On 09/02/2022 03:51, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>
> But stop claiming I don't know a bacterium from a virus.

The evidence as presented says otherwise.

> Especially since it was Chris who claimed coronavirus RNA isn't large.
>
> And yet, it is.

Not it isn't. It's "universally small".

"As with their virions, viruses exhibit a wide diversity of genome
sizes. RNA viruses possess genomes that are *universally small*, ranging
from 1,682 nucleotides (nt) (hepatitis delta virus [Deltavirus]) to
31,526 nt (murine hepatitis virus [Coronaviridae]). In contrast, the
genome sizes of DNA viruses range over 3 orders of magnitude, from only
1,758 nt (porcine circovirus [Circoviridae]) to 2,473,870 nt for the
recently discovered Pandoravirus salinus (2), although all ssDNA viruses
are small, possessing genomes that overlap in size with those of RNA
viruses."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4093846/

Even for a coronavirus it is nothing special.

On 09/02/2022 03:58, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2022 10:02:26 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:
>
>> You are dangerously misinformed and a risk to anyone around you spouting
>> rubbish about stuff you don't understand
>
> And yet, you and Steve have disputed _every_ fact that was presented

I dispute everything that you present as fact that isn't. Essentially
that means almost everything you write.

Plus you snip all context and anything that is inconsistent with your
position. That's why there's only one line left from my OP. The above
statement is fully supported by what I wrote in full in the post.

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:31:57 +0000, Chris wrote:

> I dispute everything that you present as fact that isn't. Essentially
> that means almost everything you write.

Chris,
That's bullshit.

The fact is that the CDC published in November that kids in the USA aged 5
to 11 years old from the period of October 2020 to October 2021 had
0.0002%
chance of dying from Covid (out of the total population of kids).

That's a fact.
That's a fact you denied even existing.
Then when I shoved it in your face, you denied it further.

You _still_ deny that this is a fact, Chris.

Everyone but you can see that you've denied all facts that don't fit into
your completely imaginary belief system Chris (which is all facts indeed).

> Plus you snip all context and anything that is inconsistent with your
> position. That's why there's only one line left from my OP. The above
> statement is fully supported by what I wrote in full in the post.

Idiot.

First off, my position has _never_ changed.
It's _you_ would has never comprehended my position.

All you want to do is squirm out of your embarrassing idiocy that the virus
genome isn't astoundingly huge, which, for an RNA virus, doesn't mutate all
that much (given how huge it is and how much more often RNA mutates).

You claimed idiocy after idiocy like that Carlos, where I never changed my
position even once since the facts haven't changed.

Why haven't the facts changed?
Well, did _you_ bring into the conversation even a _single_ fact Chris?
Or did you spend the entire time outright denying that facts don't exist.

Tell us Chris,
What _one_ pertinent fact did _you_ bring to the fore?

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:25:13 +0000, Chris wrote:

>> But stop claiming I don't know a bacterium from a virus.
>
> The evidence as presented says otherwise.

You're _completely_ ignorant, Chris, about microbiology.
And yet, you would _force_ other people to do what you want them to do.
*Because you are filled with hatred and fear and ignorance*
Not facts.

What's amazing is you didn't know an RNA virus from a DNA virus
(which, let's be clear, _everyone_ who is educated in such things knows)

And then...
You childishly claim that I don't know a bacterium from a viral particle?

Seriously?
You're _that_ stupid, Chris?

Do you have any idea how many tissue cultures I've grown, Chris?
No?
None?

Do you have any idea how many Petri dishes I've cultivated, Chris?
No?
None?

How many tissue cultures have _you_ grown, Chris?
You don't know _anything_ about microbiology, Chris.

And yet, you would _force_ other people to do what you want them to do.
*Because you are filled with hatred and fear and ignorance*
Not facts.
>> Especially since it was Chris who claimed coronavirus RNA isn't large.
>
> Not it isn't. It's "universally small".

