COVID Hospitalizations on the rise....

[CadyandZoe]

The response to the judge's question was "evidence"

yes and you are spewing misinformation and propaganda all over the place.

"Evidence" was their answer? And you buy that?

[shaking head] Talk about avoiding the question.

The judge's question highlights the dangers of authoritarian control over information. Remember Copernicus and Galileo?

 

[CadyandZoe]

You YOU are talking about SARS. try reading what is actually on your screen.



SARS is also part of the coronavirus family, but it stems from a different strain and is a different disease to COVID-19.

SARS is caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome virus SARS-CoV-1. COVID-19 is caused coronavirus 2

the American patent “US2006257852” is for SARS, not for COVID-19,


Then provide the actual quote and citation or stop wasting everyone's time.

So, SARS is a biotechnological invention? Yes?

Have a look at this editorial statement published in theBMJ [Origins of SARS-CoV-2 and potential future legal claims]

Thus, as long as the current uncertainty about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 persists, it is not inconceivable that soon one or many alleged patentees would step forward with legal claims toward SARS-CoV-2. Given its global prevalence (as well as evidence that reverse-transcribed SARS-CoV-2 RNA, i.e., cDNA, can integrate into the genome of human cells [2]), and—independently—the widespread use of SARS-CoV-2 sequences for COVID-19 clinical testing and for vaccination, any such claim would have broad societal implications and would be likely met with public controversy.​

Understand? Since the US issued a SARS patent, SARS is not a naturally occurring. It was invented by someone and released on the public. [the plot thickens] In other words, someone is responsible for all the deaths associated with SARS.

 

[TinMan]

"Inclusive" just means there are no circumstances under which you cannot summarily reject it, right?

No it means actually covering all women.

You just can't play an unrigged game, can you?

"Inclusive definition" is just a disingenuous, postmodern way of stipulating that the definition has to please everyone, including perhaps even those who believe a woman is simply a unicorn.

.

is that what you beleive?

 

[TinMan]

How much do you plan on spending on cold remedies this season? Why not try taking some vitamins? It's a chance for you to see for yourself.

My brother took all sorts of vitamins...

 

[TinMan]

My father taught me something about car repair. He told me to start with the cheapest fix first, and if that doesn't work, then pick the next cheapest thing to fix.

What if I am right? Okay? Let's say someone got Covid-19. Why not give them the zinc and Ivermectin for three days to see if it works? It's a lot cheaper than hospitalization. If it doesn't work (and it will) then go to the hospital.

Effect of High-Dose Zinc and Ascorbic Acid Supplementation vs Usual Care on Symptom Length and Reduction Among Ambulatory Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection

"In this randomized clinical trial of 214 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection receiving outpatient care, there was no significant difference in the duration of symptoms among the 4 groups.... treatment with zinc, ascorbic acid, or both does not affect SARS-CoV-2 symptoms."


Effect of Early Treatment with Ivermectin among Patients with Covid-19
"Treatment with ivermectin did not result in a lower incidence of medical admission to a hospital due to progression of Covid-19 or of prolonged emergency department observation among outpatients with an early diagnosis of Covid-19."

 

[TinMan]

"Evidence" was their answer? And you buy that?

[shaking head] Talk about avoiding the question.

The judge's question highlights the dangers of authoritarian control over information. Remember Copernicus and Galileo?

they both had evidence to back up with they were saying

 

[TinMan]

So, SARS is a biotechnological invention? Yes?

No.

Have a look at this editorial statement published in theBMJ [Origins of SARS-CoV-2 and potential future legal claims]

Thus, as long as the current uncertainty about the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2 persists, it is not inconceivable that soon one or many alleged patentees would step forward with legal claims toward SARS-CoV-2. Given its global prevalence (as well as evidence that reverse-transcribed SARS-CoV-2 RNA, i.e., cDNA, can integrate into the genome of human cells [2]), and—independently—the widespread use of SARS-CoV-2 sequences for COVID-19 clinical testing and for vaccination, any such claim would have broad societal implications and would be likely met with public controversy.​

Understand? Since the US issued a SARS patent, SARS is not a naturally occurring. It was invented by someone and released on the public. [the plot thickens] In other words, someone is responsible for all the deaths associated with SARS.

the patent is for a of weakened strain of the naturally occurring SARS virus to be used as a possible vaccine for respiratory diseases in animals

 

[BarneyFife]

My father taught me something about car repair. He told me to start with the cheapest fix first, and if that doesn't work, then pick the next cheapest thing to fix.

What if I am right? Okay? Let's say someone got Covid-19. Why not give them the zinc and Ivermectin for three days to see if it works? It's a lot cheaper than hospitalization. If it doesn't work (and it will) then go to the hospital.

What if you're right?

COVID isn't a casino game.

What if the person who gets sick isn't healthy enough to bet on your hypothesis for 3 days?

