In the United States, the lack of testing has been a deliberate policy since day one. The CDC initially limited testing (for what few tests they did produce) to only people who returned from China with symptoms or who had contact with a traveler from China who tested positive. It was designed to ignore community spread. Then they threatened professor Chu of the Seattle Influenza Project with prison if she continued to run her own covid tests on all her samples from the Seattle population. She told them to get fucked and did it anyway. That was when we realized it was already community spreading here.Montegriffo wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 9:36 amTo be fair, the limited testing capacity is not just due to the availability of the testing kits but also the lab' capacity to process the results.Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 8:30 am(1) Peer review is mostly bullshit (seriously). The paper's value stands on its reproducibility (guaranteed since it derives from a common data set) and the value of the data set from which it was derived (that part is admittedly by the researchers to be weak).Zlaxer wrote: ↑Sat Apr 18, 2020 3:07 am
Article also not peered reviewed....it’s possible... but smacks of PRC propaganda.
Here’s the journal article...
https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020 ... 2004999117
So the article says must have started outside Wuhan bc closest/oldest known virus in Wuhan is slightly different than known Bat strains....
Seems like a hard try to deflect blame away from PRC as it completely ignores that this variation could also show earliest known case in Wuhan may have been modified in lab and that’s why it’s different than known natural strains....
@StA - Please feel free to dig further through article and counter my observation.
And then we have this from the news article...
When did the PRC make this “record” available? Any proof of its date? Can anyone besides PRC verify this? Why is it only coming out now - after western governments have stated they have evidence it came from lab...Just saying this smells fishy...
Then there’s this gem:
So, we have a virus that shows up in a human that has mutations that would have had to occur at an unnatural rate to get from known bat virus to COVID-19.... what’s the most likely way that happened?
Btw, my vote is still natural/escaped from lab - but the more I read the Cambridge study the closer I get to hopping on the engineered bandwagon...
(2) What he is saying about the mutation rate is that this thing had to have been in circulation for quite a lot longer than Nov.
(2.1) First of all, the evidence does NOT support an origin anywhere in Wuhan currently (though that might change if they can get more data). Wherever the first epidemic began is where you will find the larger samples of type A covid and that's not Wuhan which was type B.
(2.2) Secondly, to his point about the mutation rate, there is no fucking way this thing began in November because there were too many mutations even in type A for it to have reached human carriers that recently. That was his point about mutations, not that it was engineered (which is highly doubtful).
(2.2.1) This conjecture is corroborated by California's state government who's own research has suggested an epidemic in California at least since Sep 2019. https://www.theblaze.com/coronavirus-or ... idge-study
(2.2.2) More research out of California shows incredibly high rates of infection in certain counties that would not support a late Jan / early Feb start. https://thehill.com/homenews/news/49339 ... widespread
The fact that we are months into this debacle and our federal government has still been unable to deploy sufficient tests to get a handle on what is actually going on is highly suspect to me. They could literally have just bought the tests from Germany or China if they really wanted to test (they never wanted to test). We even know very early on the CDC and FDA threatened a university professor with prison if she continued to test the subjects in her Seattle influenza study. She told them to get fucked and tested anyway. That was when we realized it was already community spread here, because until that point the CDC refused to test for community spread. They would only look at travelers from China or people in contact with infected travelers from China. It was a deliberate scheme to suppress evidence of community spread or the extent of the epidemic in the United States. The additional facts of probable epidemic in California before the Wuhan epidemic even began and the mutation rate not supporting a start date of the Nov/Dec Wuhan epidemic indicates there is quite a lot more to this story than our federal government is letting on. I don't know what the answer is other than that the federal government is completely full of shit. I think you ought to redirect your gaze towards Washington. This OMG CHINA shit is just RussiaGate 2.0, honestly.
With a serious lack of testing capacity, it is logical to restrict the testing to those most likely to be infected.
Not to absolve the powers that be from responsibility since they should have had better preparation but they can only act according to the capacity available at the time.
To insist on returning to normal before there is sufficient capacity to verify that someone has already had the virus and therefore may have immunity is idiotic, or should I say covidiotic?
Then California is starting to figure out it was already epidemic there at least since Sept.
Even now, the CDC and FDA block states from acquiring tests from anywhere but them and they refuse to produce enough of their own tests to make a difference.
But private research projects are starting to test at least for antibodies and they are finding it was much more widespread in parts of the United States than previously estimated.
This is not incompetence. It's deliberate policy designed to look like incompetence. If they really wanted to test people, they'd allow states to just buy the tests from Germany.