COVID-19 News

[Gene Steinberg]

The latest victim appears to be legendary, but totally crazy, record producer Phil Spector, who has been in prison years after being convicted of murder:

Music Producer Phil Spector Dead at 81 from COVID-19

Phil Spector, the music producer responsible for some of the biggest hits in music and the architect of The Wall of Sound has died ... sources with direct knowledge tell TMZ.

www.tmz.com

 

[Randall]

Long Haulers - The Problem of ‘Long Haul’ COVID​

"The common thread through these comments was a basic one. Each of the patients had already been infected with COVID-19 and presumably had recovered, yet each was still dealing with symptoms of the disease—sometimes vague, sometimes nonspecific—that simply would not go away. Physicians and nurses, already overloaded with emergent cases of the virus, were baffled, often searching for other, more benign explanations for what they were being told."​

The Problem of 'Long Haul' COVID

More and more patients are dealing with major symptoms that linger for months

www.scientificamerican.com

Given what we now know, the first suspect for the long hauler syndrome is an immune system response that is compromising neuropilin-1, a protein that uses the same receptors as the SARS-CoV-2 virus, but is necessary for nerve and vascular health, both of which happen to be associated with all the same symptoms as the long-hauler patients. You heard it here first.

What you haven't heard are the potential downsides on a massive scale if this theory happens to be true. But it doesn't take much imagination. The vaccine they're dosing out to hundreds of millions of people causes the same immunological response. However in healthy people, long-hauler symptoms would take longer to manifest. This is one of those theories I hope is really wrong.

 

[Randall]

Ontario Premier ignores harms of lockdown while imposing severe COVID measures​

"Ontario Premier Doug Ford said a lot of theatrical things on Tuesday as he further locked down the more than 14 million people in his province. But instead of focusing on what he said, let’s take a look at what he failed to say ... "​

FUREY: Ford ignores harms of lockdown while imposing severe COVID measures

Ontario Premier Doug Ford said a lot of theatrical things on Tuesday as he further locked down the more than 14 million people in his province. But instead of focus…

torontosun.com

 

[Gene Steinberg]

They could have done this with proper messaging. Making it illegal only brings out the crazies who make it a fake political and or free speech issue. That's more or less what incoming President Biden plans to do here.

 

[Randall]

They could have done this with proper messaging. Making it illegal only brings out the crazies who make it a fake political and or free speech issue. That's more or less what incoming President Biden plans to do here.

Biden also wants to kill a major energy project between US and Canada on his first day in office. Maybe it's a good idea. Maybe it's not. As for the lockdown strategy, Sweden is presently doing a turn-around on their open-for-business approach and instituting measures. This is a very bad sign, as is this long-hauler syndrome.

 

[Gene Steinberg]

Biden wants these energy projects to be examined for environmental impact.

 

[Randall]

Biden wants these energy projects to be examined for environmental impact.

That's already been done, and approved. So one more time around the block. Regardless of whether or not the environmental risks will be "examined", I can pretty much guarantee that there will be insufficient environmental restoration rules in place. I live here in Alberta, and therefore it's heretical for me to say that the tar sands are an environmental disaster on a massive scale, but it's also true.

One study showed that they could completely restore the environment as they go for only about 1% of their profits. But the shareholders and boards have chosen not to do it. In fact they're so cheap that they were flying workers in from Mexico while at the same time complaining how regulations were causing "Albertan jobs". Anyway, this is a major divergence from this thread's topic.

 

[Randall]

A Comment On The COVID Conspiracy - Which one was that again?

There have been so many conspiracy theories that I've lost count. The forum here has pages and pages of them. But there have been some themes in the "scamdemic" or "plandemic" or whatever you want to call it, that stick out in my mind, such as that the signal that begins the big change ( whatever it is ) will be some kind of emergency measures enacted due to some natural disaster or disease that will have most of the world population locked-down, and somehow as part of that process there will be a wide-scale culling of the global population. But with what?

The current pandemic had the potential to do both and it may be only just the start. Talking conspiratorially here, it's fairly obvious to me, despite the unproven claims to the contrary, that SARS-CoV-2 came out of the Wuhan lab, and that Chinese authorities knowingly let infected passengers onto international flights.

How convenient is it that this is a disease just happens to be so much more deadly to the older population? How convenient is it that literally millions will die as a direct result of economic lockdowns? How convenient is it that over 50,000 medical workers and scientists who oppose the lockdowns have been virtually silenced?

And now comes stage two, the worldwide vaccination program. How convenient is it that this new type of vaccine was touted as totally safe, until we find out a few people started having severe reactions, and that it shouldn't be given to pregnant women or young people? This was a rapid deployment vaccine that was speed approved based on fear promoted by the media.

