ADVERTISEMENT

24 year old man needed double lung transplant, wishes he'd been vaccinated

And lots of people are just taking zinc and hoping it works.
I hope this guy recovers and becomes an ad spokesman and poster boy for WHY YOU GET THE JAB.
I don't know if stuff like that works, but I will never forget being in grade school and seeing this guy who'd had a tracheotomy croaking out through his blow hole why smoking is bad for you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
You shouldn't lie. It makes you look like a liar. You have yet to explain how the 1918 flu shifted in virulence and affected population. So there's an actual fact. There are lots of links. Have at it. Until you can respond on point, you're done.
I don't have to show it bonehead. YOU made the claim back it up.

Then read this nice little snippet from Berkeley on viral evolution so you can actually educate yourself.

 
Bet he'll be all for universal health care after getting the bill for avoiding a free shot.
Hundreds of thousands of dollars pissed away. In the end responsible people like me will pick up the slack that his Go Fund Me page doesn't raise. I'd like to think he'll be for better health care for all, but, instead, his story will be used by some as proof that hospitals are cashing in on Covid.
As mentioned, it sucks that this moron cost a more deserving person of the gift of a transplant. I know why transplants are given priority, but, there should be a moron clause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hwki6sn
I don't have to show it bonehead. YOU made the claim back it up.

Then read this nice little snippet from Berkeley on viral evolution so you can actually educate yourself.

JFC, you're a moran. It quite literally says in your own article that the cholera virus has EVOLVED a high level of virulence in humans. How? Because it CAN. By the same measure, a respiratory virus with a long latency period...like COVID...is free to evolve higher virulence because it CAN. Now STFU before you make yourself look even dumber than you already have.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Joes Place
JFC, you're a moran. It quite literally says in your own article that the cholera virus has EVOLVED a high level of virulence in humans. How? Because it CAN. By the same measure, a respiratory virus with a long latency period...like COVID...is free to evolve higher virulence because it CAN. Now STFU before you make yourself look even dumber than you already have.

Another @your_master5 SELF-PWN!!! 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
 
No; it does not

There is not enough information to draw any conclusions at this point.

Joe, do we know why that is? I mean, it originated in India, and we know what damage it did there (seems most of that is due to terribly low vax rates and subpar health care systems). Is that why? We have to throw that data out? I know it’s spreading rapidly in the UK, but death rates haven’t climbed there and they aren’t really here either. I only ask because I don’t know, nor have I really had the time to research it.
 
Joe, do we know why that is?
Because the variant hasn't been around long enough to make formal comparisons.

Comparing mortality rates and hospitalization rates on a group fully unvaccinated (past variants) to now (vaccinated/breakthrough cases + unvaccinated) isn't apples-apples.

Most of the data you are seeing pushed out are "overall" numbers, which cannot separate the groups. We do know that 99% or so of hospitalized cases are unvaccinated, but mortality data is not separating this out when comparing to new cases. And we know ~5% of vaccinated may test positive and get mild cases.
 
Another @your_master5 SELF-PWN!!! 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
So what happens when a freely circulating virus that has shown the ability to mutate becomes more virulent in children? Oops? Your bad?
That's not what happens when virus' mutate.
My knowledge comes from listening to many scientists discussing how virus' mutate and how they know when they mutate, they become weaker.
Please show me anywhere that states, from a scientific standpoint, that viruses become stronger as they mutate. I'll wait.
Then HE posts an article that states:

Adenoviruses are transmitted through the air or via contact. We might expect this sort of transmission to require a fairly healthy host (one who gets out and comes into contact with others) and, hence, to select against virulent strains. Indeed, adenoviruses are rarely killers, but in close quarters — for example, in the military barracks where Adenovirus-14 has been a particular problem — barriers to transmission may be lowered. This could open the door for the evolution of more virulent strains. (emphasis mine)

His stupidity is mind-bottling.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Joes Place
Then HE posts an article that states:

Adenoviruses are transmitted through the air or via contact. We might expect this sort of transmission to require a fairly healthy host (one who gets out and comes into contact with others) and, hence, to select against virulent strains. Indeed, adenoviruses are rarely killers, but in close quarters — for example, in the military barracks where Adenovirus-14 has been a particular problem — barriers to transmission may be lowered. This could open the door for the evolution of more virulent strains. (emphasis mine)

His stupidity is mind-bottling.


