Should I Get Covid-19 Or Wait Until Covid-20 Comes Out?

[Giraffe]

Quick recipe for a pandemic

• Find a mutation of a virus and call it 'novel'.
• Create a PCR test. No need to have it checked by an independent group of researchers.
• Call anyone with laboratory confirmation of your novel virus a 'confirmed case' irrespective of clinical signs and symptoms. You are following WHO guidelines if you do so.
• Test preferably only symptomatic people. This way you successfully exaggerate the mortality rate. The WHO definition does not require a high morbidity and mortality rate to call it a pandemic, but you want to seed fear.
• Constantly increase the number of tests done to give the impression that the virus is spreading fast.
• In case you don't have enough tests, call everyone with symptoms a 'confirmed case'.
• A pinch or two of nosocomial infections is good, too.
• Use experimental treatments with toxic antiviral drugs liberally. -- The rule less is better, treat according to symptoms (which is considered good practice in the treatment of influenza infections) does not apply here.
• Blame the death of everyone who tested positive on the virus irrespective of age and co-morbidities. No need to do post-mortem examinations.
• To confuse people further always communicate numbers out of context. Don't tell people how many tests have been negative. Don't compare the novel disease's death rate to the normal death rate.
• Important to avoid studies in a representative cohort.
• The press people will report 24/7 about the 'deadly virus', so they will further increase the fear.
• Make sure to defame everyone as 'conspiracy theorist' who publicly expresses thoughts that do not fit to your narrative.
• If after several months journalists seriously start to question things smile and talk gibberish.

Enjoy!

related thread: Navigating Through The “Corona-Panic”: 8 Inconvenient Facts To Consider

 

[ecstatichamster]

I just love the title of your post, and your post itself.

I’m going to wait until it comes to a theater near me.

 

[tankasnowgod]

Excellent. They seem to be following the recipe perfectly on this one.

 

[Peatogenic]

Without NYC, this reality wouldn't be muddied. Or Italy. With NYC and Italy it was an instant greenlight.

 

[Giraffe]

I’m going to wait until it comes to a theater near me.

 

[David PS]

It looks like the 2nd wave is already making its scare in Japan. It is the beginning of the sequel, coming soon to your neighborhood.

Keep in mind that Japan's current rate of death due to coronavirus associated deaths is 1.0 per million.
Emergency Declared In Japanese Prefecture Hit By 2nd Wave Of Coronavirus Infections

Coronavirus Update (Live): 1,872,916 Cases and 116,038 Deaths from COVID-19 Virus Pandemic - Worldometer

 

[nikotrope]

So 2nd wave in Japan in the title, but really just Hokkaido where there was only a couple hundred cases to start with. They will milk everything they can to induce fear.

Before the Olympics postponement, patients in Japan were tested only after a CT scan indicating a problem. I don’t know if they change their procedure since then but as they announce recently they would do more tests I think that is the case.

 

[Peater]

Should I Get Covid-19 Or Wait Until Covid-20 Comes Out?

 

[Giraffe]

It looks like the 2nd wave is already making its scare in Japan. It is the beginning of the sequel, coming soon to your neighborhood.

Keep in mind that Japan's current rate of death due to coronavirus associated deaths is 1.0 per million.
Emergency Declared In Japanese Prefecture Hit By 2nd Wave Of Coronavirus Infections

Coronavirus Update (Live): 1,872,916 Cases and 116,038 Deaths from COVID-19 Virus Pandemic - Worldometer

All these latest numbers are a distraction in my opinion. They are meaningless without context.

There is no reason to assume that the virus behaves different in different countries. It's mainly elderly that get severely sick. And it's only people with co-morbidities that die. And if in one region the statistics are really different: This a reason to look closer. What's going on there?

In Japan the statistics look quite normal.(source)

Following the discussions in some of the European countries, I got the impression that some governments feel the pressure to show that they are doing something. It's a similar to the dilemma in medicine: Medical nihilism bears the risk of being sewed. While when a doctor has tried everything and harms the patient with his treatment, he has nothing to fear. The article suggests the Japanese government got under pressure, too.

Japan’s COVID-19 State of Emergency Is No Lockdown. What’s In It?

 

[Remedy]

Wait for 20. 19 is great for some people, but almost half don't get anything from it.

 

[Giraffe]

Prof. Sucharit Bahkdi mentioned cross-immunity between corona viruses in a recent interview. In Germany the virologist Prof. Christian Drosten is one of the biggest supporters of this monster-pandemic theory. So he now also admits that "there might be a kind of hidden background immunity". Some people might be protected thanks to prior infection with one of the common cold corona viruses. He mentioned a Chinese study in which the second attack rate was around 12%, 13%, 14%. This means that approx. 14% of the people who lived together with an infected person got infected themselves.

If this turns out to be true, this is not even a pandemic according to the low WHO standards.

Prior to 2009 the definition of pandemic was: a new virus, which went around quickly, for which you didn't have immunity, and which created a high morbidity and mortality rate. In order to categorize the swine flu as a pandemic the WHO had dropped the last two (morbidity and mortality). Will the WHO change definition again and drop "lacking immunity"?

