The Irrational Covid

[babe]

Some are saying we face a new wave from the British variant that's spreading now. Our "experts" believe our vaccines work on this variant.

The EU is worried about some post-vaccination blood clotting issues. I'd like to discuss those concerns.

One of the first comments from the experts is that the vaccine is safe and likely will not be the direct cause of the clots, because it is an mRNA prep and does not contain the virus itself. This statement is based on their logic and understanding that the virus causes bleeding lesions and then spreads to other organs where it also causes bleeding lesions perhaps. So they declare the vaccine "innocent".

This declaration is premature. Another issue if it is getting not into immune active cells (white cells) but red cells and platelets as well, where it may cause cell lysis/depletion of O2 carrying and blood clotting deficiencies. So whether the vaccine is causing bleeding or not, the vaccine is capable of having a deficiency in clotting. We all have minor bleeding events going on variously sometimes/somewhere for whatever reasons, and slow blood clotting can produce the occasional incident of a larger bleed and clot formation like what is being reported. The incidence of this appears to be fairly rare. It is good to know the experts are seeing things like this and thinking about them.

But I think it's unlikely to be an adequate reason not to get the shot.

There are more things to be concerned about, though, most of which are still theoretical long-term concerns. Again, probably no good reason not to get the shot which can be deadly in even 1% of patients.

My largest concern is the possibility of a variant that our vaccines won't stop. We need to be doing due diligence research on every variant we see.

 

[Avery]

Some are saying we face a new wave from the British variant that's spreading now. Our "experts" believe our vaccines work on this variant.

The EU is worried about some post-vaccination blood clotting issues. I'd like to discuss those concerns.

One of the first comments from the experts is that the vaccine is safe and likely will not be the direct cause of the clots, because it is an mRNA prep and does not contain the virus itself. This statement is based on their logic and understanding that the virus causes bleeding lesions and then spreads to other organs where it also causes bleeding lesions perhaps. So they declare the vaccine "innocent".

This declaration is premature. Another issue if it is getting not into immune active cells (white cells) but red cells and platelets as well, where it may cause cell lysis/depletion of O2 carrying and blood clotting deficiencies. So whether the vaccine is causing bleeding or not, the vaccine is capable of having a deficiency in clotting. We all have minor bleeding events going on variously sometimes/somewhere for whatever reasons, and slow blood clotting can produce the occasional incident of a larger bleed and clot formation like what is being reported. The incidence of this appears to be fairly rare. It is good to know the experts are seeing things like this and thinking about them.

But I think it's unlikely to be an adequate reason not to get the shot.

There are more things to be concerned about, though, most of which are still theoretical long-term concerns. Again, probably no good reason not to get the shot which can be deadly in even 1% of patients.

My largest concern is the possibility of a variant that our vaccines won't stop. We need to be doing due diligence research on every variant we see.

One of the biggest misnomers around is that coronavirus is something new when it's not. Though we discovered it nearly a century ago, it's likely that it's been around for ages in various incarnations from different animals.

Eventually, these variants will diminish the ability of the current vaccines and render them moot as they mutate - that's the same with any strain of influenza. The game never ends, the board simply is reshuffled.

Getting the vaccine isn't immortal armor, but it will dig us out of this hole so we can go back to the lives we've led with hopefully a bit more wisdom for the next illness that threatens our way of life when we play this unending game again.

That's more than enough reason for me to deal with a sore arm for 24 hours.

 

[One Brow]

I only linked it from OANN because you sure as hell wouldn't see that study on any liberal owned platform.

Nor any platform that care about how many people would die, truth, science, or good public policy. How fortunate for you OANN disregards these burdens.

Back to masks though, there could be a realm of possibilities here. To assume masks are the main reason for the historic low flu just doesn't add up. Some things we have to ask.

1. Does Covid overtake and kill the flu if both present at the same time? Covid was rampant before the flu season got under way, so seems possible.
2. Flu cases are being called Covid if there are even a few Covid antibodies found.

1. Viruses don't do to war with other viruses.
2. There were more covid19 cases called flu rather than the other way around for a long time.
3. If you don't think masking and similar protocols are effective, there is no reason to assume that a person with covid19 is more likely to have a flu than than a person without, and vice-versa. Your question's relevance depend on undercutting the point you are trying to make.

 

[One Brow]

This declaration is premature.

Describe a plausible biological mechanism for the coivd19 vaccine to be causing clotting issues, please.

Another issue if it is getting not into immune active cells (white cells) but red cells and platelets as well, where it may cause cell lysis/depletion of O2 carrying and blood clotting deficiencies.

Since the variant is relying on cellular machinery not present in red blood cells nor platelets, this seems extremely implausible.

 

[MVP]

One of the first comments from the experts is that the vaccine is safe and likely will not be the direct cause of the clots, because it is an mRNA prep and does not contain the virus itself.

AstraZeneca vaccine is not mRNA vaccine so this statement just shows how uneducated and unqualified you are to discuss this issue. Neither Pfizer nor Moderna vaccines ( which are mRNA vaccines ) are suspended or being investigated for clots.

 

[Avery]

As a public service, anyone in Utah (sans children) is eligible to receive the vaccine beginning March 24th.

Appointments will likely be challenging, but if you're open to where you get the vaccine, you'll be able to get in sooner.

Pro Tip: if you really want the J&J vaccine due to convenience, TOSH in Murray is doing these.

 

[babe]

Nor any platform that care about how many people would die, truth, science, or good public policy. How fortunate for you OANN disregards these burdens.


1. Viruses don't do to war with other viruses.
2. There were more covid19 cases called flu rather than the other way around for a long time.
3. If you don't think masking and similar protocols are effective, there is no reason to assume that a person with covid19 is more likely to have a flu than than a person without, and vice-versa. Your question's relevance depend on undercutting the point you are trying to make.

I would like to refine your assertions above to some degree, not that I don't see the sense in what you say, but to subject it to some further thought.

Viruses are not known to seek and destroy specifric competing viruses, so yes they "don't go to war" with that programming or purpose, that we know of yet. But some prevail over others when starting out together, and some preclude the opportunities for others by upping the immune system or changing the environment required to initiate an infection, or to let it develop.

I was looking at the flu states from the CDC last February (2019) and it was a pretty bad flu season. All the variant flus were being reported on then.

Within two months, that flu season took a sensational dive to zero and has not come back in the stats. I don't know why.

2. Your are aqbsolutely right here. There are some reports attempting to establish American Covid-19 cases as early as Aug 2019. I'll have to look up the links, this is radio news.

3. mask wearing has been pretty common in Asia for years during flu concerns. We do not have data to compare mask effectiveness between Covid and flu.

And last, non-official or counter-cultural, or non-scientific or unauthorized sites on every subject are essential to a free press. The idea that people will read them and believe them is not supported by statistical studies. People generally are believing crap before they begin reading, or even know how to read. Such sites, like sources such as the Bible, are essential baselines which any responsible writer or media retailer could use as a starter for getting interest, then leading the reader/crap believer into something that is supported by say research or good communal values.

 

[babe]

AstraZeneca vaccine is not mRNA vaccine so this statement just shows how uneducated and unqualified you are to discuss this issue. Neither Pfizer nor Moderna vaccines ( which are mRNA vaccines ) are suspended or being investigated for clots.

I presumed, on the prejudice of it being the first out, that it must be. Yes, you are right. I did not even look it up before I babbled.

Turns out this thread is a great venue for educating babes.

But I will check out your assertion when I have a minute.

 

[Jazz4ever]

Nor any platform that care about how many people would die, truth, science, or good public policy. How fortunate for you OANN disregards these burdens.


1. Viruses don't do to war with other viruses.
2. There were more covid19 cases called flu rather than the other way around for a long time.
3. If you don't think masking and similar protocols are effective, there is no reason to assume that a person with covid19 is more likely to have a flu than than a person without, and vice-versa. Your question's relevance depend on undercutting the point you are trying to make.

I rarely even visit the site to be honest. Either way, its a fact based article with no spin. The fact you can't read it without being triggered is not a good sign.

 

[One Brow]

I rarely even visit the site to be honest. Either way, its a fact based article with no spin. The fact you can't read it without being triggered is not a good sign.

Well, gosh, since you put it that way, I decided to read the article after all, mostly to see how good you were at determining " fact based article with no spin".

The first paragraph of the article:

The CDC has admitted face masks do little to prevent the spread of COVID-19 amid mounting pressure to lift mask mandates across the U.S. In a new study, the CDC found face masks had a negligible impact on coronavirus numbers that didn’t exceed statistical margins of error.

Now, the article does not link to any CDC guidance, rather it links to a scientific study, which is a very different thing. The study did not look at the wearing of masks, but part of the effort looked at the effect of mask mandates, which are related but distinct things. The study also focused how how the re-opening of restaurants contributed significantly to rises in covid19 levels, which your "no spin" study left out. So, I would say you completely failed to to dete4ct the massive amount of spin OANN put into just the first paragraph of the article. Shall I continue?

By the way, here is the CDC summary of the linked report, near the top of the linked page, saying what the CDC actually thinks:

Summary​

What is already known about this topic?

Universal masking and avoiding nonessential indoor spaces are recommended to mitigate the spread of COVID-19.

What is added by this report?

Mandating masks was associated with a decrease in daily COVID-19 case and death growth rates within 20 days of implementation. Allowing on-premises restaurant dining was associated with an increase in daily COVID-19 case growth rates 41–100 days after implementation and an increase in daily death growth rates 61–100 days after implementation.

