Five key questions about Coronavirus

[dms1972]

Sucharit Bhakdi, may not be a name you have heard often, he is Emeritus Professor of Medical Microbiology in Mainz University Germany, and the questions he is asking are likely to be key to the world gaining a better understanding of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (commonly called the Coronavirus) and demystifying this. When many in leadership are in the early stages of hysteria and lacking sound judgement and some in the media are simply running with the wild horses on this, his is a calm, learned voice that needs to be heard I believe.

COVID-19, Urgent Reassessment, Diagnosis and Basic Principles of Infectiology: Open Letter from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi to German Chancellor Dr. Angela Merkel - Global Research

 

[timewerx]

A sane mind, finally!

 

[Amittai]

COVID-19, Urgent Reassessment, Diagnosis and Basic Principles of Infectiology: Open Letter from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi to German Chancellor Dr. Angela Merkel - Global Research

Good common sense to be added to the mix.

I will say I additionally think the new virus (in some of its various strains) attacks mainly the immune system and a range of metabolic processes.

 

[Tanj]

Sucharit Bhakdi, may not be a name you have heard often, he is Emeritus Professor of Medical Microbiology in Mainz University Germany, and the questions he is asking are likely to be key to the world gaining a better understanding of the SARS-CoV-2 virus (commonly called the Coronavirus) and demystifying this. When many in leadership are in the early stages of hysteria and lacking sound judgement and some in the media are simply running with the wild horses on this, his is a calm, learned voice that needs to be heard I believe.

COVID-19, Urgent Reassessment, Diagnosis and Basic Principles of Infectiology: Open Letter from Professor Sucharit Bhakdi to German Chancellor Dr. Angela Merkel - Global Research

A Sad out of touch voice that should be ignored at all costs.

From his letter...
Point 2 (Dangerousness):
"Preliminary results of the study can already be seen today and lead to the conclusion that the new virus is NOT different from traditional corona viruses in terms of dangerousness. The authors express this in the title of their paper “SARS-CoV-2: Fear versus Data.” [3]"

Well. That's interesting. What's this [3] reference? Why it's this:
[3] Roussel et al. SARS-CoV-2: Fear Versus Data. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2020, 105947

A full text of which can be found here:
SARS-CoV-2: fear versus data

Which proudly announces:
less than 4000 deaths for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of writing.

Hmm. Sound out of date to anyone else? Seems a bit behind the times to me.

It is odd how well respected, sane researchers can dive off the deep end on things like this. Duesberg was a well respected scientist until he kept insisting HIV doesn't cause AIDS.

 

[Ophiolite]

I will say I additionally think the new virus (in some of its various strains) attacks mainly the immune system and a range of metabolic processes.

Which aspect of your expertise in the matter leads you to think this?
Or, more directly
What is the nature of your expertise in this matter?

 

[Amittai]

A Sad out of touch voice that should be ignored at all costs.

...

I think their grasp both of viruses and of "dangerousness" is shallow. The relative difference of spread in societies structured differently is the main aspect that struck me, I should have been more explicit.

I believe I should continue to socially distance though I'd like some light on whether certain individuals should visit me, yet agree this might not be readily findable outable.

 

[Amittai]

Which aspect of your expertise in the matter leads you to think this? Or, more directly, What is the nature of your expertise in this matter?

(The reports cited earlier in this thread have renamed Covid 19 as something else, are they in a muddle or deceiving us on some points?)

As to your question, a batch of observations and reading -

- recent reading that I haven't kept all the references to (or had difficulty finding) (sorry):

. Iceland found 40 strains of Covid 19 alone
. Eyewitnesses from the public have described two or three waves of illness with different symptoms or symptoms varying in gravity
. The report of the other day in a thread about poor oxygenation (which may not have much to do with radiation which a certain commentator added)

- older reading about viral and postviral illnesses including nuances of viral immune illnesses and postviral immune illnesses and the aftermath of 1918-21

- my experiences with mostly less contagious viruses and with GPs who don't know what to do about viral and postviral illnesses

- the presentation of some of these illnesses is highly individual

I've got a hunch that in addition to temporary or permanent lung and / or circulatory condition, other lasting effects will emerge. Covid 19 has been found in central nervous systems according to the Encephalitis Society.

Coronavirus and encephalitis

I very much want to back social distancing till further notice, precisely because the effects are probably more serious than rather a lot of people were making out.

 

[Tanj]

(The reports cited earlier in this thread have renamed Covid 19 as something else, are they in a muddle or deceiving us on some points?)

As to your question, a batch of observations and reading -

- recent reading that I haven't kept all the references to (or had difficulty finding) (sorry):

. Iceland found 40 strains of Covid 19 alone

No, it didn't. It found a bunch of genetic variants but they are waaaay too similar to each other to be considered different strains.

You can see alot of the genetic data here: auspice
Even those 5 major groupings aren't enough to qualify as different strains.

 

[sfs]

From his letter...
Point 2 (Dangerousness):
"Preliminary results of the study can already be seen today and lead to the conclusion that the new virus is NOT different from traditional corona viruses in terms of dangerousness. The authors express this in the title of their paper “SARS-CoV-2: Fear versus Data.” [3]"

Well. That's interesting. What's this [3] reference? Why it's this:
[3] Roussel et al. SARS-CoV-2: Fear Versus Data. Int. J. Antimicrob. Agents 2020, 105947

A full text of which can be found here:
SARS-CoV-2: fear versus data

Which proudly announces:
less than 4000 deaths for SARS-CoV-2 at the time of writing.

Hmm. Sound out of date to anyone else? Seems a bit behind the times to me.

I see that New York City may soon have to start using temporary mass graves in public parks. But hey, it's no worse than other coronaviruses.

 

[Amittai]

No, it didn't. It found a bunch of genetic variants but they are waaaay too similar to each other to be considered different strains.

You can see alot of the genetic data here: auspice
Even those 5 major groupings aren't enough to qualify as different strains.

Thank you so much
I have a hunch this is part of the reason for the range of symptoms and the differences in contagion

I hear of reports of lung infections as well as the other problems we hear about. So the "conventional" version isn't untrue either

So many well known people going

 

[cow451]

A sane mind, finally!

Working with two warnings, so ... I'll defer.

 

[Aryeh Jay]

Working with two warnings, so ...

That should be a badge or something.

 

[cow451]

That should be a badge or something.

A ribbon will do...

 

[Aryeh Jay]

A ribbon will do...