Page 627 of 711 FirstFirst ... 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 ... LastLast
Results 15,651 to 15,675 of 17752
  1. #15651
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    On Vacation for the Duration
    Posts
    14,166
    Alternative Facts. They exist.
    A few people feel the rain. Most people just get wet.

  2. #15652
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    The Goods Department
    Posts
    1,333
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    I thought the "being wrong" versus "lying" was in reference to Fauci and the Wuhan Labs funding. Fauci said adamantly that the CDC or NIH did NOT fund those labs at the time in question. Turns out that maybe they did. I'm betting he had been given bad info on that so was "wrong" instead of actually "lying".
    You sir are correct. Thanks for taking the time to maintain reading comprehension while others opine on news stories without admittedly reading any of the source material. Same trope as the "I did my own research!" type of people.

    The real disservice here is the fact that the head of the NIH has to tweet his formal letter to Congressmen James Comer as no major news outlet wants to report on what could (and should) be considered a significant news story.

    Echo chambers do us all a disservice. Branch out with your media consumption.
    Skiing in the rockies is like 70's porn

    Lots of bush

    Some wood

    No faceshots...

    -Mtnlion

  3. #15653
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Edge of the Great Basin
    Posts
    3,373
    Nonsense. The NYTimes, Newsweek, CNN, Fox News, and many more are all covering the story not only today but have been doing so all along.

  4. #15654
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    The Goods Department
    Posts
    1,333
    Quote Originally Posted by MultiVerse View Post
    Nonsense. The NYTimes, Newsweek, CNN, Fox News, and many more are all covering the story not only today but have been doing so all along.
    The letter from HHS to the congressmen was dated 10/20/21, so this would be recent news. Please provide links showing these news articles reference Lawrence Tabak's letter.

    In your earlier post you split hairs by saying the testing for gain of function research was happening to mice. You do know what humanized mice are, and their purposes, correct?
    Skiing in the rockies is like 70's porn

    Lots of bush

    Some wood

    No faceshots...

    -Mtnlion

  5. #15655
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Edge of the Great Basin
    Posts
    3,373
    Quote Originally Posted by Asspen View Post
    In your earlier post you split hairs by saying the testing for gain of function research was happening to mice. You do know what humanized mice are, and their purposes, correct?
    I said, "research was done on mutant SARS-related coronaviruses in mice. The question is whether this work on mice constitutes GOF research and whether the NIH knew about it." The subject was mutant SARS-related coronaviruses, mice were incidental although many will argue that's an important distinction. So depending on your expert opinion and/or political bent the questions are:

    1 - Did EcoHealth Alliance violate the terms and conditions of NIH grant
    2 - Was the research GOF or something else
    3 - Is making a virus that's modestly worse in mice the same as creating a more transmissible pathogen in humans


    In your earlier post you disingenuously accused someone of making a false claim, why?

  6. #15656
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    On Vacation for the Duration
    Posts
    14,166
    So news outlets are the official form of government inter office communications now?
    A few people feel the rain. Most people just get wet.

  7. #15657
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    5,176
    Quote Originally Posted by Asspen View Post
    The letter from HHS to the congressmen was dated 10/20/21, so this would be recent news. Please provide links showing these news articles reference Lawrence Tabak's letter.

    In your earlier post you split hairs by saying the testing for gain of function research was happening to mice. You do know what humanized mice are, and their purposes, correct?
    https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/21/s...-leak-nih.html


    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    Quote Originally Posted by Benny Profane View Post
    Keystone is fucking lame. But, deadly.

  8. #15658
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Alpental
    Posts
    6,210
    Quote Originally Posted by Asspen View Post
    You sir are correct. Thanks for taking the time to maintain reading comprehension while others opine on news stories without admittedly reading any of the source material. Same trope as the "I did my own research!" type of people.

    The real disservice here is the fact that the head of the NIH has to tweet his formal letter to Congressmen James Comer as no major news outlet wants to report on what could (and should) be considered a significant news story.

    Echo chambers do us all a disservice. Branch out with your media consumption.
    Dick Enbright is not the head of NIH. Nor is Lawrence Tabak. It's Francis Collins still until his retirement is official.

    Now consume this, since the actual question was not "Did NIH fund the WIV?", but specifically "Did the NIH fund gain of function research in pathogens with pandemic potential at the WIV?"


    Quote Originally Posted by https://www.science.org/content/article/nih-says-grantee-failed-report-experiment-wuhan-created-bat-virus-made-mice-sicker

    In a “limited experiment,” mice infected with one of these chimeras, SHC014 WIV1, “became sicker than those infected with the WIV1 bat coronavirus. As sometimes occurs in science, this was an unexpected result … as opposed to something that the researchers set out to do,” states the letter from NIH Principal Deputy Director Lawrence Tabak.

