Coronavirus

Started by dadudemon504 pages

CDC data shows that only 6% of the COVID-19 deaths are only from COVID-19.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

. For 6% of the deaths, COVID-19 was the only cause mentioned. For deaths with conditions or causes in addition to COVID-19, on average, there were 2.6 additional conditions or causes per death.

So now we are down to only ~9,300 COVID-19 deaths. On average, there were 2.6 other severe conditions (comorbidities) that were part of or the primary reason for death. That's the average.

Enjoy these facts.

But...truuuump?

Originally posted by Blakemore
As in himself?

Yes. For background, he posted a picture of himself in gym shorts doing leg extensions at the gym, and people teased him for having a small penis, because he has no visible bulge. To prove that he does not have a small penis, he posted a picture of himself with an erection in tight pants, and people teased him further as small penis confirmed. To be fair, I stuck up for him, because he is not, in fact, small. He is just average, and that is fine.

Originally posted by dadudemon
CDC data shows that only 6% of the COVID-19 deaths are only from COVID-19.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

So now we are down to only ~9,300 COVID-19 deaths. On average, there were 2.6 other severe conditions (comorbidities) that were part of or the primary reason for death. That's the average.

Enjoy these facts.

Thanks for the info. I had already known that they were massively overinflating the numbers to scare as many people as possible into going along with their authoritarian agenda but didn't know the exact percentage. Now I do. 🙂

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Thanks for the info. I had already known that they were massively overinflating the numbers to scare as many people as possible into going along with their authoritarian agenda but didn't know the exact percentage. Now I do. 🙂

👆

This is the CDC's own collected data that they got from medical orgs and facilities, doctor's offices, based on the CDC's own guidelines on how to report the data.

So I'm not sure how the anti-science deniers can possibly justify the data. It is the CDC.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pelosi-san-francisco-hair-salon-owner-calls-it-slap-in-the-face

We can go to funerals and you can't.

We can go to restaurants and you can't

We can go to salons and you can't.

Can a weasel defend this? And no I do not mean "this is okay because covid isn't a big deal" . I mean the hypocrisy. The way they treat us differently. Any defense? A tiny one? Even a microscopic one?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
Yes. For background, he posted a picture of himself in gym shorts doing leg extensions at the gym, and people teased him for having a small penis, because he has no visible bulge. To prove that he does not have a small penis, he posted a picture of himself with an erection in tight pants, and people teased him further as small penis confirmed. To be fair, I stuck up for him, because he is not, in fact, small. He is just average, and that is fine.
I was actually implying he was a dick, but good to know that average dude is average.

COVID-19 testing kits being shipped in 2017 and 2018?

How is that possible if it was 'discovered' in Q4 2019?

Here are screenshots before WITS changed the content on their website:

Note the product codes match for 2017 meaning it was also for COVID-19 testing kits:

WITS quickly updated their website when this got out:

https://wits.worldbank.org/trade/comtrade/en/country/ALL/year/2017/tradeflow/Exports/partner/WLD/nomen/h5/product/902780

https://wits.worldbank.org/tariff/trains/en/country/CAN/partner/ALL/nomen/h5/product/902780

Notice the lack of a COVID-19 reference, now?

But wait! Maybe you're skeptical like I am and think those screenshots were shopped.

NOPE! Internet Archive link to the old version of the website has the old data still there:

http://archive.is/CpjOD

Tinfoil hat or not, it's impossible to have test kits for COVID-19 in 2017 and 2018. Unless COVID-19 was not discovered in Q4 2019.

Buckle your butts up. Because this story will go no where. But it should be the biggest news blaring on every TV station with demands for explanations for why we were lied to about COVID-19.

Originally posted by dadudemon
COVID-19 testing kits being shipped in 2017 and 2018?

How is that possible if it was 'discovered' in Q4 2019?

Here are screenshots before WITS changed the content on their website:

Note the product codes match for 2017 meaning it was also for COVID-19 testing kits:

WITS quickly updated their website when this got out:

https://wits.worldbank.org/trade/comtrade/en/country/ALL/year/2017/tradeflow/Exports/partner/WLD/nomen/h5/product/902780

https://wits.worldbank.org/tariff/trains/en/country/CAN/partner/ALL/nomen/h5/product/902780

Notice the lack of a COVID-19 reference, now?

But wait! Maybe you're skeptical like I am and think those screenshots were shopped.