 

[Vinny]

Should I Get Covid-19 Or Wait Until Covid-20 Comes Out?

I,d go for 19.
Not always the new model is better than the previous one.


Btw, you,ve put everything very well, Giraffe.

 

[Lynne]

Classic @Giraffe!

 

[yerrag]

Is there a need to wait? I thought it had already mutated? And "20" isn't enough. "20a", "20b", "20c"..."20z."

And you can have a new vaccine every 2 weeks. Sign up for a package deal and save!

Well, what are you waiting for? Guaranteed no wait for each new model of iVax.

You need to go back to paying your debts and this is the only way to work.

 

[Giraffe]

Two virologists meet. The first one asks: "What are you working on?" The other answers: "I work on the third wave; the second one didn't work."

 

[LUH 3417]

It’s free with amazon prime shipping.

 

[yerrag]

Two virologists meet. The first one asks: "What are you working on?" The other answers: "I work on the third wave; the second one didn't work."

Don't be too sure you need a third wave.

Trump may yet lose. The bane of China and the Deep State.

The third wave will still come though.

China and the Deep State will just unravel in their marriage of convenience. And they will direct the third wave on each other.

It's basically the Zionist Hegemony vs. the As-Un -yet-Zionified Hegemony.

To decide the fate of humanity - Humanistic (Confucianist-Taoist-Moralist) vs. Superstitious-Religious-Moralist.

 

[Grapelander]

As seen on TV - hurry while supplies last - only 1 per customer - sorry, no refunds.

 

[yerrag]

As seen on TV - hurry while supplies last - only 1 per customer - sorry, no refunds.

Or you can have front row seats. Years in the making. You won't want to miss it!

 

[thomas00]

Virologists are the easily excitable children of the science world. Convinced they've discovered this and that, eager to declare some new pandemic . Most of the time they are probably just looking at junk under a microscope.

The 1970-1980 years were dominated by a series of ideas which would never have withstood scientific scrutiny 10 or 20 years before. For example:

1. It became acceptable to postulate that when viruses cannot be seen by EM in cancer cells, biochemical or immunological methods supposedly identifying viral "markers" were enough to demonstrate viral infection of the cells under scrutiny. Such markers can be an enzyme (RT), an antigen, various proteins, or some RNA sequences. Never seeing the viral particles was conveniently explained by the integration of the viral genome into the chromosomes of the alleged infected cells. To accommodate such interpretations implied complete oblivion of all we knew from previous research on cancer of experimental animals. Admittedly, in these models EM was only showing terminal steps of viral reduplication, initial phases being a series of molecular events which escape ultrastructural recognition. Still, in all the classical models such as murine and avian leukoses, visible terminal steps of viral replication (i.e. "budding") were always observed and regarded as essential for the spreading of infection from cell to cell.

2. Another shortcut with disastrous consequences has been the naive notion that any material banding at 1.16gm/ml represented retroviruses! Sure enough, true retroviruses band around that density. But this does not mean that whatever material bands at 1.16gm/ml is retroviral in nature! In the 1960s I was frequently asked to look at such 1.16gm/ml bands by biochemists: "Look at this, it forms a sharp band, it should be pure viruses!" Ultracentrifugation pellets obtained from such "sharp bands" showed, in thin sections for EM, an extreme variety of microvesicles and proteinaceous debris, but no retroviruses! Still, this approach has been (and still is!) used to identify virus "markers!" How sad it is to think that a simple EM control of such "bands" (which takes about two days, and costs a few hundred dollars, but has never been done before 1997) could have prevented these highly misleading interpretations of "markers" on which large budgets have been simply wasted...

3. Collecting viruses from the supernatant of cultures of virus infected cells raises other questions. We all remember the discovery, by Epstein (15) in 1964 of the EB virus in cultures derived from African Burkitt's lymphomas. This was an EM finding and the virus was immediately and properly classified as a member of the herpes group. To identify this DNA virus in cultured cells it was necessary to look into partially degenerating cells because, most obviously, the virus had a marked cytolytic effect. By complete contrast, retrovirus-carrying cells maintain excellent viability and released viruses can be easily recovered in the culture supernatant without the need to apply any lymphokine or growth factors stimulation to the cultures.

4. As far as scientific policy is concerned, research on potentially oncogenic viruses was dominated by the retrovirus hypothesis. Federal funding took the same direction, amplified by the incredibly naive idea that success was primarily a matter of money! Unusually large levels of federal support resulted in the creation of a retrovirus research establishment. Large numbers of research jobs were created in this venture. The intellectual freedom to think along other avenues of cancer research was rapidly dwindling, especially when major pharmaceutical companies started to offer tantalizing contracts to support polarized retrovirus research... The top priority was to demonstrate, at any cost, that retroviruses had something to do with human cancer, an hypothesis, however, which didn't receive the slightest support throughout the 1970s. Such a misdirected research effort would have been relatively inconsequential as long as public health was not involved. Unfortunately, the emergence of acquired immunodeficiency syndromes (AIDS) in 1981 gave the retrovirus establishment an opportunity to transform what could have been only an academic flop into a public health tragedy.
HIV & AIDS - Retroviruses: The Recollections of an Electron Microscopist