    Before the chimera work was funded, NIH had determined it was not GOF research involving what NIH calls “enhanced pathogens of pandemic potential,” because neither the new bat coronaviruses nor WIV1 were known to infect humans, the letter says. But the letter says the terms of the grant stated that if the virus experiments produced certain results, such as “a one log increase in [virus] growth,” EcoHealth should inform NIH “immediately” and that NIH would do a “secondary review” of the research, to see whether it should be re-evaluated or new biosafety measures imposed.

    But “Ecohealth failed to report this finding right away, as was required by the terms of the grant,” the letter states. It says EcoHealth now has 5 days to submit all unpublished data from the project.
    What I consider to be "source" material isn't a web based news compiler- it's the actual Ecohealth summary submitted to NIH.

    3.1 In vivo infection of Human ACE2 (hACE2) expressing mice with SARSr-CoV S protein
    variants

    In Year 5, we continued with in vivo infection experiments of diverse bat SARSr-CoVs on
    transgenic mice expressing human ACE2. Mice were infected with 4 strains of SARSr-CoVs
    with different S protein, including the full-length recombinant virus of SARSr-CoV WIV1 and
    three chimeric viruses with the backbone of WIV1 and S proteins of SHC014, WIV16 and
    Rs4231, respectively. Pathogenicity of the 4 SARSr-CoVs was evaluated by recording the
    survival rate of challenged mice in a 2-week course. All of the 4 SARSr-CoVs caused lethal
    infection in hACE2 transgenic mice, but the mortality rate vary among 4 groups of infected mice
    (Fig. 13a). 14 days post infection, 5 out of 7 mice infected with WIV1 remained alive (71.4%),
    while only 2 of 8 mice infected with rWIV1-SHC014 S survived (25%). The survival rate of mice
    infected with rWIV1-WIV16S and rWIV1-4231S were 50%. Viral replication was confirmed by
    quantitative PCR in spleen, lung, intestine and brain of infected mice. In brain, rWIV1, rWIV1-
    WIV16S and rWIV1-4231S cannot be detected 2 days or 4 days post infection. However,
    rWIV1-SHC014 was detected at all time points and showed an increasing viral titer after
    infection. The viral load reached more than 10e9 genome copies/g at the dead point (Fig. 13b).
    We also conducted histopathological section examination in infected mice. Tissue lesion and
    lymphocytes infiltration can be observed in lung, which is more significant in mice infected with
    rWIV1-SHC014 S (Fig. 13d) than those infected with rWIV1 (Fig. 13c). These results suggest
    that the pathogenicity of SHC014 is higher than other tested bat SARSr-CoVs in transgenic
    mice that express hACE2.
    Full results summary

    I.1 What were the outcomes of the award?

    The aims of our grant (R01AI110964) were to: 1) Analyze the risk that there could be a repeat of the SARS outbreak, due to bat coronaviruses still circulating in China; 2) Work out how we can predict which bat viruses would be most likely to emerge, so that we can prevent new outbreaks; 3) Using lab tests, find out if any of the coronaviruses still present in bat populations in China have the potential to infect people. The overall goal of this work is to help design vaccines and therapeutics against future potentially emerging viruses, work out which communities are on the frontline of a new potential outbreak, and reduce the risk of them being infected by analyzing their risk behavior. During this 5-year period of work, we made significant discoveries leading to 18 peer-reviewed scientific papers, including in some of the world’s foremost scientific journals.

    Overall, our work shows that bats in China harbor a high number and diversity of coronaviruses, some closely related to SARSCoV(the virus that caused the SARS pandemic in 2003). We sampled over 16,000 individual bats and found evidence of hundreds of different SARS-related coronavirus genetic sequences. We found out that bats across China harbor these viruses, and that they are common, with 6.7% of bats sampled being positive. Many of these bats are found across China, Southeast Asia, South Asia and beyond, suggesting viruses with zoonotic potential may exist in those regions also. Many of these bats are abundant, and roost and feed close to people and livestock, suggesting high potential for future viral spillover. We also identified one cave system in Yunnan Province with horseshoe bats that had diverse SARSr-CoVs, including some with S proteins able to use human ACE2 as entry receptors. Bats in this cave carried SARSr-CoVs with all unique genetic elements of the SARS-CoV outbreak virus, suggesting that this site may be a potential public health risk.

    To analyze which viruses were a potential public health risk, we managed to culture three strains of SARSr-CoVs from bat feces: WIV1, WIV16 and Rs4874. We used the genetic codes of some of the other viruses we found in bats and inserted the spike protein genes of those viruses (the proteins that attach to cells) into the cultured viruses. By doing this experiment we showed that other viruses may also be able to infect human cells, and were able to do this safely without the need to culture large amounts of virus. We also showed that some of these viruses cause SARS-like illness in mice that are adapted to have similar cell surface receptors to people. This work proves that there is a clear and present danger for future emergence of novel SARS-like viruses in people.