But here's where things get really interesting. Now we've got cases where patients who no longer have COVID-19 are suffering from what is called Long Hauler Syndrome. The virus is gone from their bodies, but they are suffering after effects that according to the articles I've read so far, have completely stumped medical experts.

So I recently wrote to one of the heads of a Long Hauler study group suggesting that the symptoms may be a COVID-19 related immune response that is attacking the protein used for building nerves and blood vessels. The symptoms of the long-haul patients match those that this situation would lead to. I'm no scientist, but I'm pretty good at seeing patterns and relationships in certain complex problems.

So I could be completely wrong. But what if I'm not? And this is where the conspiracy comes in again. This new vaccine causes our immune systems to target exactly the same markers. But in healthy people the long-haul symptoms wouldn't be immediately prevalent. They would only start to appear after some time. In other words, the approval process for the vaccine was not long enough to detect if this danger would manifest.

So first comes the virus, then the fear campaign, followed by the lockdowns, and then a worldwide vaccination campaign that could have some serious long term consequences over and above the millions of elderly and poor who will die because of the lockdowns, all orchestrated by bureaucrats, communists, and wealthy industrialists. Hmm. But don't worry. There's really no conspiracy. Is there? Someone please tell me I'm just being paranoid.

An Old Conspiracy Theory Known As "Agenda 21" Has Been Rebooted By The Coronavirus Pandemic

People on social media are sharing posts that link the pandemic to claims that a totalitarian world government is seeking to kill most of the planet’s population.

www.buzzfeed.com

 

[marduk]

Biden also wants to kill a major energy project between US and Canada on his first day in office. Maybe it's a good idea. Maybe it's not. As for the lockdown strategy, Sweden is presently doing a turn-around on their open-for-business approach and instituting measures. This is a very bad sign, as is this long-hauler syndrome.

The funny thing is that the strategists and executives in every mid-to large size oil company up here has known that Keystone was dead or too late for years. It literally no longer is part of most strategies. Even if it comes on-line, it will be too late because of the sandbagging.

It's a non-issue for most. Unfortunately that means banking on TMX and BC politics (which is almost as dumb as Washington), and ship-by-rail and ship-by-truck. Both of which are far less safe and far more carbon-intensive, but that's the kind of decision making you get when you make decisions based on emotion rather than science.

The only real loser for Keystone now are the Albertan taxpayers. Kenney's an idiot for investing in it. He was warned off of it and wouldn't listen.

 

[Randall]

The funny thing is that the strategists and executives in every mid-to large size oil company up here has known that Keystone was dead or too late for years. It literally no longer is part of most strategies. Even if it comes on-line, it will be too late because of the sandbagging.

It's a non-issue for most. Unfortunately that means banking on TMX and BC politics (which is almost as dumb as Washington), and ship-by-rail and ship-by-truck. Both of which are far less safe and far more carbon-intensive, but that's the kind of decision making you get when you make decisions based on emotion rather than science.

The only real loser for Keystone now are the Albertan taxpayers. Kenney's an idiot for investing in it. He was warned off of it and wouldn't listen.

Interesting perspective, but I'm too far out of that loop to know what you mean. What it seems like you're saying is that TMX ( presumably an acronym for the trans mountain pipeline expansion ) through BC is a more effective strategy anyway. Being the heretic that I am, I'm fine with no expansion at all until they agree to clean-up ( rather than expand ) the giant mess they have up there in the tar sands. By clean-up, I mean clean it ALL up AS THEY GO, not create some 7% token reclamation zone to demonstrate that they're not doing completely nothing.

 

[marduk]

Interesting perspective, but I'm too far out of that loop to know what you mean. What it seems like you're saying is that TMX ( presumably an acronym for the trans mountain pipeline expansion ) through BC is a more effective strategy anyway.

What I'm saying is that most (smart) organizations recognized that we couldn't count on Keystone being there to build a business strategy on - so other transportation strategies were planned. Don't get me wrong, Keystone would be a net positive for us, but most current business plans have been done with the assumption that it won't be there. Instead, Trans Mountain and other strategies are being exploited. Most are costlier, but still work even at ~$30/barrel or higher from what I'm being told. However, they are all (except pipelines) far less environmentally friendly in terms of carbon release and risks for oil leakage. A train derailing while carrying oil is usually more risky than a pipeline leak, for example. And the risks of trucks getting into accidents nets out far higher in terms of spillage as well. And they all take far more energy to transport than a gravity-fed pipeline.

Being the heretic that I am, I'm fine with no expansion at all until they agree to clean-up ( rather than expand ) the giant mess they have up there in the tar sands. By clean-up, I mean clean it ALL up AS THEY GO, not create some 7% token reclamation zone to demonstrate that they're not doing completely nothing.

One day I'll share some stuff with you. Not saying the industry isn't environmentally net problematic, but some of us are actually reclaiming the land and leaving it healthier than we found it. Nothing much grows in the tar sands to begin with, because it's the most massive oil spill on the planet - it was just done by nature.

 

[Randall]

What I'm saying is that most (smart) organizations recognized that we couldn't count on Keystone being there to build a business strategy on - so other transportation strategies were planned. Don't get me wrong, Keystone would be a net positive for us, but most current business plans have been done with the assumption that it won't be there. Instead, Trans Mountain and other strategies are being exploited. Most are costlier, but still work even at ~$30/barrel or higher from what I'm being told. However, they are all (except pipelines) far less environmentally friendly in terms of carbon release and risks for oil leakage. A train derailing while carrying oil is usually more risky than a pipeline leak, for example. And the risks of trucks getting into accidents nets out far higher in terms of spillage as well. And they all take far more energy to transport than a gravity-fed pipeline.

Thanks for that. Makes sense to me.

One day I'll share some stuff with you. Not saying the industry isn't environmentally net problematic, but some of us are actually reclaiming the land and leaving it healthier than we found it. Nothing much grows in the tar sands to begin with, because it's the most massive oil spill on the planet - it was just done by nature.

Yes, I've heard that all before, and looked into it, and like I say, only about 7% has been reclaimed, and calling it a natural oil spill is dismissive of the scale of devastation that isn't natural. When only 1% of profits could clean-up everything as they go ( not to mention the jobs it would create ), and they won't do it, then that is where the real problem is. They fight tooth and nail against any regulation that would hold them accountable.

 

[marduk]

Thanks for that. Makes sense to me.

Yes, I've heard that all before, and looked into it, and like I say, only about 7% has been reclaimed, and calling it a natural oil spill is dismissive of the scale of devastation that isn't natural. When only 1% of profits could clean-up everything as they go ( not to mention the jobs it would create ), and they won't do it, then that is where the real problem is. They fight tooth and nail against any regulation that would hold them accountable.

Totally hear and agree with you. Not all companies approach this stuff the same way. I’m talking about projects that I’m aware of and tangentially involved with, that I can’t discuss here.

 

[Randall]

Totally hear and agree with you. Not all companies approach this stuff the same way. I’m talking about projects that I’m aware of and tangentially involved with, that I can’t discuss here.

I would love to hear your perspectives sometime ( off the record ). BTW, my Dad was the head geologist for a number of years at Pan Canadian. They didn't drill a well anywhere in North America unless it went past him first, and he showed me what the real maps look like. You know, the ones that show what companies own what land where, and where all the deposits are ( both operational and in reserve ). It's a whole other world.

 

[Randall]

Into the mystic is one of my favourite songs ever. Oddly enough, I discovered Van Morrison by loving the 80's movie 'Dream a Little Dream' as a kid.

Too bad he's a covid denier. It's certainly made me think twice about him.

Interesting. A quick look at some of the articles about Van Morrison's views on the COVID-19 pandemic doesn't look like denial, as in he doesn't believe the SARS-CoV-2 virus is real. He ( and Clapton ) appear to be in the anti-lockdown camp ( same as me and a number of PhDs and over 50,000 medical scientists and health care professionals ).

What is less clear is what he means by the "pseudoscience". If you've followed this issue as closely as I have, you already know that there are two versions of pseudoscience being talked about. One is the pseudoscience around dubious, if not outright false, claims of cures. The other type of pseudoscience, and the one I think Van Morrison is probably referring to, are the contentious and often highly politicized claims that are being touted as scientific, when in-fact, they don't really meet that standard.

The details of those particular claims are better discussed on the COVID-19 News thread.

 

[marduk]

I would love to hear your perspectives sometime ( off the record ). BTW, my Dad was the head geologist for a number of years at Pan Canadian. They didn't drill a well anywhere in North America unless it went past him first, and he showed me what the real maps look like. You know, the ones that show what companies own what land where, and where all the deposits are ( both operational and in reserve ). It's a whole other world.

Yup. It's wild how little folks here understand how things like that really work, even though we depend upon it - and as citizens in fact own it for the most part.

 

[marduk]

Interesting. A quick look at some of the articles about Van Morrison's views on the COVID-19 pandemic doesn't look like denial, as in he doesn't believe the SARS-CoV-2 virus is real. He ( and Clapton ) appear to be in the anti-lockdown camp ( same as me and a number of PhDs and over 50,000 medical scientists and health care professionals ).

What is less clear is what he means by the "pseudoscience". If you've followed this issue as closely as I have, you already know that there are two versions of pseudoscience being talked about. One is the pseudoscience around dubious, if not outright false, claims of cures. The other type of pseudoscience, and the one I think Van Morrison is probably referring to, are the contentious and often highly politicized claims that are being touted as scientific, when in-fact, they don't really meet that standard.

The details of those particular claims are better discussed on the COVID-19 News thread.

If we've learned anything by going through the Trumpian era, it's that purposeful misinformation kills.

Van Morrison has been clear - Covid dangers are 'pseudoscience' and he wants the lockdowns lifted so he can make money. Which clearly is exactly the same conspiracy thinking pseudo-criticism that is weaponized to achieve an end that Trump and his kin do.

You're asking questions while obeying the law and not harming people. That is skepticism and is good, and you're not harming anyone.

Trump weaponized conspiracy thinking to enrich himself and attempt to subvert democracy in favour of fascism. Van Morrison is doing the same in an attempt to get an income. Both harm others in an attempt for personal gain. There's a big difference there.

Clapton and Van Morrison know they're full of shit. They just lie to make money and get attention, even if it means people die that aren't them. Period. No different than Trump. Classic narcissism.

 

[Randall]

If we've learned anything by going through the Trumpian era, it's that purposeful misinformation kills.

Van Morrison has been clear - Covid dangers are 'pseudoscience' and he wants the lockdowns lifted so he can make money. Which clearly is exactly the same conspiracy thinking pseudo-criticism that is weaponized to achieve an end that Trump and his kin do.

You're asking questions while obeying the law and not harming people. That is skepticism and is good, and you're not harming anyone.

Trump weaponized conspiracy thinking to enrich himself and attempt to subvert democracy in favour of fascism. Van Morrison is doing the same in an attempt to get an income. Both harm others in an attempt for personal gain. There's a big difference there.

Clapton and Van Morrison know they're full of shit. They just lie to make money and get attention, even if it means people die that aren't them. Period. No different than Trump. Classic narcissism.

I'm not so sure about all that. There's nothing wrong with earning a living doing what you do, regardless of whether or not you happen to be famous, and celebrities often advocate not simply for themselves, but for their fans and the disenfranchised, which now includes millions who have lost their livelihoods due to pandemic restrictions killing their businesses.

That being said, I don't know enough about either of their views to be sure just how radical they are, and I'm probably somewhat biased because I've been a fan of both of them as musicians. So I don't want them to be cuckoo. One think I've learned about this pandemic is that as soon as you think you can take on a sound position, some information comes to light that throws doubt on it.

It's really complex. I do a couple of hours of research on it daily, and it barely scratches the surface.

 

[marduk]

I'm not so sure about all that. There's nothing wrong with earning a living doing what you do, regardless of whether or not you happen to be famous, and celebrities often advocate not simply for themselves, but for their fans and the disenfranchised, which now includes millions who have lost their livelihoods due to pandemic restrictions killing their businesses.

That being said, I don't know enough about either of their views to be sure just how radical they are, and I'm probably somewhat biased because I've been a fan of both of them as musicians. So I don't want them to be cuckoo. One think I've learned about this pandemic is that as soon as you think you can take on a sound position, some information comes to light that throws doubt on it.

It's really complex. I do a couple of hours of research on it daily, and it barely scratches the surface.

I think it's one thing to abide by the laws, take precautions, and still do research and ask questions. I think it's entirely another to call Covid pseudoscience as more than 2M are dead worldwide, call for superspreader events like concerts, while having money be your motivation.

Making an income is good. Making an income that causes others to be killed needlessly isn't so good.

I think we would at least agree that his messaging is problematic at best, dangerous at worst. And certainly tone-deaf in the media.

 

[Randall]

I think it's one thing to abide by the laws, take precautions, and still do research and ask questions.

Yup.

I think it's entirely another to call Covid pseudoscience as more than 2M are dead worldwide, call for superspreader events like concerts, while having money be your motivation.

I think that really needs clarification. There is definitely pseudoscience going on, but what exactly they are referring to needs to be identified before it can be validated.

Making an income is good. Making an income that causes others to be killed needlessly isn't so good.

One study found that the number of hospitalizations was about the same as you'd find at a typical NFL game. And then we need to remember the demographics. How many 80+ year olds are going to be attending a live concert? And even if they do go to one, then they know the risk, and taking that risk should be their choice, not the government's ( IMO ).

I think we would at least agree that his messaging is problematic at best, dangerous at worst. And certainly tone-deaf in the media.

There's quite a few hits when you search it out, but I'm not sure about the depth of content. I'll have a closer look. But in all honesty, I suspect that you and I are probably already more well informed than either of them. I continue to do my part, mainly because I'm in a position where doing so is of very little consequence for me compared to the risks, which in my case are more from enforcement than the virus, that is unless ...

Something that's been of growing concern lately is this issue of the long-haulers. I'd probably survive the virus itself, but the after-effects are actually more worrisome, especially if they are the result of what I suspect they are. At one point I was ready to go and lick somebody's face just to get it over and done with. Now I'm much more reserved and don't want it anywhere near me. Got enough health problems already.