If I said a Mastiff was large, you'd claim it was small.
(which would prove you know nothing about dogs)

If I said a Shire was large, you'd claim it was small.
(which would prove you know nothing about horses)

The fact you don't even realize that the genome of this virus is huge, and
yet, it's RNA, and yet, it _still_ doesn't mutate all that much, is what is
so sad about people like you who are ignorant on just about everything.

And yet, you would _force_ other people to do what you want them to do.
*Because you are filled with hatred and fear and ignorance*
Not facts.

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 08:10:05 -0000 (UTC), Chris wrote:

> You have no point.

My point is you would _force_ other people to do what you want them to do.
*Because you are filled with hatred and fear and ignorance*
Not facts.

On 2/10/2022 11:07 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:

> Tell us Chris,
> What _one_ pertinent fact did _you_ bring to the fore?

I'm not Chris but there is this fact: "Children aged 5–11 years are at
risk of severe illness from COVID-19".

So, your limiting the discussion to deaths ignores the fact there are
other issues to consider. But you ignore those facts and cherry pick the
one the best suits your narrative.

On 2022-02-10 9:46 a.m., joe wrote:
> On 2/10/2022 11:07 AM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>
>> Tell us Chris,
>> What _one_ pertinent fact did _you_ bring to the fore?
>
> I'm not Chris but there is this fact: "Children aged 5–11 years are at
> risk of severe illness from COVID-19".
>
> So, your limiting the discussion to deaths ignores the fact there are
> other issues to consider. But you ignore those facts and cherry pick the
> one the best suits your narrative.
>

As he has forever done, yes.

In message <su3gog$1q2v$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:31:57 +0000, Chris wrote:
>
> > I dispute everything that you present as fact that isn't. Essentially
> > that means almost everything you write.
>
> Chris, That's bullshit.
>
> The fact is that the CDC published in November that kids in the USA aged 5
> to 11 years old from the period of October 2020 to October 2021 had
> 0.0002% chance of dying from Covid (out of the total population of kids).
>
> That's a fact. That's a fact you denied even existing.

I don't recall seeing anyone denying the number. People have been making
the point that even that small number of tragedies can be reduced by
vaccinating the children. The vaccinations will also result in reduced
incidence of serious illness and long Covid - and we don't yet know if
all the people (of all ages) with long Covid recover completely.

David

On 2/10/2022 5:25 AM, Chris wrote:
> On 09/02/2022 03:51, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>>
>> But stop claiming I don't know a bacterium from a virus.
>
> The evidence as presented says otherwise.

He knows now. Thank you for helping to educate him. No matter how
obnoxious some of our trolls get, the reality is that they do appreciate
us for correcting their errors because it helps them learn.

In article <su4bad$5qh$1@dont-email.me>, sms
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> He knows now. Thank you for helping to educate him. No matter how
> obnoxious some of our trolls get, the reality is that they do appreciate
> us for correcting their errors because it helps them learn.

the only trolls are you & 'arlen', who think they're the experts about
everything apple despite their limited experience and consistently
being proven wrong with numerous cites.

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 23:14:41 GMT, David Higton wrote:

> I don't recall seeing anyone denying the number.

Hi David Higton,

My post below contains detail which I hope isn't too much in answering your
concerns, which I do very much appreciate that you brought up, as I welcome
intelligent discourse with anyone (even those who previously trolled us).

I have noticed you're one of the few people who own an adult mindset, which
is refreshing on this newsgroup (the Apple one only - not Android).

You may not have read every post, but I read every post in this newsgroup,
where I saw, quite a few times, Chris claimed, for example, that I didn't
present _any_ facts (when, in fact, I clearly did - he just doesn't like
them so he dicounts them out of hand).

Likewise, Steve claimed many times that his "favorite troll" (whom we all
know he was talking about me) spews incorrect facts and the like, which
again, is Steve's way of "processessing" facts he simply doesn't like.

So, yes, there were _plenty_ of denials of the CDC facts I presented.
You just missed those brazen denials, that's all (but I didn't).