    We also demonstrated that outbreaks can happen in livestock. In 2016-17, we analyzed fecal samples from pigs at 5 farms in South China affected by a fatal diarrheal disease. We discovered a new coronavirus, Swine Acute Diarrheal Syndrome coronavirus (SADS-CoV), and showed that it originates in bats, caused the death of more than 20,000 pigs, but also is able to infect human cells in the lab.

    Our work has produced predictive algorithms to map hotspots of viral risk so that public health measures can be taken to protect communities at the frontline of potentially the next SARS pandemic. We have produced new reagents and viral cultures that can be used by labs across the world to design novel vaccines and therapeutics against SARS-CoV and other related viruses that might emerge in the future. Finally, our work has been used directly by the WHO to list SARS-related coronaviruses as one of the highest priority group of pathogens with pandemic potential, so that efforts can be taken to stop a future pandemic before it happens.
    This is not gain of function as broadly defined by "one skilled in the art" as the legalese would say. This was an experiment to define the function/tropism of other naturally occuring Cov's using chimeric viruses by grafting other viral Spike proteins on a nonhuman-infectious WIV1 virus, in lieu of isolation and propagation of the other naturally occuring virus isolates. This was to help to define which of those naturally occurring bat CoV's may have the potential to spill over into humans, not to design a bat/human infecting CoV with a gain of function that enabled human infection.

    However.

    IMO it is a bit disingenuous to say the results of increased lethality were "unexpected", since this type of experiment fundamentally addresses a simple question whether the lethality of the chimeric viruses with the other grafted BatCoV species Spike variants is increased, decreased, or the same as that of the non-chimeric WIV1 strain.
    Move upside and let the man go through...

  9. #15659
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    6,345
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  10. #15660
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    7,185
    Throw in a comment that has anything to do with the flu. Or even mentions the flu.

    Then add in some sarcastic comments feigning concern.

    Include Fauci and mainstream media and you’ll get the full bonus from your troll farm masters.

  11. #15661
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    The Goods Department
    Posts
    1,333
    Quote Originally Posted by Mofro261 View Post
    Dick Enbright is not the head of NIH. Nor is Lawrence Tabak. It's Francis Collins still until his retirement is official.

    Now consume this, since the actual question was not "Did NIH fund the WIV?", but specifically "Did the NIH fund gain of function research in pathogens with pandemic potential at the WIV?"




    What I consider to be "source" material isn't a web based news compiler- it's the actual Ecohealth summary submitted to NIH.



    Full results summary



    This is not gain of function as broadly defined by "one skilled in the art" as the legalese would say. This was an experiment to define the function/tropism of other naturally occuring Cov's using chimeric viruses by grafting other viral Spike proteins on a nonhuman-infectious WIV1 virus, in lieu of isolation and propagation of the other naturally occuring virus isolates. This was to help to define which of those naturally occurring bat CoV's may have the potential to spill over into humans, not to design a bat/human infecting CoV with a gain of function that enabled human infection.

    However.

    IMO it is a bit disingenuous to say the results of increased lethality were "unexpected", since this type of experiment fundamentally addresses a simple question whether the lethality of the chimeric viruses with the other grafted BatCoV species Spike variants is increased, decreased, or the same as that of the non-chimeric WIV1 strain.
    Did hell just freeze over because the resident expert just agreed with me with his last sentence RE: what kind of research the NIH is funding.

    I see Eco Health Alliance getting chucked under the bus for this, with NIH distancing themselves as fast as possible.

    The inherent issue though is that the NIH funds this research and (should) be providing oversight to said taxpayer funded research.
    Skiing in the rockies is like 70's porn

    Lots of bush

    Some wood

    No faceshots...

    -Mtnlion

  12. #15662
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    7,185
    Experts will agree with you when are right.

    So I’d guess they’ll agree with around 0.5% of your posts (and even then have to ignore the included bullshit behavior)

  13. #15663
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    On Vacation for the Duration
    Posts
    14,166
    Ignore is a wonderful gain of function.
    A few people feel the rain. Most people just get wet.

  14. #15664
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    northern BC
    Posts
    25,460
    Got a free flu shot yesturday, then had a sativa gummy, feeling rough today

    but I think it was the beers on the way home thru the beermuda triangle
    Lee Lau - xxx-er is the laziest Asian canuck I know

  15. #15665
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    15,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Asspen View Post
    Did hell just freeze over because the resident expert just agreed with me with his last sentence RE: what kind of research the NIH is funding.

