preventing them from becoming seriously ill (Delta increased the chances of serious effects on children but it is still exceptionally low), it's about preventing them from becoming spreaders

applying the "nut-case labels" to everyone who's not parroting the "official stance" you choose to believe in

See rule 3 from the playbook.

You might want to go back and check who introduced the phrase "nut case" into this thread. It wasn't me, it was you, post 3897. You introduced it in response to my pointing out that you'd miss-understood Shaggy's argument, which you had. You also might want to go back and count the number of times I've called you a nut case or called you stupid in this thread, it's zero. But you've self applied it multiple times. This is not you being persecuted, it's your martyr complex at work.

I have asserted that you are wrong if you are advocating some of the positions being expressed in this thread. E.g. that the virus was deliberately released by some shady, unidentified cabal; has something to do with the great reset; or the gay agenda/feminist agenda; or that this is Nazism or Facism; or being driven by George Sauros, Bill Gates and Dr Fauci. If you are advocating those things then yes, I'm saying you're wrong. Further, I'm saying you're a conspiracy theorist. That's not "parrotting the official stance" though, it's dismissing unfounded conspiracy theories that are unsupported by any evidence and which do not stand up to the most casual appliance of Occams razor.

If you're not advocating those things then I'm not saying you're a conspiracy theorist. I may be still be saying that I think your wrong because there's a whole world of grey opinions between "get a vaccine, it protects you and me" and "vaccines let Bill Gate's track you with his Jewish space lasers". I do not know where you stand on that axis because you really haven't said anything beyond bemoaning your self created martyrdom.

[Shaggy Hiker]

So, is Rupert Murdoch behind all this?

Eduardo: The problem with looking for the effects is that you think there's a cause.

Look at the way your cells work. You have DNA, it gets turned into mRNA, that gets translated in the ribosomes into proteins. The proteins are driving a lot of cellular processes. So, the proteins are the result, the mRNA is the means to get to the result, the DNA is the code for creating the mRNA to get to the result, but doesn't there have to be something telling the DNA to create the mRNA?

In fact, there is not. It's just feedback loops, both positive and negative. Some of the proteins end up suppressing the creation of their own mRNA, or other mRNA. Some end up causing more mRNA to be created. mRNA is constantly being degraded within the cell, so if only a small amount is created, it may be that none lives long enough to reach the ribosome, whereas if a slightly higher amount is created, then some protein results, and if a lot more mRNA is created, then a lot of protein results. Some of the mRNA also binds back to the DNA to enhance or attenuate the creation of more mRNA. Some DNA can move around (transposons), some other chemicals can bind to the DNA and suppress the creation of some mRNA.

It's just feedback loops. The code is directing the building, which is altering the code, which is altering the building, and we are the result.

The same is true in society. You are looking at the results and speculating about the nature of the cause, but if you were on the inside, you'd see that the results are the cause. You are a part of the result and therefore you are a part of the cause. That's my objection to the whole conspiracy theory: You assume that there is a puppet master, but YOU are the puppet master, you just don't see it. Just as in the cell, where the DNA controls and is controlled by the proteins it creates and the feedback loops that are the cell, so society is just a bunch of feedback loops. You are a part of society. If you advocate loudly enough for the destruction of society, you will get your wish, but you won't find a puppet master at the center, just more puppets.

[sapator]

To add to the conversation.
I don't know if it is true or false, I saw it so I'm posting it without double checking:
"75 members in the US Congress own stock in Pfizer Moderna and Johnson and Johnson"

George Galloway member of UK parliament.

https://twitter.com/georgegalloway/s...eb3cebacf81%2F

[Eduardo-]

That seems to depend on two questions:

1) Are they really inactive?
2) How are they delivered?

I would guess that both of these questions have been answered pretty well, by now. Bad answers to both of these questions caused a lot of problems in the past, but that past is many decades back, by now. If you want to scare people about vaccines, you can't do much better than the polio vaccine that killed and paralyzed children because it was made incorrectly.

When you have a killed or attenuated virus vaccine, you have to be very careful to get it right. An attenuated virus could end up mutating back to full strength, and a dead vaccine...well, you have to be sure that it's ALL dead. I would hope that such things are well understood and protocols are carefully followed, but are they? The Sinovac vaccine uses the dead virus approach. China has a truly deplorable record of lapses in pretty nearly every safety protocol from food to buildings to the economy. Are they being more careful with the vaccine? I sure hope so.

Well, but then the risk is to be infected with Covid, that the person would have have the disease, and later be cured (hopefully).
I would say that it didn't happen, but... if someone that took the vaccine is diagnosed with Covid after that, nobody would say that the person was infected by the vaccine. So, considering that, I think we can't have data about whether that happened or not.

We had here a case, a famous TV interviewer and host that took one of these vaccines and in a couple of days was diagnosed with Covid and died.
Still, the logic points that he must had been already infected when he took the vaccine, because he died too soon after.
That was a strange case, because people usually last like at least a couple of weeks or more before the end.

The Sputnik vaccine uses the attenuated virus strategy.

Humm, no. It is an adenovirus viral vector vaccine. It is similar to AstraZeneca.
The main differences, talking in general, is that AstraZeneca is based on Ad26 for the two doses and the Sputnik V is based on Ad26 for the first dose and Ad5 for the second. Also, AstraZeneca uses chimpanzee adenovirus whilst Sputnik uses human adenovirus.

Frankly, I trust Russia more than I trust China, in this regard, but I trust an attenuated virus approach a whole lot less than I trust a dead virus approach. Russia doesn't have the lengthy track record of scandals involving tainted products, though that could easily just be because they never make the news.

Russians are quite good in technology. Their politics is that is not trusted.
China... they have improved in technology in later years, their politics are the least trusted.

But they would be risking their reputations worldwide if they send something like this that have a serious problem.
Still, there is always a risk of course, they were made very quickly and are experimental.

[FunkyDexter]

I wouldn't take George Galloway seriously, he was widely discredited when he was a politician and was himself found to be profiteering off oil during the second Iraq war.

Do member of the US congress have stock in Big Pharma? Almost certainly. Pretty sure you'll find some who bought that stock since the pandemic began. But for this to be significant would require politicians worldwide to be in a position to profit from vaccines, for them all to feel that it was worth carrying out mass murder for that profit and for there to be nobody significant who felt that was worth blowing a whistle on.

[sapator]

I wouldn't take George Galloway seriously, he was widely discredited when he was a politician and was himself found to be profiteering off oil during the second Iraq war.

Do member of the US congress have stock in Big Pharma? Almost certainly. Pretty sure you'll find some who bought that stock since the pandemic began. But for this to be significant would require politicians worldwide to be in a position to profit from vaccines, for them all to feel that it was worth carrying out mass murder for that profit and for there to be nobody significant who felt that was worth blowing a whistle on.

As I've said, I have no knowledge of him or if it is true.
But it won't be necessary of mass murdering to profit. You just have an opportunity with covid so what you need to do is continue ordering vaccines from companies and take commissions. If you saw moderna director, he said that omicron would be a 3 shot vaccine, with O just coming out, so they already may, just may, have cut a deal with some governments.
Anyhow it's Friday night so I kinda feel like going out to wherever I'm allowed rather than posting something that is already posted, so...

[PlausiblyDamp]

As I've said, I have no knowledge of him or if it is true.
But it won't be necessary of mass murdering to profit. You just have an opportunity with covid so what you need to do is continue ordering vaccines from companies and take commissions. If you saw moderna director, he said that omicron would be a 3 shot vaccine, with O just coming out, so they already may, just may, have cut a deal with some governments.
Anyhow it's Friday night so I kinda feel like going out to wherever I'm allowed rather than posting something that is already posted, so...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/tv...B-episode.html might give you an idea of what he is like, anything for a bit of media attention.

[Eduardo-]

If someone mentions Bill Gates, everything that he says should be rejected.

It is like the rule that if you mention Hitler, you lost the debate.

Bill Gates is untouchable. Everybody knows that he is a good guy. And here even more, since VB was invented by his company while he was the chief.
Of course he is a good guy, and more now that he is a philanthropist.
Mentioning Bill Gates is the definitive proof that someone is nuts.

I wonder why some people must be untouchable, why you cannot even consider anything wrong from Mahoma... or Bill Gates.

Do you know that if you make a video saying things against Bill Gates (and also some other billionaires) it is taken down from Youtube?
Of course he has a good reputation, nobody is allowed to say anything against him.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Well, but then the risk is to be infected with Covid

Right. What I stated was my criticism of that vaccine creation strategy. If the disease you are trying to protect yourself from with the vaccine is not a concern to you anyways, then you don't even care whether the vaccine is effective. That was the essential strategy used for chicken pox when I was young: You got it, you got over it, no big deal. Since that time, we've learned that it CAN be a big deal, since an early chicken pox infection makes you far more likely to get shingles, or something like that, later on in life. That was also the strategy for using cowpox (minor annoyance) to inoculate against smallpox (disfiguring and/or deadly). The failure of that strategy also led to the issue with one batch of the early polio vaccine.

So, the strategy is an ancient one. It has known risks, and everybody gets to decide for themselves. If it's the only game in town, that makes the decision a bit more straightforward.

Humm, no. It is an adenovirus viral vector vaccine. It is similar to AstraZeneca.

Ah, I read that it was using a 'weakened virus', and assumed that was the attenuation strategy. In fact, you are right that it is the adenovirus. It is ThAT virus that was weakened by removing it's ability to replicate while introducing the genes to create the spike protein.

Russians are quite good in technology. Their politics is that is not trusted.
China... they have improved in technology in later years, their politics are the least trusted.

The Russians are mostly weird in technology. They do some of it really well, but others...just really odd. For example, they did a lot of stuff with nuclear reactors in various places, but were strangely deficient in shielding them. It seemed to be a pattern. They also are cutting edge in some places (space, for a long time), and backwards in other areas. They're marching to their own tune, that's for sure.

China has certainly improved. I don't trust their health care OR their politics, though. I think the politics are predictable, it's just that they will predictably cover up the places they fall short.

But they would be risking their reputations worldwide if they send something like this that have a serious problem.
Still, there is always a risk of course, they were made very quickly and are experimental.

Does China care about their reputation? They certainly get aggressively offended when criticized, but there is no evidence that they will change their behavior as a result of criticism, they just attack the critic.

[Shaggy Hiker]

@Sapator: Is it true that the next significant variant would get the name pi?

If so, then everybody must do everything they can to stop COVID right now.

[wes4dbt]

Most who "dare criticise the system" are quite aware, that there's no "big conspiracy"

Now that's funny. "dare criticise the system" Who doesn't criticize the "system", they would definitely be the minority.

[Eduardo-]

So, is Rupert Murdoch behind all this?

I don't think so.

Eduardo: The problem with looking for the effects is that you think there's a cause.

Usually there is, if not always. That is how things work in nature.
And I don't believe in coincidences by chance. They sometimes happen, but now frequently.

Look at the way your cells work. You have DNA, it gets turned into mRNA, that gets translated in the ribosomes into proteins. The proteins are driving a lot of cellular processes. So, the proteins are the result, the mRNA is the means to get to the result, the DNA is the code for creating the mRNA to get to the result, but doesn't there have to be something telling the DNA to create the mRNA?

In fact, there is not. It's just feedback loops, both positive and negative. Some of the proteins end up suppressing the creation of their own mRNA, or other mRNA. Some end up causing more mRNA to be created. mRNA is constantly being degraded within the cell, so if only a small amount is created, it may be that none lives long enough to reach the ribosome, whereas if a slightly higher amount is created, then some protein results, and if a lot more mRNA is created, then a lot of protein results. Some of the mRNA also binds back to the DNA to enhance or attenuate the creation of more mRNA. Some DNA can move around (transposons), some other chemicals can bind to the DNA and suppress the creation of some mRNA.

It's just feedback loops. The code is directing the building, which is altering the code, which is altering the building, and we are the result.

The same is true in society. You are looking at the results and speculating about the nature of the cause, but if you were on the inside, you'd see that the results are the cause. You are a part of the result and therefore you are a part of the cause. That's my objection to the whole conspiracy theory: You assume that there is a puppet master, but YOU are the puppet master, you just don't see it. Just as in the cell, where the DNA controls and is controlled by the proteins it creates and the feedback loops that are the cell, so society is just a bunch of feedback loops. You are a part of society. If you advocate loudly enough for the destruction of society, you will get your wish, but you won't find a puppet master at the center, just more puppets.

I used to think this way until about one or two months ago.
That it was only the Pharma companies trying to profit from this pandemic, and that the virus escaped from Wuhan lab by accident.

That's a possibility, and I'm still not 100% convinced otherwise... but every time less and less.

So, the idea is that propaganda occurs, that's to obvious to deny and I think most of us already agree on that.

But you think that they are not organized or there is not a global direction, but everyone is doing whatever they do just only for their own advantage and nothing else.
That it is chaotic and not something organized, studied and planned.

Yes, as I said it is a possibility. Let's keep watching and trying to find more clues, more evidence.

But it is very logical to think that there could be someone behind. We have to pay attention, because I'm paying attention and that possibility make more sense every time.

About like two months ago I talked with someone (somebody I respect) that suggested that there was people/group behind this. I said no, that I thought that the Big Pharma saw the opportunity to profit and that's all.
But... I remembered there were some videos about "Plandemic", that I had dismissed as nut-people, I didn't even wanted to see that crap of conspirationist theorists.

After that, I decided to give it a shot. Let's see if they are so nuts or what.
I saw them.
Well, they seemed more serious than what I was expecting. Yes, they might not be right in all the things they say, but at least makes some sense most of they say.
I opened my mind, and started to consider if something like this could be happening.

OK, I don't have a definitive answer, but everything points that it could be.
I still don't know for sure, still trying to figure better what is really happening.

But I think it wasn't the Chinese like I used to think.
I hope more evidence comes in the future, but the point is that we must be open, and see.

That's all, I don't have proofs, and I don't have more clarity so far.

I value your opinions that it is too difficult to do, to organize something like this, etc.

[Eduardo-]

Does China care about their reputation? They certainly get aggressively offended when criticized, but there is no evidence that they will change their behavior as a result of criticism, they just attack the critic.

They don't care if they are criticized about human rights. But about making damage to third countries sending a vaccine that cause harm, I think they would "try" to avoid something like that.
But IDK.

[Shaggy Hiker]

Why is it the media that is responsible for overselling much of anything? Sure, they are the ones that everybody sees, but if they are faithfully reporting what they are told, aren't you just blaming the messenger? I was reading the science articles before the vaccines came out. Those are notoriously optimistic, and generally acknowledge that. After all, LOTS of things work against viruses in vitro, then prove to be ineffective, or have terrible consequences in practice.

For example, we know that telomeres appear to have something to do with aging. Therefore, perhaps if you enhance telomeres you can reverse aging. As it turns out, blocking the reduction of telomeres isn't all that difficult, so perhaps we could stop aging? Except that it turned out that you end up with cancer pretty much every time, so that idea ended up in the trash.

Similarly, there was a lot of enthusiasm about the vaccines. The media reported on that only a little (it was mostly in written press, as far as I could tell, though I don't know whether the TV news said anything one way or the other, for obvious reasons). Then the tests results started coming out about the vaccines. The media reported on that with considerable enthusiasm. But why not? There was considerable enthusiasm, why would they not report on it?