Those brazen denials of all facts they don't like is important to my main
point which always has been that the more ignorant people are, the more
scared they are, and therefore the more they want to force others to do
things that those other people might not want to do.

> People have been making
> the point that even that small number of tragedies can be reduced by
> vaccinating the children.

That's wrong, I believe, but see the details below, where I haven't learned
_anything_ from this thread because I know a billion times more than anyone
who has posted to date - where all I learned is what I knew in how ignorant
they are about just about everything revolving around Covid.

EDIT: I see Steve claims he taught me something, which is amazing, given he
still has denied _every_ fact that was presented from the CDC. [END EDIT]

While the strategic _concept_ you claim above is rather true, I think you
missed the key point that people were making about kids getting the shot.

And that's important.

Most of them made the claim that the kids could infect the adults, which,
while true, is a purely fear based mentality on their part which I easily
can see (as I know everything they think before they even say it).

If you wonder why I can say such a thing, it's because they're not all that
intelligence so they say what all the other ignorant people say, bearing in
mind I ask _everyone_ why they got or didn't get the shot - and they all
tell me the same garbage that Steve and Chris did.

To their credit, most people are incredibly ignorant, as witnessed by the
responses I get at Costco when I ask the guy putting Premium in a Honda
Civic, why, and all I get is him parroting a Chevron commercial.

More detrimental to your point though, that they have been claiming the kids
can benefit even if the risk of death is almost negligible, they have NOT
made that claim since they have been _denying_ all the facts about the
mortality rate.

For example, Chris denies that he believes in the "Crude Mortality Rate" at
all (since he doesn't like what it informs him). Chris spent something like
a dozen posts disputing that he doesn't like the very rate that is the
typical rate _always_ used in a pandemic.

Then again, Chris spent something like a score of posts claiming the RNA
genome in the coronavirus is tiny, so, that tells you that these guys own
belief systems that are almost completely devoid of even a single fact.

> The vaccinations will also result in reduced
> incidence of serious illness and long Covid - and we don't yet know if
> all the people (of all ages) with long Covid recover completely.

David,

Everything you say is sound in the main, which I don't disagree with you
save on the details (as I did above).

For this "Long Covid" thing, I'm not yet so sure it's not just a clickbait
term that the news invented as the studies I've read certainly show
long-lasting damage (e.g., honeycomb lung) but few have shown that the virus
is not completely wiped out, and, in fact, that's the whole point of the
home tests, isn't it?

The home tests (depending on which kind) can test for the presence of the
virus (via the presence of antigens, of course), where they stop detecting
the virus pretty soon(ly) in most people.

While there are always outliers in the biology of disease progression (I
have _years_ of training on this topic by the way), in general, you either
completely wipe out a virus (like you do with, oh, say, smallpox) or it
stays inside of your body forever (like it does with, oh, say, chickenpox).

Notice that I'm talking about the _disease_ (not the vaccine) where, for
example, once you live through smallpox, you'll _never_ get it again, while
you can live through chickenpox and still have it recur (as do many Herpes
viruses) for reasons I was thoroughly trained in but which aren't needed to
describe here.

I will say though that I recently read (about a month ago?) an article that
said they found the coronavirus in adipose tissue, which, if that's
confirmed, means it has a way of hiding from the immune system (much like
Herpes does, although Herpes uses a different hiding location).

Googling, this describes that nascent research, but it wasn't peer reviewed
at that time so take this whole "long covid" thing with a grain of NaCl.
<https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/08/health/covid-fat-obesity.html>

There's a _lot_ of bullshit for the hoi poloi like Chris & Steve are, along
those lines (such as the mutation rate, which, AFAICT, is downright tame for
a large RNA virus after all).

The proletariat have _no_ experience with making such decisions, and even
the press doesn't, where the fact Trump's name came up multiple times in the
discussions which just goes to prove how crazily far-to-the-left politicized
these people like Chris and Steve truly are (as it has _nothing_ to do with
any President, current or ex).