I got COVID last January (2022) and got over it after taking absolutely nothing but water and vegetable broth for 3 days. I know a lot about health and disease but I can't say what will work for everyone else. People are ultimately responsible for their own health.

.

 

[BarneyFife]

No it means actually covering all women.

IOW, all people who "identify as women."

.

 

[TinMan]

IOW, all people who "identify as women."

.

where is I say that?

 

[CadyandZoe]

My brother took all sorts of vitamins...

There is a difference between facts and truth.

One day a man notices bicycle tracks in his yard and he wonders to himself how they got there. He talks with his neighbor who tells him that he saw a young boy riding a bike on lawns around the neighborhood. The next day, the man confronts the boy. "Are these tracks yours?", he asked the young boy. "No sir," the boy says. "Those tracks were caused by my sister's bike." The boy was giving the facts, but was he telling the truth?

As it turns out, the boy was indeed riding his sister's bike. The boy caused the tire tracks, not his sister.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Effect of High-Dose Zinc and Ascorbic Acid Supplementation vs Usual Care on Symptom Length and Reduction Among Ambulatory Patients With SARS-CoV-2 Infection

"In this randomized clinical trial of 214 patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection receiving outpatient care, there was no significant difference in the duration of symptoms among the 4 groups.... treatment with zinc, ascorbic acid, or both does not affect SARS-CoV-2 symptoms."


Effect of Early Treatment with Ivermectin among Patients with Covid-19
"Treatment with ivermectin did not result in a lower incidence of medical admission to a hospital due to progression of Covid-19 or of prolonged emergency department observation among outpatients with an early diagnosis of Covid-19."

Facts, but not truth.

 

[CadyandZoe]

they both had evidence to back up with they were saying

Wow, you really do miss the point. The judge didn't ask them if they could prove anything. She asked them, "What if the government is lying?" Freedom of speech is one of the guardians of our liberty. The people have the right to openly criticize the government. And if the government is responsible for lies, cover-ups, misdeeds, etc. the people have the right to inform each other and to hold the government accountable.

Without a free press,
without free speech,
Without free and fair elections,
There is no accountability and tyranny thrives.

 

[TinMan]

There is a difference between facts and truth.

One day a man notices bicycle tracks in his yard and he wonders to himself how they got there. He talks with his neighbor who tells him that he saw a young boy riding a bike on lawns around the neighborhood. The next day, the man confronts the boy. "Are these tracks yours?", he asked the young boy. "No sir," the boy says. "Those tracks were caused by my sister's bike." The boy was giving the facts, but was he telling the truth?

As it turns out, the boy was indeed riding his sister's bike. The boy caused the tire tracks, not his sister.

the fact is my brother died a slow horrible death from Covid and nothing will change that. And that is the truth

 

[TinMan]

Wow, you really do miss the point. The judge didn't ask them if they could prove anything. She asked them, "What if the government is lying?"

and the response was that the evidence says they are not.

Freedom of speech is one of the guardians of our liberty. The people have the right to openly criticize the government. And if the government is responsible for lies, cover-ups, misdeeds, etc. the people have the right to inform each other and to hold the government accountable.

Without a free press,
without free speech,
Without free and fair elections,
There is no accountability and tyranny thrives.

No right is absolute. Your right to free speech does not for example allow you to issue death threats or to falsely accuse someone of a crime.
It also works both ways freedom of speech means that people have the right to confront you about your sick lies regarding Covid

 

[CadyandZoe]

No.



the patent is for a of weakened strain of the naturally occurring SARS virus to be used as a possible vaccine for respiratory diseases in animals

No?
I read through the entire patent application for SARS-CoV and I discovered a few things.

US7220852B1
Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the ...

US7220852B1 - Coronavirus isolated from humans - Google Patents

Disclosed herein is a newly isolated human coronavirus (SARS-CoV), the causative agent of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). Also provided are the nucleic acid sequence of the SARS-CoV genome and the amino acid sequences of the SARS-CoV open reading frames, as well as methods of using...

patents.google.com

Quote from Patent Application:
Coronavirus have not previously been known to cause severe disease in humans, but have been identified as a major cause of upper respiratory tract illness, including the common cold.

Here, the paper acknowledges that naturally occurring coronavirus is not known to cause severe disease.

Quote from Patent Application:
In late 2002, cases of life-threatening respiratory disease with no identifiable etiology were reported from Guangdong Province, China, followed by reports from Vietnam, Canada, and Hong Kong of severe febrile respiratory illness that spread to household members and health care workers. The syndrome was designated “severe acute respiratory syndrome” (SARS) in February 2003 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (MMWR, 52:241–48, 2003).

Here is what the Mayo clinic says about it.
Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)-Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) - Symptoms & causes - Mayo Clinic


Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) is a contagious and sometimes fatal respiratory illness. severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) first appeared in China in November 2002. Within a few months, SARS spread worldwide, carried by unsuspecting travelers.

SARS showed how quickly infection can spread in a highly mobile and interconnected world. On the other hand, a collaborative international effort allowed health experts to quickly contain the spread of the disease. There has been no known transmission of SARS anywhere in the world since 2004.

What do you know? No known transmission of SARS anywhere in the world since 2004.

Impact of SARS Epidemic
The 2003 epidemic was responsible for more than 8,000 cases of SARS in 29 countries, including 29 cases in the United States. There were 774 SARS-related deaths; none reported in the U.S. SARS was fatal for 1 in 10 patients Age was an important factor in mortality; the risk of the disease being fatal increased to about half of patients over the age of 60. A small percentage of patients had long-term effects from their illness, including depression or anxiety, cough, shortness of breath, chronic lung disease or kidney disease. However, most patients fully recovered.

So why was a patent issued?
It is possible for companies to obtain patents related to naturally occurring diseases, not for the disease itself, but for the technique of isolating and replicating it in a laboratory. The reason for this is to have sufficient samples for research and potentially develop a cure.

Even so, technology has proven to be a two-edged sword. The same techniques used to isolate and replicate a disease in a laboratory are the same techniques one might use to develop a novel strain.

When and why was CRISPR invented?
When was it first used for Genome editing?
Is there a biological lab in Wuhan China?

Where did SARS-CoV-2 come from?

 

[CadyandZoe]

the fact is my brother died a slow horrible death from Covid and nothing will change that. And that is the truth

Sorry for your loss. Did your brother die in a hospital? How old was he? How long did he wait for treatment? When did this occur?

 

[CadyandZoe]

What if you're right?

COVID isn't a casino game.

What if the person who gets sick isn't healthy enough to bet on your hypothesis for 3 days?

I got COVID last January (2022) and got over it after taking absolutely nothing but water and vegetable broth for 3 days. I know a lot about health and disease but I can't say what will work for everyone else. People are ultimately responsible for their own health.

.

Granted a casino game is a high-risk activity, especially because the house controls the situation such that at the end of the day, more people lose money than win. Buying a bottle containing zinc, vitamin C, vitamin D3 and quercetin is a low-risk bet. And if it doesn't work, (which it does) then no harm is done.

Let's address the topic at hand and the underlying question it raises: "Who do you trust?" Dr. Zelenko was not the only physician recommending early treatment with zinc and hydroxycroquine. (It's worth noting that President Trump learned about hydroxycroquine from Dr. Zelenko during a White House meeting.) However, after the government halted the supply of hydroxycroquine, doctors turned to Ivermectin. When the government then restricted access to Ivermectin, doctors had to find an alternative and discovered that quercetin was also effective.

I base my recommendation on the personal testimonies of numerous doctors whom I've seen and heard firsthand, as they are the ones who practice medicine and genuinely aim to heal their patients. I trust them. The resistance towards hydroxycroquine and Ivermectin is mainly due to pharmaceutical companies that stand to lose millions of dollars if people stop taking their vaccines. The government is supposedly protecting the Pharmaceutical industry, but at what expense?

Have you ever wondered why a cure for the common cold has not been discovered yet? If so, I recommend watching the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car?" as it provides a hint. The General Motors EV1 did not require gas, oil, air filters, or other similar items. This caused concern that the car repair market would be destroyed. Similarly, if a cure for the common cold was found, it could potentially cause damage to the over-the-counter industry.

All I am asking is this, try the formula on a common cold. Isn't that low enough risk for you?

 

[CadyandZoe]

and the response was that the evidence says they are not.

No right is absolute. Your right to free speech does not for example allow you to issue death threats or to falsely accuse someone of a crime.
It also works both ways freedom of speech means that people have the right to confront you about your sick lies regarding Covid

Let's put this in context with a quotation from the Law school at Cornell.

Freedom of speech is the right to speak, write, and share ideas and opinions without facing punishment from the government. The First Amendment protects this right by prohibiting Congress from making laws that would curtail freedom of speech.

While the public has a right to freedom of speech when it comes to the U.S. government, the public does not have this right when it comes to private entities. Companies and private employers are able to regulate speech on their platforms and within their workplace since the First Amendment only applies to the government. This right allowed Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter to ban President Donald Trump from their sites in 2021 without legal repercussion. Companies like Facebook and YouTube were also able to ban misleading information on Covid-19 during the 2020 pandemic.

freedom of speech

www.law.cornell.edu

The current problem concerns the government's use of pressure on private platforms. According to LII, the freedom of speech protects us from government sanctions. There are claims that the government has bypassed the First Amendment by threatening private companies with punishment, thereby violating people's right to free speech.


The court ruling can be found here: https://ago.mo.gov/wp-content/uploads/missouri-v-biden-ruling.pdf

 

[Scott Downey]