NOPE! Internet Archive link to the old version of the website has the old data still there:

http://archive.is/CpjOD

Tinfoil hat or not, it's impossible to have test kits for COVID-19 in 2017 and 2018. Unless COVID-19 was not discovered in Q4 2019.

Buckle your butts up. Because this story will go no where. But it should be the biggest news blaring on every TV station with demands for explanations for why we were lied to about COVID-19.

You visit some crazy ass websites.

Originally posted by Blakemore
You visit some crazy ass websites.

It's pretty easy to run across this if you're looking for COVID-19 test kit availability. Anyone needing this for work, school, church, etc. could potentially runs across this result.

I just so happened to look at the site a few days later and saw that they updated their site, scrubbing the info from their test kit shipping history.

They f*cked up. Big time. And it was 2 years in a row for "COVID-19" testing. That's not possible unless COVID-19 was a thing in 2017.

Well, most COVID deaths are due to strokes, heart attacks, flu and pneumonia. But having said that, a virus that can literally stop people breathing is still a concern and yes, a cause of other health problems.

Originally posted by Blakemore
Well, most COVID deaths are due to strokes, heart attacks, flu and pneumonia. But having said that, a virus that can literally stop people breathing is still a concern and yes, a cause of other health problems.
yeah, they are secondary infections or syndromes, the virus is still the cause as it undermines the immune system.

Originally posted by dadudemon
It's pretty easy to run across this if you're looking for COVID-19 test kit availability. Anyone needing this for work, school, church, etc. could potentially runs across this result.

I just so happened to look at the site a few days later and saw that they updated their site, scrubbing the info from their test kit shipping history.

They f*cked up. Big time. And it was 2 years in a row for "COVID-19" testing. That's not possible unless COVID-19 was a thing in 2017.

Fact check re: test kits, most pulmonary viruses enter via the eyes, ears, nose and mouth. The easiest nexus point to access is with a swab up the nose. PCR is also the same technique for all viruses, the indicator bands are different, hence how identification takes place.

No tin foil hat needed and a simple "thank you" is fine. 🙂

The Covid 19 labelling is this year, the kits are not specific.

Nice to have you back whirly

Originally posted by Blakemore
Nice to have you back whirly
Thanks mate, I hope all have been well without me.

Luckily, we know there are 2 major COVID-19 test types, what comes in a COVID-19 test kits, and it's more than swabs. For the antibody test kits, they require COVID-19 IgM/IgG specific nitrocellulose membrane strips that test specifically for COVID-19 IgM/IgG. Not possible to have those strips in 2017 unless SARS-CoV-2 existing prior to shipment in 2017.

https://www.fda.gov/media/140297/download

But what if it was the swab test kits? The labeling on the swab test kits has prefilled references to COVID-19 so the labs know what is being tested. Additionally, the test kits themselves are labeled for COVID-19:

https://health.ri.gov/publications/instructions/COVID-19-Specimen-Collection-Kit.pdf

https://www.copanusa.com/covid-19-sample-collection-kits-for-upper-respiratory-tract-specimens/

Additionally, these supplies were specific to COVID-19 in vitro analysis, as stated in the product description.

Notice how my posts have actual citations with facts and screenshots?

Originally posted by dadudemon
Luckily, we know there are 2 major COVID-19 test types, what comes in a COVID-19 test kits, and it's more than swabs. For the antibody test kits, they require COVID-19 IgM/IgG specific nitrocellulose membrane strips that test specifically for COVID-19 IgM/IgG. Not possible to have those strips in 2017 unless SARS-CoV-2 existing prior to shipment in 2017.

https://www.fda.gov/media/140297/download

But what if it was the swab test kits? The labeling on the swab test kits has prefilled references to COVID-19 so the labs know what is being tested. Additionally, the test kits themselves are labeled for COVID-19:

https://health.ri.gov/publications/instructions/COVID-19-Specimen-Collection-Kit.pdf

https://www.copanusa.com/covid-19-sample-collection-kits-for-upper-respiratory-tract-specimens/

Additionally, these supplies were specific to COVID-19 in vitro analysis, as stated in the product description.

Notice how my posts have actual citations with facts and screenshots?

https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/32828

Yeah but not really the nitrocellulose cards give different bands for different things. The ones that work for Mers will ID Sars 2.

The Flu SC2 Multiplex Assay, or multi-viral band assessments for the PCRs, uniquely identify SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, and Flu B and is part of the result from analyzing the COVID-19 test kits.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/covid-19-diagnostic-test/about/pac-20488900

It would not be possible to use the PCRs with the COVID-19 test kits if it did not distinguish between SARS-CoV-2 specific nucleotide sequences.

There's no argument or debate to be had. It is specific to COVID-19 test kits.

Too Long, Didn't Read: [1] they either mislabeled their content for COVID-19 test kits or [2] they had COVID-19 test kits that were specific to SARS-CoV-2 in 2017.

Since you can literally sort the content by PCRs specific to SARS-CoV-2 for 2017, the [2] option is correct.

https://wits.worldbank.org/trade/comtrade/en/country/ALL/year/2017/tradeflow/Exports/partner/WLD/nomen/h5/product/382200

So we are faced with an uncomfortable truth: at the latest, we had sequenced SARS-CoV-2 by 2017 and had unique PCR for this virus. This contradicts the previous finding that it was originally sequenced in Q4 2019.

The Associated Press tried their best to debunk this "myth" but fundamentally failed to address the problem with having SARS-CoV-2 tests, via PCR, in 2017. Something that should not be possible. A less "tin foil hatty" explanation is it was properly identified and PCR available in 2017 but it was not known to be as deadly as it was until 2019 when a true break-out happened. This explanation can debunk the "plandemic" portion of the tin foil hat argument while also explaining why we would have extremely specific tests, via PCR, for this specific novel coronavirus. Also, no one has to share their "trade secrets" and when it did break out, test kits were rapidly produced and made available.

But WITS adjusting the content on their site after this story broke out makes them look very guilty as if they are hiding something. That something is the obvious 2017 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-specific tests that would make some companies look quite guilty for not better sharing information related to a pandemic. It seems a "don't want a lawsuit" is a far better explanation than a plandemic.

Originally posted by dadudemon
The Flu SC2 Multiplex Assay, or multi-viral band assessments for the PCRs, uniquely identify SARS-CoV-2, Flu A, and Flu B and is part of the result from analyzing the COVID-19 test kits.

https://www.mayoclinic.org/tests-procedures/covid-19-diagnostic-test/about/pac-20488900

It would not be possible to use the PCRs with the COVID-19 test kits if it did not distinguish between SARS-CoV-2 specific nucleotide sequences.

There's no argument or debate to be had. It is specific to COVID-19 test kits.

Too Long, Didn't Read: [1] they either mislabeled their content for COVID-19 test kits or [2] they had COVID-19 test kits that were specific to SARS-CoV-2 in 2017.

Since you can literally sort the content by PCRs specific to SARS-CoV-2 for 2017, the [2] option is correct.

https://wits.worldbank.org/trade/comtrade/en/country/ALL/year/2017/tradeflow/Exports/partner/WLD/nomen/h5/product/382200

So we are faced with an uncomfortable truth: at the latest, we had sequenced SARS-CoV-2 by 2017 and had unique PCR for this virus. This contradicts the previous finding that it was originally sequenced in Q4 2019.

The Associated Press tried their best to debunk this "myth" but fundamentally failed to address the problem with having SARS-CoV-2 tests, via PCR, in 2017. Something that should not be possible. A less "tin foil hatty" explanation is it was properly identified and PCR available in 2017 but it was not known to be as deadly as it was until 2019 when a true break-out happened. This explanation can debunk the "plandemic" portion of the tin foil hat argument while also explaining why we would have extremely specific tests, via PCR, for this specific novel coronavirus. Also, no one has to share their "trade secrets" and when it did break out, test kits were rapidly produced and made available.

But WITS adjusting the content on their site after this story broke out makes them look very guilty as if they are hiding something. That something is the obvious 2017 SARS-CoV-2 PCR-specific tests that would make some companies look quite guilty for not better sharing information related to a pandemic. It seems a "don't want a lawsuit" is a far better explanation than a plandemic.

No, nitrocellulose is inert biologically. Don't try setting fire to it mind. The reason I said Mers is because the antigen immuno globulin used on Mers and Sars 1 test kits works for Sars 2. What none of them do is show mutation, you need PCR for that.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!

Fact check re: test kits, most pulmonary viruses enter via the eyes, ears, nose and mouth. The easiest nexus point to access is with a swab up the nose. PCR is also the same technique for all viruses, the indicator bands are different, hence how identification takes place.

No tin foil hat needed and a simple "thank you" is fine. 🙂

The Covid 19 labelling is this year, the kits are not specific.

Yup. When I got tested a few weeks ago, they swabbed by inner cheek and then around in my nostrils.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
No, nitrocellulose is inert biologically. Don't try setting fire to it mind. The reason I said Mers is because the antigen immuno globulin used on Mers and Sars 1 test kits works for Sars 2. What none of them do is show mutation, you need PCR for that.

Further

https://healthfeedback.org/claimreview/covid-19-test-kits-were-not-purchased-in-2017-and-2018-claim-is-based-on-mislabeled-data/

Claims that the coronavirus pandemic was planned has been fanned by online posts showing data tables from the World Integrated Trade Solutions (WITS) website, developed by the World Bank and other organizations, which “allows users to access and retrieve information on trade and tariffs.” These tables appear to report that COVID-19 test kits were already being sold in 2017 and 2018 (archived here and here, respectively), which contradicts our present understanding that the pandemic started in 2019. The claim was posted on the imageboard 4chan on 5 September 2020 and was also shared by Ben Swann on Facebook.
However, as we explain below, this claim is based on a misunderstanding of how the system used to track exports and imports, called the Harmonized System (HS), works. And it is likely little more than the result of an error in data labeling on the WITS website. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce:

“Among industry classification systems, Harmonized System (HS) Codes are commonly used throughout the export process for goods. The Harmonized System is a standardized numerical method of classifying traded products. It is used by customs authorities around the world to identify products when assessing duties and taxes and for gathering statistics.

The HS is administrated by the World Customs Organization (WCO) and is updated every five years. It serves as the foundation for the import and export classification systems used in the United States and by many trading partners.”

Swann’s Facebook post shows that the HS code associated with COVID-19 test kits is 382200. The assignment of this code to COVID-19 test kits was established in the HS classification reference for COVID-19 medical supplies, jointly issued on 9 April 2020 by the WCO and the World Health Organization. The reference also explains that this code is based on a pre-existing HS classification from 2017 (Figure 1). Therefore, the HS code 382200 was already in use two years before the pandemic.

HS classification for COVID-19 test kits
Figure 1. Screenshot of a table in the HS classification reference for COVID-19 medical supplies. Note that COVID-19 test kits come under a pre-existing HS code set in 2017 (in red).
The code is associated with medical test kits in general and is not specific to COVID-19 test kits only. This is demonstrated by the WITS pages which display all imports by country under the code 388200 (2017 and 2018), showing that the data displayed pertains to “Reagents; composite diagnostic or laboratory reagents, other than those of heading no. 3002 or 3006” (Figure 2). In short, this broad description can apply to any medical test kit.

2017 all imports 382200
Figure 2. Screenshot of the WITS page which displays all 2017 imports by country under the code 388200.
The code’s association with medical kits in general is corroborated by the Italian news organization Open, which reported in their fact-check of the same claim that the code 382200 can also be found in descriptions of a kit that processes semen and a test kit for detecting Cryptococcus, a disease-causing fungus. All of this information together indicates that the data tables for 2017 and 2018, which supposedly apply to COVID-19 test kits, are actually displaying information about previously existing medical test kits from before the pandemic.

The WITS website has since corrected the tables (2017 and 2018) to display “Medical test kits” in the title rather than “COVID-19 test kits”. It has also been updated to include an explanatory note: “The data here track previously existing medical devices that are now classified by the World Customs Organization as critical to tackling COVID-19” (Figure 3).

HS classification corrected on WITS
Figure 3. A comparison of the webpage displayed at this URL address before (top) and after (bottom) the update. An archive of the original webpage can be seen here.
Numerous conspiracy theories regarding the origins of the coronavirus began almost as soon as the pandemic itself. The persistent claim that the pandemic is a manmade event is based on faulty premises and has been repeatedly debunked by fact-checkers. This claim is no different, as these online posts which supposedly provide evidence of a conspiracy are likely founded on an error that led to mislabeled data, which has since been corrected by WITS. Given that scientists only discovered the virus in early 2020, it is impossible for COVID-19 test kits to have been available two years ago.

Good thing I am back to fact check DDM's tinfoil hat tomfoolery with facts and Science.