In summary, I don't disagree that you are well informed so I agree with all
your statements about why it might be a good idea to give kids the shot.

However, you didn't express any sentiments toward the harm that the shot can
cause, which, again, I've stated in clear terms many times is quite
possible.

We have to weigh all these risks together, not just some of them, right?

My point being, those who are ignorant (like Steve & Chris are), are
completely incapable of weighing these risks intelligently - which is fine -
but then they have no right to deny facts just because they don't like them.

More importantly, nor do they have the right to advocate forcing others to
make the same ill-educated fact-free fear-based decisions that _they_ make.

Notice something very clearly about me:
a. I have a degree in this stuff - so I know what I'm talking about
b. Better yet, I read about a hundred recent papers on the subject
c. I _know_ almost everything in the news for the hoi polloi is clickbait
d. Personally, I'm not scared in the least for myself & for my kids
e. However, there _are_ unknowns so I chose to get the shot & the booster
f. However I am in a higher-than-average risk group (old age for one)
g. And I often care for the elderly and substitute teach high school classes
h. More to the point, I _understand_ exactly why people want the shot
i. And, just as importantly, I _understand_ why some hate that shot
j. Even as most of that crap is politicized mostly by the Democrats
....
i. But the one thing I won't do - even with all that immense knowledge

The one thing I won't do...
Even as I know more about this stuff likely than all of you folks combined

The one thing I will _not_ do...

.... is tell someone else what _they_ should do ...

It's their body.
Their choice.

Note Chris say I've been changing my stripes but I have never wavered.
*It's those most ignorant who are forcing others to do what they'd do*

Not me.

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 16:40:46 -0800, sms wrote:

> He knows now. Thank you for helping to educate him. No matter how
> obnoxious some of our trolls get, the reality is that they do appreciate
> us for correcting their errors because it helps them learn.

Steve,

*I object to ignorant people like you forcing others to do what you want*

As you're aware, I have a long-standing background in coronavirus education:
<https://i.postimg.cc/rw8V0jfj/books10.jpg> Index for coronaviridae entries

And you're likely aware we're both EE's, where I've _taught_ design classes:
<https://i.postimg.cc/6qdCpK0Y/books11.jpg> The Microelectronics Bible

a. But, unlike you, I _also_ have a degree in this exact subject matter.
b. Also unlike you, I _ask_ everyone _why_ they get or don't get the shot.
c. Also unlike you, I have read about a hundred papers on this subject.

For some strange reason, Steve, you bring up Trump every time you see a fact
that you're unaware of (you said yourself all facts must come from there).

Yet, you're about as far pegged to the left as a Democrat can be, Steve.,
As a logical sensible fact-based person, I'm just about in the middle.
a. I'm neither Democrat
b. Nor Republican

I am all for abortion, but it's homicide for sure (of that there is no
doubt), but I'm all for the "choice" of the mother to murder her child.

And don't say it's not a homicide when you know that NY state law allows
abortion up until the very day before the child actually comes out, so
there's no playing around with the artificially imposed viability clause.

Notice that I'm simply logican and sensible about abortion:
a. Abortion is good for the mother and good for society (it turns out).
b. Yet, it's still a very ugly death of an innocent child Steve.

That's logic.
Not religion.
Not bullshit on privacy (although I accept Roe v Wade's privacy stance).
Not some meaningless slogan about "My Body My Choice" you don't believe in.

And that's my point, Steve.
1. You are ignorant beyond belief (and that's OK - lots of people are).
2. You are political beyond reason (that's OK too - for the same reason).

But don't force others to do what you'd do just because you're afraid.
a. I get it you're so afraid you're shitting in your pants right now.
b. You need to get it that people like I am are not afraid at all.

It's a risk. Sure.
It's a rather small risk for most of us, Steve.
And even smaller for kids, who have almost zero risk, Steve.

And yet, you advocate fucking with their developing immune systems, Chris.
By force.

That.
That.
That.

That is my point.
*I object to ignorant people like you forcing others to do what you want*

On 2022-02-10 6:47 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 16:40:46 -0800, sms wrote:
>
>> He knows now. Thank you for helping to educate him. No matter how
>> obnoxious some of our trolls get, the reality is that they do appreciate
>> us for correcting their errors because it helps them learn.
>
> Steve,
>
> *I object to ignorant people like you forcing others to do what you want*
>
> As you're aware, I have a long-standing background in coronavirus education:
> <https://i.postimg.cc/rw8V0jfj/books10.jpg> Index for coronaviridae entries

Ummmmmmmm.... ...no.

Taking a picture of the index of a book proves nothing about your
qualifications.

>
> And you're likely aware we're both EE's, where I've _taught_ design classes:
> <https://i.postimg.cc/6qdCpK0Y/books11.jpg> The Microelectronics Bible

Ummmm.... ...no.

Take a picture of a book proves nothing about your qualifications.

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 20:51:57 -0500, nospam wrote:

> the only trolls are you & 'arlen', who think they're the experts about
> everything apple despite their limited experience and consistently
> being proven wrong with numerous cites.

Hi nospam,

*The only way you can process facts you hate, is to outright deny they exist.*

When you act like an adult, I treat you as an adult, but most of the time,
you iKooks call anyone who brings up facts about Apple you don't like, a
troll.

All you iKooks are alike, in that you have lied about Apple functionality
for decades, nospam, sending even innocent users on fruitless wild-goose
chases simply because you _hate_ that iOS is crippled in so many ways.

It doesn't matter to me if iKooks like you, Jolly Roger, & Lewis call me a
troll because it's your childish way of dealing with facts you hate about
Apple, so I expect you to not have an _adult_ response to the facts.

But it irks me to no end when Steve plays that kindergarten trick,
especially as we could say this whole thread was a troll that he authored,
although I can see that it has "some" merit on a smartphone newsgroup.

As for me thinking I'm an expert, it's pretty clear by now that I have an
education in the matter and you don't even have an education.

That's a big divide, nospam.
a. You have no education whatsoever, nospam.
b. You always fabricate your belief systems, nospam.
c. As a result, you're almost always wrong (want me to provide cites?)

Interestingly, it doesn't bother me in the least you call every fact you
don't like, a troll... because it's how your childish brain works nospam.

The only way you can process facts you hate, is to outright deny they exist.
Hence, it bothers me not you call all facts you hate, trolls.

I expect it of you iKooks.

On 10/02/2022 17:15, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:25:13 +0000, Chris wrote:
>
>>> But stop claiming I don't know a bacterium from a virus.
>>
>> The evidence as presented says otherwise.
>
> You're _completely_ ignorant, Chris, about microbiology.

You can stamp your feet all you like, but you're the one that
incorrectly applied antimicrobial resistance to viruses. Antimicrobial
resistance categorically does not and cannot apply to viruses.

If you need that explained to you then you need to re-read your books or
more importantly read one published in the last 10-15 years.

>>> Especially since it was Chris who claimed coronavirus RNA isn't large.
>>
>> Not it isn't. It's "universally small".
>
> If I said a Mastiff was large, you'd claim it was small.
> (which would prove you know nothing about dogs)

I can see why you resort to an analogy when your absolute statement is
factually incorrect.

To re-iterate. The SARS-CoV-2 genome is 30 kilobases. The human genome
is 3.2 *giga*bases. The viral genome is 5 ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE smaller.
That's like comparing a garden fence with Mt Everest.

There are larger coronaviruses: the beluga whale coronavirus (SW1) is
larger (31.7kb). So even for a coronavirus it's nothing special.
https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/2/8/1804

On 10/02/2022 17:07, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 13:31:57 +0000, Chris wrote:
>
>> I dispute everything that you present as fact that isn't. Essentially
>> that means almost everything you write.
>
> Chris,
> That's bullshit.
>
> The fact is that the CDC published in November that kids in the USA aged 5
> to 11 years old from the period of October 2020 to October 2021 had
> 0.0002%
> chance of dying from Covid (out of the total population of kids).
>
> That's a fact.
> That's a fact you denied even existing.
> Then when I shoved it in your face, you denied it further.
>
> You _still_ deny that this is a fact, Chris.

How can I deny it when I helped you find the correct number? You defy logic.

> Everyone but you can see that you've denied all facts that don't fit into
> your completely imaginary belief system Chris (which is all facts indeed).

David disagrees you. No-one agrees with you. The only one in an
imaginary world is you.

> Tell us Chris,
> What _one_ pertinent fact did _you_ bring to the fore?

Easy. There's at least five.

1. COVID infectivity is low - you even thanked me for it
2. COVID is the 4th or 5th leading cause of death in young children
3. Vaccines are supremely safe despite the ~15 deaths in the UK
4. Vaccines do not induce resistance in the virus
5. Pictures of books is not equivalent to a degree. A picture of your
(anonymised) degree certificate would be more believable.
6. Bonus: viral genomes, of any type, are not huge.

On 2/11/2022 3:40 AM, Chris wrote:
> On 10/02/2022 17:07, Andy Burnelli wrote:

<snip>

>> What _one_ pertinent fact did _you_ bring to the fore?
>
> Easy. There's at least five.
>
> 1. COVID infectivity is low - you even thanked me for it
> 2. COVID is the 4th or 5th leading cause of death in young children
> 3. Vaccines are supremely safe despite the ~15 deaths in the UK
> 4. Vaccines do not induce resistance in the virus
> 5. Pictures of books is not equivalent to a degree. A picture of your
> (anonymised) degree certificate would be more believable.
> 6. Bonus: viral genomes, of any type, are not huge.

You also explained to him the difference between viral and bacterial
infections. To be fair, there are a lot of people that don't understand
the difference, see
<https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/bacterial-and-viral-infections>.

On 2022-02-11 06:35:56 +0000, sms said:

> On 2/11/2022 3:40 AM, Chris wrote:
>> On 10/02/2022 17:07, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> What _one_ pertinent fact did _you_ bring to the fore?
>>
>> Easy. There's at least five.
>>
>> 1. COVID infectivity is low - you even thanked me for it
>> 2. COVID is the 4th or 5th leading cause of death in young children
>> 3. Vaccines are supremely safe despite the ~15 deaths in the UK
>> 4. Vaccines do not induce resistance in the virus
>> 5. Pictures of books is not equivalent to a degree. A picture of your
>> (anonymised) degree certificate would be more believable.
>> 6. Bonus: viral genomes, of any type, are not huge.
>
> You also explained to him the difference between viral and bacterial
> infections. To be fair, there are a lot of people that don't understand
> the difference, see
> <https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/bacterial-and-viral-infections>.

He knows all of that.
It's you who needed to look it up.

sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 2/11/2022 3:40 AM, Chris wrote:
>> On 10/02/2022 17:07, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>> What _one_ pertinent fact did _you_ bring to the fore?
>>
>> Easy. There's at least five.
>>
>> 1. COVID infectivity is low - you even thanked me for it
>> 2. COVID is the 4th or 5th leading cause of death in young children
>> 3. Vaccines are supremely safe despite the ~15 deaths in the UK
>> 4. Vaccines do not induce resistance in the virus
>> 5. Pictures of books is not equivalent to a degree. A picture of your
>> (anonymised) degree certificate would be more believable.
>> 6. Bonus: viral genomes, of any type, are not huge.
>
> You also explained to him the difference between viral and bacterial
> infections.

I did say at least five ;)

On 2/11/2022 10:47 AM, gtr wrote:
> On 2022-02-11 06:35:56 +0000, sms said:

<snip>

>> You also explained to him the difference between viral and bacterial
>> infections. To be fair, there are a lot of people that don't
>> understand the difference, see
>> <https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/bacterial-and-viral-infections>.
>
> He knows all of that.

No, his posts showed that he was unfamiliar with the difference between
bacterial and viral infections. Now that it was explained to him, he
understands.,

> It's you who needed to look it up.

LOL, uh, I've known the difference for about 45 years!

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:44:32 -0800, sms wrote:

> No, his posts showed that he was unfamiliar with the difference between
> bacterial and viral infections. Now that it was explained to him, he
> understands.,

He knew.
You did not.

EOD

On 2/11/2022 11:04 AM, Chris wrote:
> sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On 2/11/2022 3:40 AM, Chris wrote:
>>> On 10/02/2022 17:07, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>> What _one_ pertinent fact did _you_ bring to the fore?
>>>
>>> Easy. There's at least five.
>>>
>>> 1. COVID infectivity is low - you even thanked me for it
>>> 2. COVID is the 4th or 5th leading cause of death in young children
>>> 3. Vaccines are supremely safe despite the ~15 deaths in the UK
>>> 4. Vaccines do not induce resistance in the virus
>>> 5. Pictures of books is not equivalent to a degree. A picture of your
>>> (anonymised) degree certificate would be more believable.
>>> 6. Bonus: viral genomes, of any type, are not huge.
>>
>> You also explained to him the difference between viral and bacterial
>> infections.
>
> I did say at least five ;)

LOL. BTW, I think that our favorite troll has an additional new nym
"gtr" giving content-free responses. One more filter added!

On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:16:28 +0000, Chris wrote:

> You can stamp your feet all you like, but you're the one that
> incorrectly applied antimicrobial resistance to viruses. Antimicrobial
> resistance categorically does not and cannot apply to viruses.

You and Steve are constantly proving my point for me, Chris.
*The most ignorant people are the most vehement on what others should do*

Nobody with a PhD in sciences would be as ignorant as you are in the basics.

> If you need that explained to you then you need to re-read your books or
> more importantly read one published in the last 10-15 years.

You complained about "vehicle", and you complained about "RNA" and you
failed to comprehend a simple immunologic example, Chris.

You are ignorant.

> I can see why you resort to an analogy when your absolute statement is
> factually incorrect.

It's not worth talking to you as you're wasting my valuable time.
Neither Steve nor you know the slightest thing about Covid. Nothing.

You're _exactly_ like the lemon-juice bank robber, Chris.

> To re-iterate. The SARS-CoV-2 genome is 30 kilobases. The human genome
> is 3.2 *giga*bases. The viral genome is 5 ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE smaller.
> That's like comparing a garden fence with Mt Everest.

Do you realize you are simply embarrassed you had no perspective whatsoever
on how fantastically huge the genome is inside the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid?

> There are larger coronaviruses: the beluga whale coronavirus (SW1) is
> larger (31.7kb). So even for a coronavirus it's nothing special.
> https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/2/8/1804

Count the number of times I said "human" coronaviruses, you idiot.

You think I don't know there are more zoonotic coronaviruses out there than
you can count, but that there are only seven _human_ coronaviruses, Chris.
You are just figuring out what I learned in a basic virology class, Chris.
<https://i.postimg.cc/rw8V0jfj/books10.jpg> Index for coronaviridae family

You and Steve proved my point:
*The most ignorant people are the most vehement on what others should do*

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 11:16:28 +0000, Chris wrote:
>
>> You can stamp your feet all you like, but you're the one that
>> incorrectly applied antimicrobial resistance to viruses. Antimicrobial
>> resistance categorically does not and cannot apply to viruses.
>
> You and Steve are constantly proving my point for me, Chris.
> *The most ignorant people are the most vehement on what others should do*
>
> Nobody with a PhD in sciences would be as ignorant as you are in the basics.
>
>> If you need that explained to you then you need to re-read your books or
>> more importantly read one published in the last 10-15 years.
>
> You complained about "vehicle", and you complained about "RNA" and you
> failed to comprehend a simple immunologic example, Chris.
>
> You are ignorant.

The evidence that you've provided by the bucketload shows the opposite.

>> I can see why you resort to an analogy when your absolute statement is
>> factually incorrect.
>
> It's not worth talking to you as you're wasting my valuable time.

You have no valuable time. Every month you are the top poster on here and
other ngs spouting your nonsense over literally hundreds of posts.

> Neither Steve nor you know the slightest thing about Covid. Nothing.
>
> You're _exactly_ like the lemon-juice bank robber, Chris.
>
>> To re-iterate. The SARS-CoV-2 genome is 30 kilobases. The human genome
>> is 3.2 *giga*bases. The viral genome is 5 ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE smaller.
>> That's like comparing a garden fence with Mt Everest.
>
> Do you realize you are simply embarrassed you had no perspective whatsoever
> on how fantastically huge the genome is inside the SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid?

I'm not because it isn't.

>> There are larger coronaviruses: the beluga whale coronavirus (SW1) is
>> larger (31.7kb). So even for a coronavirus it's nothing special.
>> https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/2/8/1804
>
> Count the number of times I said "human" coronaviruses, you idiot.

Let's look at your original claim:

> I've read a few papers on the mutations, where my assessment is twofold:
> a. The mutations that _matter_ are actually rather rare for SARC-CoV2 b.
> However the RNA ball is fantastically huge so mutations _will_ happen

No mention of human. You keep changing your claim and still getting it
wrong.

In message <su4hmg$26a$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 23:14:41 GMT, David Higton wrote:
>
> > People have been making the point that even that small number of
> > tragedies can be reduced by vaccinating the children.
>
> That's wrong, I believe, but see the details below,

All the studies show it. Proper studies, performed by the people who are
qualified to do so.

I just read the other day that almost 400 children in the USA have died
as a result of Covid. Some proportion of those tragedies would have
been avoided by vaccinating the children. I don't know about you, but
I care about that.

All the studies show that the side effects of the vaccine are less
frequent than those of the virus. Indeed, I found it very interesting
that we all worried in the early days about blood clots caused by the
vaccines, only to discover, when proper follow-up studies had been
performed, that people were less likely to suffer them from the
vaccine than from the virus - in other words, the vaccine actually
protected people from blood clots.

> > The vaccinations will also result in reduced incidence of serious
> > illness and long Covid - and we don't yet know if all the people (of all
> > ages) with long Covid recover completely.
>
> For this "Long Covid" thing, I'm not yet so sure it's not just a clickbait
> term that the news invented as the studies I've read certainly show
> long-lasting damage (e.g., honeycomb lung) but few have shown that the
> virus is not completely wiped out, and, in fact, that's the whole point of
> the home tests, isn't it?

For someone who claims huge knowledge on the subject, your claim that
long Covid might be clickbait invented by the news media stretches your
credibility way beyond breaking point.

There has surely been enough coverage about it by thoroughly respectable
and credible media organisations, it has to be accepted as fact.

Long Covid is a bit of a misnomer in that victims don't continue to
harbour the virus for a long time. Rather, the huge damage done to
various parts of their bodies is the thing that persists far longer
than the virus itself. For many people it is very debilitating.

------------------------

Vaccinations have removed many scourges from the developed world. It
started with Jenner, by whose work smallpox was eradicated. I'm old
enough to remember kids in "leg irons" because they had caught polio,
which was eradicated long ago. Measles, mumps, rubella, tuberculosis...

Any side effects from the vaccines (were there ever any?) pale into
insignificance by comparison with those dreadful diseases.

(When I talk about eradication, of course I mean in the rich countries
where enough people were vaccinated. They still continue to cause
death and suffering in poorer countries. Shame on us in the richer
nations who are too selfish to help them.)

And of course, diseases continue to afflict people who are stupid
enough to believe ant-vax clickbait instead of science.

David