What are the implications for public health practice?

Mask mandates and restricting any on-premises dining at restaurants can help limit community transmission of COVID-19 and reduce case and death growth rates. These findings can inform public policies to reduce community spread of COVID-19.

Association of State-Issued Mask Mandates and Allowing ...

This report describes changes in COVID-19 case and death growth ...

www.cdc.gov

I am hoping we can put this particular sub-topic to bed.

 

[babe]

Well, gosh, since you put it that way, I decided to read the article after all, mostly to see how good you were at determining " fact based article with no spin".

The first paragraph of the article:


Now, the article does not link to any CDC guidance, rather it links to a scientific study, which is a very different thing. The study did not look at the wearing of masks, but part of the effort looked at the effect of mask mandates, which are related but distinct things. The study also focused how how the re-opening of restaurants contributed significantly to rises in covid19 levels, which your "no spin" study left out. So, I would say you completely failed to to dete4ct the massive amount of spin OANN put into just the first paragraph of the article. Shall I continue?

By the way, here is the CDC summary of the linked report, near the top of the linked page, saying what the CDC actually thinks:

Association of State-Issued Mask Mandates and Allowing ...

This report describes changes in COVID-19 case and death growth ...

www.cdc.gov

I am hoping we can put this particular sub-topic to bed.

My impression, without having done much "study" of the alternative media sites like OANN and several others---Epoch Times, Newsmax, about all I can recall, but there are several others---- is that they play to a theoretical market of people they see as burned out by the mainstream media. There is a decided effort to take the "high ground" by pushing every possible argument to the max.

Which, imo, is also happening on the progressive side sites in an extreme fashion.

Everywhere I look, I see unbelievable nonsense. Where can we really get the "news" without the spin?

I just don't really believe any of it.

My own "opinions": annoy a lot of people because I try to ruffle the comfortable assumptions, but I'm in no position to aggregate unbiased and purely factual material. It takes a huge effort, tons of time.

And...... then there's the wholly-owned dedicated political agenda machines..... often just making crap up. I'm embarrassed to resemble that.

Part of the "fun" in calling this thread "Irrational" is a reflection on the level of intellect we have as a society achieved on this issue. Nobody is believing anything, really, nobody is escaping earth gravity on this issue if we equate earth gravity with human conventions/'norms, and positing that those are not true science.

A man's reach must exceed his grasp. Once in a while, for a fleeting moment, we touch the ideals of science but have not ever really got a firm grip.

 

[babe]

Describe a plausible biological mechanism for the coivd19 vaccine to be causing clotting issues, please.


Since the variant is relying on cellular machinery not present in red blood cells nor platelets, this seems extremely implausible.

I'm sorta winging it here, like Red has described.

I did work for a research professor one summer who wanted me to isolate a blood clotting factor from platelets. I gathered donated blood, separated the platelets and lyzed them. The protein I was was looking for was membrane-bound. He had funding for a year of work to do that, I completed it in two months.

I still need to read up on the vaccines in question. In general, vaccines in the past have been, as you know, live viruses perhaps attenuated(modified to make them impotant as actual transmitters of the disease) or viral fragments themselves incapable of replication somehow. Antigens still present which the patient's immune system develops immunity from.

My impression of mRNA methods is that a specific viral protein's mRNA base is made up in a microsomal-like or artificial carrier structure like a lipid bubble that can be absorbed through a cell membrane. The target cell might be any host cellular type but I presume it's a lymphocyte. I don't know how "accurate" the mRNA capsid is. I wonder if it can get into a platelet or a red-blood cell, and if it can cause such a cell to lyze (break open).

As I understand it, mRNA even our own produced mRNA all have some kind of an active "life" span or half-life if you will, and will not persist forever. You can get them into a cell and make lots of the antigen protein, and the cell breaks open and releases the antigen (a protein not a live virus), and the immune system will then build a defense against that antigen.

Some patients may have an abnormality somehow that is triggered by this vaccine and results in a clot somewhere. I think the most concerning areas are in the lungs and heart and brain. Viruses general work on some manner of intrusion into, and breakout from, some cell. Generally, clotting factors are triggered by some material present in such events. Arterial walls, vein wall, have stuff that causes such a reaction in spades, but there may be some level of it in any cell wall or membrane.

Something is broken messages, chemotaxis to the site, some kind of chemical band aid secreted.

One of the panic-press issues is a lot of people think mRNA or mDNA becomes incorporated somehow into the human genes of the patient, and will create a non-human or deranged human gene. Considering the amount of gene expression in microsomes or in the nucleus of RNA, and the constant rates of turnover, I sorta don't buy that panic.
But then what do I know, really.

Are RBC and white cells really lacking in microsomes(the machinery you mention above?)