The reason we don't get news like, "I saw a coyote eat a squirrel this morning" is because it doesn't sell. It's the bulk of what happens in the world, though. Our lives are made up of numerous little things like that, and only somewhat impacted by larger events. Only the larger events get reported on, though, because the media has very limited bandwidth (only a handful of segments of only a couple minutes each) and a nearly infinite pool to draw from.

Your blaming the messenger, but they are just the messenger. Yes, there's a feedback loop there, but their mostly constrained by the low bandwidth and near infinite pool. Every single person here knows what sells: Advertising. And every single person here knows that you sell more advertising when you have more viewers. Do we know what gets more viewers? Yeah, we do.

[Shaggy Hiker]

And we should also dispense with that stupid 'blue pill' nonsense. We all know that comes from "The Matrix" movies, so perhaps we should acknowledge that was the weakest element of a good movie (the first one was good, anyways).

"Take this pill and you see reality" Except that the 'reality' they showed was exactly the same as the 'fake', other than being worse in EVERY SINGLE WAY. If you were a schlub in the matrix, you're still a schlub in the real world, except now you're mired in a grimy world of perpetual war, perpetual stress, and for no clear reason. Do you have the same problems as before? Absolutely, except that their worse.

After all, Neo kept going back into the Matrix. At the end of the first movie it was clear that he wasn't going back into the Matrix for any particular reason, except that it was so much better than his 'real' life. In the matrix he had god-like super powers, and a truly god-like indifference to the other people around him. In the real world, he was a dirty, scared, bit of detritus devoid of purpose and meaning.

Now, had he awoken into an Eden where the vicissitudes of life had been reduced to a constant striving to bring people out of squalor to paradise, that would be one thing, but that's certainly not what that movie offered. All it offered was the idea that life sucks, and if you REALLY understand it, then it REALLY REALLY sucks.

Why in the world do people think that's a good thing?

[FunkyDexter]

If someone mentions Bill Gates, everything that he says should be rejected.

It was you that brought him up. Post 3960.

But it won't be necessary of mass murdering to profit

For the "it was deliberately released" theory to hold water requires that millions of people have been deliberately killed. That would be mass murder for profit.

My point, that I believe you may have missed, is that the corporate media initially oversold the vaccine over a year ago and have since been moving the goal posts as to why individuals should received the vaccine.

The media exaggerates and simplifies, sure. Like I said several pages back, if it bleeds it leads. The messaging has been changes because the facts on the ground have been changing. But ascribing some nefarious intent to either those (I'm not sure whether you are but participants in this thread certainly have been) is inaccurate.

why an individual with no comorbidities should risk taking a vaccine

Because it helps protect us all. It helps supress spread and helps prevent the emergency services from becoming overwhelmed. I'd also take issue with the word "risk". We have the data that shows just how low the risk of taking a vaccine is. You're at higher risk of dying in a plane crash.

shielded from legal liabilities

Now there I'm with you, I really don't like those clauses. Mind you, I work with highly sensitive data to do with abused children and I usually have similar clauses written into my contracts to cover me against data leaks that are beyond my control - I guess the difference is that my clauses specify "beyond my control". I see no conspiracy or secrecy there though, it's simple protectionism and done in the open.

Let's keep watching and trying to find more clues, more evidence

The problem is that you've begun with your conclusion and are casting around for evidence to support it. Your horse and cart need to go the other way round. There's plenty of evidence that media wants you to consume it so tailors itself as such. There's evidence that companies market their product to you. There's evidence that companies lobby governments to try and get favourable legislation implemented and there's evidence that some politicians are corrupt to respond to that lobbying regardless of what's good for their constituents. But none of this is new or remarkable.

Where is your single piece of evidence that "it is very logical to think that there could be someone behind". "It's possible" is not enough to draw a conclusion or start telling people that, because they don't agree with you, it is because they are uninformed (which is what you did). It's possible that the earth is flat and Nasa faked the moon landings. It's possible that we're all living in the matrix. It's possible that my wardrobe has a secret world behind it with talking lions. But if espouse those views with no evidence to lead toward those conclusion, I really shouldn't expect anyone to take me seriously.

I've never cared for the red/blue pill analogy. Most people I've talked to use it in the context of democrat/republican instead of in the context of The Matrix.

I first encountered it in the context of the toxic end of the Men's Rights movement. I actually think that Men's Rights is a cause worth endorsing but, sadly, most of the people that do seem to be a cess pool of incels and toxic anti feminists. For that reason I tend to view it as a dog whistle. And it shouldn't escape notice that this discussion briefly veered into blaming this all on the "feminist agenda" and the "gay agenda" so I guess the dogs were listening.

[wes4dbt]

Bill Gates is untouchable. Everybody knows that he is a good guy. And here even more, since VB was invented by his company while he was the chief.

This is more false claims. Bill Gates is not untouchable. Just ask his wife's divorce attorney. Also, not everybody thinks he's a good guy. There is negative things said about him, it's very common and the people saying them will depend on who's agenda he is hindering.

I'd be hard pressed to think of anyone who is untouchable. Even Kings, dictators, presidents are all "touchable".

[wes4dbt]

This is precisely why I adopted the term corporate media.

Edit
I will go further and say that your points are exactly why people are switching to long form podcasts. What I do blame the corporate media for is trying ostracize someone who says "this vaccine looks promising, but I'm hesitant because of A, B, and C."

Instead of taking on those questions, that person is immediately deemed a conspiracy theorist or quack, regardless of how sound their objections are.

Corporate media sounds good to me.

But I don't agree with this,

Instead of taking on those questions, that person is immediately deemed a conspiracy theorist or quack, regardless of how sound their objections are.

It just depend on which people you chose to listen to. It just depends if it suites the narrative there pushing. It really doesn't even have to be a "sound" objection. One group will praise them and another will call it crap. This happens constantly. Lately it's been about masks, vaccines and mandates.

[Eduardo-]

And we should also dispense with that stupid 'blue pill' nonsense. We all know that comes from "The Matrix" movies, so perhaps we should acknowledge that was the weakest element of a good movie (the first one was good, anyways).

"Take this pill and you see reality" Except that the 'reality' they showed was exactly the same as the 'fake', other than being worse in EVERY SINGLE WAY. If you were a schlub in the matrix, you're still a schlub in the real world, except now you're mired in a grimy world of perpetual war, perpetual stress, and for no clear reason. Do you have the same problems as before? Absolutely, except that their worse.

After all, Neo kept going back into the Matrix. At the end of the first movie it was clear that he wasn't going back into the Matrix for any particular reason, except that it was so much better than his 'real' life. In the matrix he had god-like super powers, and a truly god-like indifference to the other people around him. In the real world, he was a dirty, scared, bit of detritus devoid of purpose and meaning.

Now, had he awoken into an Eden where the vicissitudes of life had been reduced to a constant striving to bring people out of squalor to paradise, that would be one thing, but that's certainly not what that movie offered. All it offered was the idea that life sucks, and if you REALLY understand it, then it REALLY REALLY sucks.

Why in the world do people think that's a good thing?

The metaphor is that at some point you have to choose between staying being deceived, fooled, controlled, but still more or less "happy", as any other "normal" person, or choose to be aware of the truth, that is not pleasant.
What are the benefits? They are not clear sometimes, but perhaps you can do something to change something.

But I would say: if someone has chosen to stay being fooled, willingly, because that will help to make him happier, then do not contend with the ones that took the blue pill, because they are at another level.

[Eduardo-]

It was you that brought him up. Post 3960.

I know. I wasn't talking about you.