Compared to non-VOC SARS-CoV-2 strains, the adjusted elevation in risk associated with N501Y-positive variants was 59% (49-69%) for hospitalization; 105% (82-134%) for ICU admission; and 61% (40-87%) for death. Increases with Delta variant were more pronounced: 120% (93-153%) for hospitalization; 287% (198-399%) for ICU admission; and 137% (50-230%) for death.
Interpretation
The progressive increase in transmissibility and virulence of SARS-CoV-2 VOCs will result in a significantly larger, and more deadly, pandemic than would have occurred in the absence of VOC emergence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tarheelbybirth
Then HE posts an article that states:

Adenoviruses are transmitted through the air or via contact. We might expect this sort of transmission to require a fairly healthy host (one who gets out and comes into contact with others) and, hence, to select against virulent strains. Indeed, adenoviruses are rarely killers, but in close quarters — for example, in the military barracks where Adenovirus-14 has been a particular problem — barriers to transmission may be lowered. This could open the door for the evolution of more virulent strains. (emphasis mine)

His stupidity is mind-bottling.

Also, note that the UK is NOT seeing an uptick in severity, overall.

BUT, it is NOW 5x more young people being infected than those 50 or 60+.

That directly implies that, IF the Delta variant is impacting new infections with similar severity, the severity we previously saw in "old people" is now "the norm" in the youths and young adults driving most of the infections.

In other words - this variant may be MUCH WORSE for those age groups than earlier strains were.... 👀
 
  • Haha
Reactions: your_master5
JFC, you're a moran. It quite literally says in your own article that the cholera virus has EVOLVED a high level of virulence in humans. How? Because it CAN. By the same measure, a respiratory virus with a long latency period...like COVID...is free to evolve higher virulence because it CAN. Now STFU before you make yourself look even dumber than you already have.
JFC you can't ****ing read!! Cholera is a bacteria NOT a virus, first off. Secondly, most virus do NOT become more virulent and in case you missed the BIG ****ING IMAGE in the article which shows something MORE contagious being less virulent you'd understand that's what is happening with covid. God damn you liberals are ****ing boneheads! The virus wants to survive so if it kills it's host, it becomes extinct, so it mutates to less damaging. DID YOU NOT READ THIS? What a ****stick!
 

Compared to non-VOC SARS-CoV-2 strains, the adjusted elevation in risk associated with N501Y-positive variants was 59% (49-69%) for hospitalization; 105% (82-134%) for ICU admission; and 61% (40-87%) for death. Increases with Delta variant were more pronounced: 120% (93-153%) for hospitalization; 287% (198-399%) for ICU admission; and 137% (50-230%) for death.
Interpretation
The progressive increase in transmissibility and virulence of SARS-CoV-2 VOCs will result in a significantly larger, and more deadly, pandemic than would have occurred in the absence of VOC emergence.
CFR


"Results revealed that during the initial six weeks of the pandemic in Cleveland, the early virus strains were well established and contributed to higher incidents of death from the disease. However, within weeks these early virus strains were outpaced by more transmissible strains that were associated with lower hospitalizations and increased patient survival even when hospitalized."

img.png
 
It's like Dunning-Kruger is a virus that has evolved and mutated and strengthened and metastasized and a whole host of other shit and has completely overtaken @your_master5. Like it was bad in @shank hawk but @your_master5 has an even worse strain of this shit.
Dude you're a mess and as usual provide absolutely nothing to a conversation other than attacks and stupidity.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: sob5
Then HE posts an article that states:

Adenoviruses are transmitted through the air or via contact. We might expect this sort of transmission to require a fairly healthy host (one who gets out and comes into contact with others) and, hence, to select against virulent strains. Indeed, adenoviruses are rarely killers, but in close quarters — for example, in the military barracks where Adenovirus-14 has been a particular problem — barriers to transmission may be lowered. This could open the door for the evolution of more virulent strains. (emphasis mine)

His stupidity is mind-bottling.
You do realize that did NOT happen right? Of course you missed it. Keep the fear porn coming!
 
JFC you can't ****ing read!! Cholera is a bacteria NOT a virus, first off. Secondly, most virus do NOT become more virulent and in case you missed the BIG ****ING IMAGE in the article which shows something MORE contagious being less virulent you'd understand that's what is happening with covid. God damn you liberals are ****ing boneheads! The virus wants to survive so if it kills it's host, it becomes extinct, so it mutates to less damaging. DID YOU NOT READ THIS? What a ****stick!
Lol...you are correct. Cholera is a bacteria and that's my bone-headed mistake. The adenovirus, however, is not and your article lays out the kind of scenario where it would become more virulent. Which you, of course, have repeatedly assured us doesn't occur. As your own f'n article explains in detail, a virus that can easily transmit from host to host has no need to limit it's virulence and, in fact, can increase in virulence to produce a higher viral load in it's host leading to more shedding and a higher probability or infecting others. In other words, you have answered your own question.

I do appreciate that you now say "most viruses" so you are learning. BTW, "most viruses" don't kill millions around the world in a year. Yet, here we are. You might want to stop using that idiotic metric.
 
You do realize that did NOT happen right? Of course you missed it. Keep the fear porn coming!
Ummm...what? How does that negate the premise? You categorically claimed mutated viruses weakened. You asked how a virus could possibly increase in virulence. You posted an article laying out very clearly how it occurs. Whine all you like but that was just funny.
 
Lol...you are correct. Cholera is a bacteria and that's my bone-headed mistake. The adenovirus, however, is not and your article lays out the kind of scenario where it would become more virulent. Which you, of course, have repeatedly assured us doesn't occur. As your own f'n article explains in detail, a virus that can easily transmit from host to host has no need to limit it's virulence and, in fact, can increase in virulence to produce a higher viral load in it's host leading to more shedding and a higher probability or infecting others. In other words, you have answered your own question.

I do appreciate that you now say "most viruses" so you are learning. BTW, "most viruses" don't kill millions around the world in a year. Yet, here we are. You might want to stop using that idiotic metric.
Ohhhhhhhh so I get it. Because I didn't use the word "most" that's where your argument lies! You did realize that article explained the "doomsday" scenario that's NEVER happened right?

This guy doesn't must be totally wrong too!!!


And keep taking that awesome VACCINE!!
 
Ummm...what? How does that negate the premise? You categorically claimed mutated viruses weakened. You asked how a virus could possibly increase in virulence. You posted an article laying out very clearly how it occurs. Whine all you like but that was just funny.
It posted a scenario and just as I mentioned, it didn't happen. Please have more reading comprehension.
 
That IS "actual scientific data"

Go look up those flu pandemic mortality rates.
How many strains of flu are there? Can you tell me? Are you just going to tell me the number of deaths each year and that explains it? Or are you going to provide actual data? What a simpleton argument.
 
How many strains of flu are there?
Lots of them

H1N1 has lots of variants, including those that hit us "recently" in the past decade.
Y'know.....the ones you claimed "could not possibly be more virulent", but WERE more virulent.
 

Your chart says Delta CFR is 0.3% (0.2% to 0.5% range) for "28 day followup"

Currently YOUNG adults and CHILDREN make up MOST of the cases.
So, what were CFRs for the early Covid variants in those age groups?

5-17 yrs: 0.011%
18-29 yrs: 0.043%
30-49 yrs: 0.135%
40-49 yrs: 0.365%

0.3% is monstrously HIGH
if we're claiming MOST (80%) of the new cases are in YOUNG PEOPLE. Alpha was <0.05% for that demographic.
 
Delta has a significantly less CFR than previous.
I don't know if this is true or not. Could be. But if people are more easily infected, the net death toll could still be higher.

And keep in mind that death toll is not the only measure of harm the virus can cause. Economic damage and long term health impairment are other non-trivial harms.

Do you have a link for your claim about the lower fatality rate? I'd like to see some real data.

I found this interesting graph showing R0 for some common diseases:

reproduction_number_diseases.png


 
CFR


"Results revealed that during the initial six weeks of the pandemic in Cleveland, the early virus strains were well established and contributed to higher incidents of death from the disease. However, within weeks these early virus strains were outpaced by more transmissible strains that were associated with lower hospitalizations and increased patient survival even when hospitalized."

img.png
This is pretty interesting. I missed it earlier.

I wish I knew how much the vaccines (and improved treatments) are influencing the numbers for the more recent variants.
 
Hey! Here's another. Two anecdotes plus some others starts to equal data!.

Strange do you do the same things when anecdotes about people dying from the vaccines? How about all the scientific data around Ivermectin that you called me stupid on? I wonder which pieces of information you believe and ones that you don't? Strange how you support this position on kids yet not the positions on others. Maybe you have a bias? Yep!
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT