Recent content by djpbaltimore

  1. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    For people interested in the actual science, this is a great place to start. View: https://mobile.twitter.com/GurusPod/status/1634489182843437056 It was also riddled with fundamental errors about factual matters. It should be noted that he was a clinician, so really doesn't know much about...
  2. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    I agree with the last part. Suggesting the possibility of a lab origin and the need for an investigation is not conspiratorial. However, that isn't representative of what the lab leak contingent are saying. Most of their arguments are based in conspiracy theories. And like Qanon, it has caught...
  3. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    Almost no one believes that 1977 was a natural flu reemergence. And I have no reason to dispute that based on what I know. And lab outbreaks happen frequently. But almost all of them are due to extant pathogens. Unlike you, I have worked with human pathogens, so I know the dangers involved. And...
  4. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    It is worth noting that they can't even agree which lab it came from, indicating that the information can't be that compelling. Maybe they should release it so we can all see for ourselves?
  5. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    Did I say that? My comments are about this one. But nice attempt at deflection.
  6. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    In this case it is that simple. Unfortunately, you don't want to see this because you have been actively contributing to the conspiracy theorizing. (Unwittingly or otherwise)
  7. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    Yet more evidence that the constant spillover between animals and humans is likely the cause of Covid-19. The science has always pointed in one direction and that is zoonosis. But, motivated reasoning will usually win out over abstruse science. View...
  8. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    If that wasn't the point, why was Havana syndrome brought up at all? Beyond paying brief lip service, there was minimal indication that LC has any debilitating physical component. And the clear suggestion that psychology is central to making minor post infection symptoms worse.
  9. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    The long drawn out parallel between LC and Havana syndrome was a poor one. It really shows the implicit bias in the doctor. And not mentioning the research that many who have LC suffer from chronic infection based on detectable spike protein levels is also noteworthy. So wedded to his central...
  10. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    The ironic part is that the Boston group were scooped on this. A lab at the FDA already did these experiments and published it. And not a peep from Fox news or the Daily mail. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9420700/ And if anybody remembers the fear mongering about deltacron they...
  11. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    You have zero idea what you are talking about. The reason everyone has focused on WIV is that they have been publishing in the literature since SARS1. Then they were the first to sequence the virus and published it in January 2020. They have been rewarded for their transparency by being accused...
  12. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    Both early strains were found in the market. It is highly unlikely that would happen if the benign lab infection happened at WIV. If you want to limit research, make arguments based on reality. Using SC2 as a pretext is scientifically dubious IMO.
  13. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    IMO, you are giving him too much credit. He has been talking lab leak to anyone willing to put a mic in his vicinity. He wrote an article in PNAS heavily implying that the FCS was engineered. But above all else, he lacks any relevant experience to offer an intelligent opinion on this. That...
  14. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    With all due respect, that opinion is based more in conspiracy theory than reality.
  15. D

    Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

    Despite what this economist suggests, the best evidence we have indicates that SC2 was a natural zoonosis. Two recent articles published this summer provide strong support for this conclusion. Significantly, Sachs does not even mention them in his report. If he is going to cherry pick that...