IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Have you used it appropriately yet? No.
Viruses have yet to be successfully attacked by allopathic medicine. Aside from symptomatic treatment, which does not address the root cause of viral infections, we've relied on plasma generated antibodies arising either naturally or artificially via vaccines to combat viral infections. It is worrisome that a non-trivial number of patients have gone from Covid-19 positive to Covid-19 negative and back to Covid-19 positive. If these "re-infection" tests are picking up different viral strains, then this is only a problem if the virus is mutating too fast for vaccines (or our own B-Cells) to keep up with. But if that's not the case and people are actually being re-infected with the same virus, then this is entirely new. Historically, surviving a viral infection resulted in antibodies to that virus - meaning you couldn't catch the same virus again while these antibodies were present. That may not be the case with Covid-19. It's far from certain, but if it turns out that naturally occurring antibodies are an insufficient defense against re-infection, then that would render out entire strategy of combating viral infections through vaccines utterly useless.

It's an interesting problem. That's all.
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
New Reinfection probably isn't reinfection.
There was a very recent study that showed that it was likely just test faults and long periods of time before expression.
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
New I'm dubious of that, too.
The continuing asymptomatic, contagious infections post symptomatic expression makes this dicey in a way other common viral infections aren't.

My overall sense on this is that we just don't know enough yet to make any decisions about "re-opening" of economies, schools, gatherings, etc. Initial studies suggest this is a different kind of virus than those with which we are familiar and behaves in ways others don't. It could be spectacularly worse than a lot of people are prone to believe. The fact that vaccine development is being done under the assumption that mutations are unlikely may be problematic.
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
New Re: I'm dubious of that, too.
Regards,
-scott
Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
New (Dunno how you zeroed-in to such an al-punte Find.. c'est Magnifique!)
It seems almost 'paranoid-resistant' too, when you peep the subtended YES/NO qualifications and their (redundant?)-constraints upon ANY-idea that: "You Skipped something" within your provenance, You Fuel !!".

Just now CA's Gov is delivering his daily summation, expounding also--in plain but not Patronizing framing--to remind that "COVID activity continues here", thus Why ..any precipitate-OPENING-WIDE actions ..won't happen on his shift. (I know of no other Gov,. who has spoken so clearly, completely and Daily): with his precision and, oft even eloquence ..all of this sans an iota of Pol-Speak (except an occasional aside: about some diversionary-meme floating about: and His 'take').

Maybe FDR, in his [rare ..thus always listened-to] 'Fireside Chats', from that keen mind: bested the lot of such communications (?) though we have no peer alive as can match The Bard, I wot.

Lucky CA, Lucky moi.

So NOW: back-to: trying to project anything useful from: the speaking-in-tongues range of largely-BS-bloviations, rampant across the dis-US-of-ignorant armies clashing by night
(to coin a phrase..)
New The DNC needs to draft him at their convention.
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
New Hmmm ✓✓
New That's encouraging. Thanks. Added a link.
bcnu,
Mikem

It's mourning in America again.
Expand Edited by mmoffitt May 7, 2020, 05:27:16 PM EDT
     So a while back Peter thought I was being hysterical about this. What do you think? - (mmoffitt) - (21)
         Probably the end of Iwethey, but not necessarily the world. - (scoenye) - (3)
             Apropos.. Scott? - (Ashton) - (2)
                 Appreciated, but... - (malraux) - (1)
                     ..yer a Prince amongst us horse-thieves ;^> -NT - (Ashton)
         In.Deed. - (Ashton)
         Being less eschatological would be good for you. -NT - (pwhysall) - (15)
             Jeez, Peter.. - (Ashton)
             Did you ever use that word before? - (crazy) - (13)
                 Not often, but yes. -NT - (pwhysall) - (12)
                     How did you originally discover it? - (crazy) - (3)
                         Re: How did you originally discover it? - (malraux)
                         No idea, but... - (pwhysall)
                         I knew that one, and as you all know, I never think. You learn words by reading lots of shit. - (CRConrad)
                     Have you used it appropriately yet? No. - (mmoffitt) - (7)
                         Reinfection probably isn't reinfection. - (malraux) - (6)
                             I'm dubious of that, too. - (mmoffitt) - (5)
                                 Re: I'm dubious of that, too. - (malraux) - (4)
                                     (Dunno how you zeroed-in to such an al-punte Find.. c'est Magnifique!) - (Ashton) - (2)
                                         The DNC needs to draft him at their convention. -NT - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                                             Hmmm ✓✓ -NT - (Ashton)
                                     That's encouraging. Thanks. Added a link. - (mmoffitt)

Quite another Theatre of operations.
53 ms