    I see Eco Health Alliance getting chucked under the bus for this, with NIH distancing themselves as fast as possible.

    The inherent issue though is that the NIH funds this research and (should) be providing oversight to said taxpayer funded research.
    He's not agreeing with you. Reread his post.

    Sorry if I missed it with all the Asspen chum in the water...but are people getting mix and match boosters just by going in? When I try to book an appointment I, for one, don't meet any of the criteria, and two the sites ask me what vaccine I had and then recommends a boost of the same kind. I sort of want to mix in a Moderna shot as a booster if possible. I'm basing this on the Costco and Walgreens sites.
    Damn shame, throwing away a perfectly good white boy like that

  16. #15666
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    7,147
    Yes, Walgreens website directs you to a store that has what you had, which was 25 miles away from home. After checking them I booked mine this morning at CVS. Had the choice of Moderna of Pfizer. Chose Moderna (kept going back and forth so just went with what I had and the CVS close to my house is Moderna).

    They asked no questions online about what I'd had, just dates to make sure I was 6 months out.

    Showed up and left after 5 minutes. This store was Moderna but I think they would have given me the shot if my card said Pfizer. He didn't even look at it and sign it till he was ready to shoot me.

    It was anticlimactic.

  17. #15667
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    15,736
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    Yes, Walgreens website directs you to a store that has what you had. After checking them I booked mine this morning at CVS. Had the choice of Moderna of Pfizer. Chose Moderna (kept going back and forth so just went with what I had).

    They asked no questions online about what I'd had, just dates to make sure I was 6 months out.

    Showed up and left after 5 minutes. The only offered Moderna but I think they would have given me the shit if my card said Pfizer. He didn't even look at it and sign it till he was ready to shoot me.

    It was anticlimactic.
    thanks. I'll give CVS a try.
    Damn shame, throwing away a perfectly good white boy like that

  18. #15668
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    7,147
    I just walked myself through it again on CVS and it does ask what you had but it gives you the option to schedule either Pfizer or Moderna even after you tell them.

    Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk

  19. #15669
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    15,736
    Quote Originally Posted by uglymoney View Post
    I just walked myself through it again on CVS and it does ask what you had but it gives you the option to schedule either Pfizer or Moderna even after you tell them.

    Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk
    Yeah, just signed myself up. Excellent. thanks again
    Damn shame, throwing away a perfectly good white boy like that

  20. #15670
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    835
    Got a txt message from CO state that my vax is over 6mo ago and 'due for booster'. Pretty cool. I'm going to do it. Decisions on the mix-match hmmmm.

  21. #15671
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Moose, Iowa
    Posts
    7,147
    Quote Originally Posted by old goat View Post
    The CDC still has to weigh in which I believe will happen this week. The Moderna comes in multidose vials so it's just a matter of drawing up half the amount.
    If you really want a shot right away I'm sure you can find one.
    Day late and day a dollar short but appreciated the reply.

    Sent from my SM-G991U1 using Tapatalk

  22. #15672
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    6,345
    CVS I was picking something up at today only has Pfizer.. That works for wife and kid, both frontline. No Moderna though which is want I'm after to keep pure. Here's the thing though, I'm neither working around other folks nor age 65+. Wife caught the "high risk" fine print that includes "smokers and former smokers".. So I'm in when I find a place shooting Moderna without a wait beyond my patience level.. which is very low hahahaha.. Sam's Club has Moderna right now according to the CDC vaccine search page. I have Nov 1st off. Thinking a weekday would be better than a weekend for walking in and getting it without a wait.
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  23. #15673
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Where the sheets have no stains
    Posts
    17,106
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    I thought the "being wrong" versus "lying" was in reference to Fauci and the Wuhan Labs funding. Fauci said adamantly that the CDC or NIH did NOT fund those labs at the time in question. Turns out that maybe they did. I'm betting he had been given bad info on that so was "wrong" instead of actually "lying".
    It was.
    I have been in this State for 30 years and I am willing to admit that I am part of the problem.

  24. #15674
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    15,736
    Quote Originally Posted by Bunion 2020 View Post
    It was.
    Yeah, maybe, sort of. There's more to the story as pointed out by others. Plus, still waiting to get an answer to this:

    Quote Originally Posted by wooley12 View Post
    I saw the exchange with Rand and the Dr. in real time. Enlighten me. Why does this make a difference in the way this pandemic is being handled?
    So the US funded research somewhere. OK. What does that mean in this context?
    Damn shame, throwing away a perfectly good white boy like that

  25. #15675
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    7,185
    Asspen ran away from a series of “tough”questions in another thread. Just bailed completely rather than face them. So don’t hold your breath.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •