Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Swine Flu virus man made.
I'm not an epidemiologist or virlogist, however, something is very, very wrong. The current swine flu virus is a three strain hybrid combining human, avian and pig strains. Two strain mutations are uncommon and the three strain mutation, as it manifested, is simply not a naturally occuring disease.
Typically flu viruses originate in Asia, this one started in central Mexico City. A more logical progression would have been a genisis in a rural area which then spread to the cities.
Here is an interesting tidbit from an article by the University of Minnesota, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. (Link: http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/panflu/news/jan1404hybrids.html )
Excerpt: "Jan 14, 2004 (CIDRAP News) – One of the worst fears of infectious disease experts is that the H5N1 avian influenza virus now circulating in parts of Asia will combine with a human-adapted flu virus to create a deadly new flu virus that could spread around the world.
That could happen, scientists predict, if someone who is already infected with an ordinary flu virus contracts the avian virus at the same time. The avian virus has already caused at least 48 confirmed human illness cases in Asia, of which 35 have been fatal. The virus has shown little ability to spread from person to person, but the fear is that a hybrid could combine the killing power of the avian virus with the transmissibility of human flu viruses.
Now, rather than waiting to see if nature spawns such a hybrid, US scientists are planning to try to breed one themselves—in the name of preparedness.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will soon launch experiments designed to combine the H5N1 virus and human flu viruses and then see how the resulting hybrids affect animals. The goal is to assess the chances that such a "reassortant" virus will emerge and how dangerous it might be.
CDC officials confirmed the plans for the research as described recently in media reports, particularly in a Canadian Press (CP) story.
Two ways to make hybridsThe plans call for trying two methods to create hybrid viruses, CDC spokesman David Daigle told CIDRAP News via e-mail. One is to infect cells in a laboratory tissue culture with H5N1 and human flu viruses at the same time and then watch to see if they mix. For the human virus, investigators will use A (H3N2), the strain that has caused most human flu cases in recent years, according to the CP report.
The other method is reverse genetics—assembling a new virus with sets of genes from the H5N1 and H3N2 viruses. Reverse genetics has already been used to create H5N1 candidate vaccines in several laboratories, according to Daigle. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) said recently it would soon launch a clinical trial of one of those vaccines.
Of the two methods, the co-infection approach was described as slower and more laborious, though closer to what happens in nature.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
So, the CDC has been screwing around with dangerous hybrids since 2004 and earlier (1997).
The larger questions are: What government would benefit the most from an outbreak of this type? and What nations are scummy enough to launch a viral attack that could kill millions of people?
There is also the issue that this virus concentrates it's attack on the most healthy instead of the most weak. Flu fatalities tend to usually be either the old or the very young. The current Swine Flu strain is having very bad effects on those in the 20-50 year old age group.
We should also consider the financial aspect of this. Our government has a stockpile of 50 million doses of flu vaccine which needs to be periodically replaced. A worldwide man-made pandemic could be a windfall for certain companies who produce these flu vaccines. (This also includes businesses that produce anti-viral drugs)
As I say, I'm not sure what the big picture is, but this latest Swine Flu outbreak is no accident.
(Time to bone up on the Book of Revelation)
Typically flu viruses originate in Asia, this one started in central Mexico City. A more logical progression would have been a genisis in a rural area which then spread to the cities.
Here is an interesting tidbit from an article by the University of Minnesota, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy. (Link: http://www.cidrap.umn.edu/cidrap/content/influenza/panflu/news/jan1404hybrids.html )
Excerpt: "Jan 14, 2004 (CIDRAP News) – One of the worst fears of infectious disease experts is that the H5N1 avian influenza virus now circulating in parts of Asia will combine with a human-adapted flu virus to create a deadly new flu virus that could spread around the world.
That could happen, scientists predict, if someone who is already infected with an ordinary flu virus contracts the avian virus at the same time. The avian virus has already caused at least 48 confirmed human illness cases in Asia, of which 35 have been fatal. The virus has shown little ability to spread from person to person, but the fear is that a hybrid could combine the killing power of the avian virus with the transmissibility of human flu viruses.
Now, rather than waiting to see if nature spawns such a hybrid, US scientists are planning to try to breed one themselves—in the name of preparedness.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will soon launch experiments designed to combine the H5N1 virus and human flu viruses and then see how the resulting hybrids affect animals. The goal is to assess the chances that such a "reassortant" virus will emerge and how dangerous it might be.
CDC officials confirmed the plans for the research as described recently in media reports, particularly in a Canadian Press (CP) story.
Two ways to make hybridsThe plans call for trying two methods to create hybrid viruses, CDC spokesman David Daigle told CIDRAP News via e-mail. One is to infect cells in a laboratory tissue culture with H5N1 and human flu viruses at the same time and then watch to see if they mix. For the human virus, investigators will use A (H3N2), the strain that has caused most human flu cases in recent years, according to the CP report.
The other method is reverse genetics—assembling a new virus with sets of genes from the H5N1 and H3N2 viruses. Reverse genetics has already been used to create H5N1 candidate vaccines in several laboratories, according to Daigle. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) said recently it would soon launch a clinical trial of one of those vaccines.
Of the two methods, the co-infection approach was described as slower and more laborious, though closer to what happens in nature.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
So, the CDC has been screwing around with dangerous hybrids since 2004 and earlier (1997).
The larger questions are: What government would benefit the most from an outbreak of this type? and What nations are scummy enough to launch a viral attack that could kill millions of people?
There is also the issue that this virus concentrates it's attack on the most healthy instead of the most weak. Flu fatalities tend to usually be either the old or the very young. The current Swine Flu strain is having very bad effects on those in the 20-50 year old age group.
We should also consider the financial aspect of this. Our government has a stockpile of 50 million doses of flu vaccine which needs to be periodically replaced. A worldwide man-made pandemic could be a windfall for certain companies who produce these flu vaccines. (This also includes businesses that produce anti-viral drugs)
As I say, I'm not sure what the big picture is, but this latest Swine Flu outbreak is no accident.
(Time to bone up on the Book of Revelation)
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Arthur Louis
David Brin
Boanerges1
Cenk Uygur
Kate Geiselman
J. P. Major
Salon.com
Comments
Have you been watching Alex Jones on prisonplanet.com? He used that exact same phrase. He asserts that the current outbreak is a weaponized version.
And what's up with the CDC & FEMA Bio Coffins? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=THLGrNObwUs
Just out of curiosity, why would anyone who could develop and deploy a weaponized flu virus launch it in Mexico? Granted, after the past 8 years, it's easy to imagine a secret program that casually disregards the well-being of people outside of the U.S. But an outbreak in Mexico is horrible for the U.S., so rule out the U.S. and allied nations. On the other hand, if an enemy of America decided to do this, why not start with America? Or at least Canada? And who, with the resources to do this, would want to attack Mexico? Your theory has a plausible motivation problem.
You have a tin foil hat too Bursa?
Deborah, I agree Napolitano sucks.
Specular, good questions. I do not have the answers, but the Chinese still have an active biowarfare program. Some folks have also speculated that there is an effort by the monied elite to reduce the worldwide population to a more reasonable level. Who knows what the actual motivation is, but this is most certainly a manufactured virus.
Nature has a history of evolving nasty little surprises for the human race. Pandemics happen well enough without human intervention. Or at least, direct human intervention: transportation technologies are mighty good at putting us all at risk of pandemics, since they make it so easy for virii and bacteria to fly around the world at close to the speed of sound. They don't need labs, they've got reproduction rates that make bunnies blush and jet-powered transit to every corner of the earth.
1. What was going on in Mexico BEFORE this "outbreak"? The military was battling a losing war with well equipped drug dealers and by some accounts the Mexican Government was getting ready to collapse. That doesn't seem to be an issue now.
2. The Fed's just released 12 million Tamaflu doses to the States to set up vaccination sites. However the CDC has already said that there will not be a working vaccine for this strain for months. So why would you distribute 12 million doses of an ineffective drug? Also Tamaflu is all but banned in Japan because they found that when you give it to those ages 9-20 they tend to experience delirium and attempt/commit suicide at an alarming rate.
3. If you wanted to completely control the healthcare system in this county what better to gain control than by manufacturing a "pandemic", siezing control and then never giving it back?
Just some food for thought.
I also was scratching my head that we would release vaccines that were initially said to be effective and the next day were said to be ineffective. Which is it? Also, we seem to have, as you noted DJ, a problem making safe vaccines.
I'll say it again, something is up.
Because Tamaflu is not ineffective. What does the CDC's statement about vaccines have to do with Tamaflu? Tamaflu is an anti-viral drug, not a vaccine.
I'm not a medical expert, but I've heard Tamaflu called an anti-viral several times on CNN. It does not prevent or cure the flu - it is given to people who have been recently infected and interferes with the virus, reducing the severity and recovery time of their flu infection.
Although this may sound like just so much puffery, why not conduct some experiments on humans and full-term fetuses so that the Biden clan can once again benefit from living outside the family compound? The study could also determine whether cigar smoking has less, equal, or augmented prophylactic potential when compared to regular cigarettes.
An unintended benefit could inure to the plaintiffs' bar, which could represent flu suffers who might have been protected if those refusing to smoke in their presence when requested to do so had done so.
Non-smokers could escape prosecution by bringing a note from their doctors, but those doctors, whose names and likenesses would be posted periodically by Sheriff Smith on OS, would be subject to trial in Spain if it is later determined that the must-smoke policy was, indeed, propertly founded.
So given that you're not an epidemiologist or a virologist, why do you assume that your opinion is worth the time to write down, let alone share with an audience? I'm sorry if this is insulting, but why are you wasting everybody's time with speculation you can't back up?
For what it's worth, strains incorporating features of two, three, or four other strains are exceptionally common, as are frame-shift and point mutations in the viral genome. That's what makes it necessary for pharmaceutical companies to issue new vaccines every year - because they recombine and mutate so rapidly. It's how viruses do business. It's why HIV has no vaccine.
Tamiflu is not a vaccine. It's a representative of a class of drugs referred to as neuraminidase inhibitors, which stop a crucial stage in the viral reproductive process. A vaccine acts as a "mission briefing" for the immune system, which produces antibodies against an inactive version of the virus so that if you contract the active virus it can already fight it off. NI drugs work after you've been infected, and the virus is reproducing in your cells - they stop the cells from releasing more virus particles into your system, stopping the chain of infection.
Why would you form such strong opinions about a topic you haven't done due diligence on? I mean, you're basically accusing two governments of engaging in biological warfare here - but not really, because you're relying on weak, nudge-wink arguments by insinuation rather than a rational assessment of facts. But not even knowing what tamiflu is...that implies that you're willing to ignore or not seek out information that might contradict you, which I find even more troubling than the conspiracies you stop just short of alleging.
"I do, however, believe that human-caused changes in the global carbon cycle are, have been, and will continue to cause climate changes, which beget changes to ecosystems, biogeochemical cycles, oceanic phenomena, weather, and in the health and stability of the populations of many animals and plants, humans included.
How did I reach that conclusion?
Well, I've read the IPCC report. All of it. It's a tome: three working groups produced one novel-length report in dense, scientific prose. I also read a great many of the papers it cites, and I've taken hundreds of hours of classes on the topic on the university and postgraduate level as part of my old research on biogeochemistry and my current research on how climate change affects the prevalence of invasive weeds in grasslands. In that report, specific and numbingly long, dense, in-deph chapters demonstrate why, for example, global warming isn't just another instance of natural climate cycles, and why exactly carbon compounds derived from human activities are likely to have caused it. They explain how the models work and what their limitations are. They explain the confidence limits of their projections and outline with considerable detail the aspects of global change we can't comment on right now because our understanding and protocols just aren't up to the challenge.
In short, I've done my literal and figurative homework. I've put in the long nights, painful days, and considerable effort to understand global warming. I've paid my dues, and in exchange I got an opinion that means something, an opinion I can defend, and an opinion that I am, frankly, proud of."
You claim to have done your homework. Indeed you have.....examining total BS sources and masquerading as an intellectual. You may fool the multitude of starry eyed lefties on OS, but some of us actually have a shred of common sense. Even an all out nuclear exchange would have but a temporary fleeting negative impact on the environment. (in the overall scheme of things) Thirty years ago scientists were saying with absolute certainty that we were in the beginnings of the next ice age. The human population will self destruct before reaching a density significant enough to cause anything but minor impacts on global warming. (figuring that out ain't rocket science)
The difference is that I'm going off what I can determine is factual. You're going off whatever you make up. I'd rather err on the side of intellectually conservative and fail to leap to a conclusion that's not supportable than to err in the other direction - where most of what I say is meaningless because I can't back it up.
Masquerade? I've been studying this stuff for getting on 8 years, intensively. My sources are almost every paper ever published about climate change. Your personal attack suggests that you're insulted by my curt dismissal of your ridiculous conspiracy theories, which is understandable, if pathetic. But my sources ARE the sources. The fact that you consider rigorous, published scientific literature BS squares perfectly with everything else I observe about your intellectual character, but you're going to have to do better if you're hoping to engage my ideas rather than simply insult me.
"You may fool the multitude of starry eyed lefties on OS, but some of us actually have a shred of common sense. Even an all out nuclear exchange would have but a temporary fleeting negative impact on the environment."
Common sense is a waste of time. Common sense brought us bloodletting, trepanning, Zeus, and snake oil. Common sense brings us ridiculous statements like you just made. And I'm sorry, but data absolutely trumps your common sense. The universe is not always, or even typically, intuitively understandable and in conformation with your personal biases and beliefs.
" Thirty years ago scientists were saying with absolute certainty that we were in the beginnings of the next ice age."
Oh, please. If you had any idea what you were talking about, and were forming a well-rounded and independent opinion, you'd have known that the 70's ice age myth was based off an egregious misunderstanding of a1976 article in the magazine Science News, which isn't a journal and isn't scientific literature. That article merely mentioned that " the long-term trend over the next 20,000 years is towards extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation and cooler climate." At that time, not a bad prediction - given that the warming trend really didn't start until 1970 and wasn't visible yet in 1976. That article, much like swine flu hysteria, was picked up by the mainstream media and wildly exaggerated. Some scientists were concerned that airborne aerosols might suppress temperatures, and they do. But mainstream climate science was in its infancy then, and the National Academy of Sciences report in 1975 stated explicitly that climate science was not at that time able to accurately predict trends. It mentioned cooling not at all - which it would have if a majority of scientists were concerned about it - and was much more concerned with laying out a framework to build climate science to where it is today.
It's wonderfully ironic that you're attempting to demonstrate that a working ecologist is full of shit by posting a widely discredited, incredulously repeated meme based on misunderstandings of a scientific issue that originate with a misunderstanding of a poorly considered article that was refuted a year before it was published. That wouldn't have happened if you weren't so insufferably arrogant that any source but your brain and the Good Book is full of shit.
Like I said - if you're gonna hold an opinion, on global warming or anything else, do your friggin' homework. Your common sense ain't gonna cut it when you cross swords with somebody who can back up their bombast with something substantial.
Here is a video link for you to eyeball: (use google) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttLBqB0qDko
You need to stop doing your homework Charlie. It's a waste of your time and your remaining (few) brain cells could be put to work on more productive activities.