It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Coronavirus has mutated into a more aggressive strain

page: 2
23
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 4 2020 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Mod note.....



The thread title is the source title.
Please feel free to dispute the truth or untruth of the source material.
But not the ATS member who posted it.

Go after the ball not the player.


You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!




posted on Mar, 4 2020 @ 10:50 PM
link   
According to the source material in the article, the title of the article is falsely alluding to it mutating into a more aggressive (which translates to more lethal for the most part) strain. That has been stated repeatedly in the start of this thread. Something that, IMO, the OP should have read their own source article before posting something the admittedly know nothing about and likely didn't even read it seems.

I prefer reading, understanding, and then posting a personal interpretation/opinion on the articles I source in my threads. I think every ATS member should do that as opposed to finding a sensationalist story title, and posting it here with little to no opening post containing their analysis.



posted on Mar, 4 2020 @ 11:52 PM
link   
a reply to: violet
So we’re living in plague inc...

Ps. Found this oddly Enough

www.google.com...



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 12:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krakatoa
According to the source material in the article, the title of the article is falsely alluding to it mutating into a more aggressive (which translates to more lethal for the most part) strain. That has been stated repeatedly in the start of this thread. Something that, IMO, the OP should have read their own source article before posting something the admittedly know nothing about and likely didn't even read it seems.

I prefer reading, understanding, and then posting a personal interpretation/opinion on the articles I source in my threads. I think every ATS member should do that as opposed to finding a sensationalist story title, and posting it here with little to no opening post containing their analysis.



I made a brief comment and offered an unrelated source to that (you might want to read also: Here It’s not possible for me to offer an interpretation at length because I’m not a microbiologist. I don’t know anything about viruses. We just get what we are told. Is it true? I have no idea. I never said it was.

There is more than one strain going around that originated from different locations. Iran has one that isn’t the same as China and this is how they are tracking it. Noted from cases providing their travel history. You can look that up from the other source I provided in my brief comment in the OP. The virus has it’s only family tree so to speak. Here is that: Genomes sampled

You keep saying the title is false, but once again I didn’t author it. I just provided it for discussion. It’s ok for you to disagree and offer your rebuttals and include sources to back that up but it’s not fair to call me a liar for posting a news story that is now circulating. Here is the link to read with the Apple App, if one prefers: apple.news... The full story is in that. I didn’t link that because not everyone uses Apple devices. I sourced it in a web browser for all to view as to not discriminate.
edit on 5-3-2020 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-3-2020 by violet because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-3-2020 by violet because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 08:05 AM
link   
Is it me or is everybody saying the same thing while thinking others are wrong?

From what I saw, all the articles say:
1 - that the coronavirus has mutated into a more aggressive strain;
2 - the newer strain was called L or L-type;
3 - the older strain was called S or S-type;
4 - L is more aggressive than S;
5 - L accounts for 70% of the cases, S for the remaining 30%;
6 - cases originated by the L strain were more common in the initial stages;
7 - cases originated by the S strain are more common now.

Where are the discrepancies between the articles?



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 08:23 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Hundreds of new viruses are discovered each year. Do you believe they were all created by anything other than nature or god if you lean towards that?I

Not everything stems from nefarious means or conspiracies.

Why can't anything ever just be normal # that happens.

No, here in ATS land the whole world is a jigsaw puzzle.



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Thecakeisalie

It took humans much longer than that because we are complex life forms.

A virus on the other hand is a very simple life form.

Pretty much dies if it gets out of the body.

We beat these babies all the time.

Puny human my foot.



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa

And why do you believe it's become more agressive?

You have a lab you confirmed it with or you read it on some faceless website on the internet?

Six of one dude...six of one. They're both half a dozen.



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: ArMaP

Maybe it's just people jumping to conclusions due to misleading terminology. The spread might be called aggressive if it's about avoiding precision in journalism, but this allegedly mutated strain is cool as a cucumber and never really gave AF to begin with.
Clickbait idiots wasting our TIMES. No wonder people are jumping to the wrong conclusions, they're literally supposed to do so.





edit on 5-3-2020 by PublicOpinion because: a harmless title



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Krakatoa

And why do you believe it's become more agressive?

You have a lab you confirmed it with or you read it on some faceless website on the internet?

Six of one dude...six of one. They're both half a dozen.


I don't, and never made that claim. If you read my post, I was contesting that the fear mongering title of the article was misleading at best. Pleas re-read my post as you seem to have interpreted it 180 degrees from the intent.



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 09:24 AM
link   

originally posted by: PublicOpinion
a reply to: ArMaP

Maybe it's just people jumping to conclusions due to misleading terminology. The spread might be called aggressive if it's about avoiding precision in journalism, but this allegedly mutated strain is cool as a cucumber and never really gave AF to begin with.
Clickbait idiots wasting our TIMES. No wonder people are jumping to the wrong conclusions, they're literally supposed to do so.






Yes, thank you. My point exactly. That article title was, IMO, intentionally written in that manner to draw people in with the lure of interpreting "more aggressive" with "more lethal/deadly". When you say someone got more aggressive with you, the immediate reaction is to consider them to be attacking you in a more harmful manner. That's the way yellow journalism works. They use word games to spread FUD and get click revenue.

How can the OP not see that was the case unless they didn't actually read the article and just posted this thread in response to the sensationalist title? A better title for the article itself would have been, "Covid-19 virus mutates to less virulent strain". But, that would not instill fear and draw people to blindly share the article, now would it?



edit on 3/5/2020 by Krakatoa because: fixed spelling errors



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 09:28 AM
link   

Mod note.....



The thread title is the source title.
Please feel free to dispute the truth or untruth of the source material.
But not the ATS member who posted it.

Go after the ball not the player.


You are responsible for your own posts.....those who ignore that responsibility will face mod actions.


and, as always:

Do NOT reply to this post!!



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Oathkeeper73

I vote that anyone who says an entire country needs to be annihilated should be forced onto the front lines as a foot soldier.



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 09:41 AM
link   
I saw that article on my news feed as well. They way I interpreted was: There are now two strains, one is deadly. We don't know anything about it. Signed, brilliant scientists.

We're all doomed.

I passed it by without reading the article. I don't believe anything I read anymore and I sure as # don't believe random videos with no explanation. I love click bait and I always fall for it but ya never know when you'll find the real story behind the perceived click bait.

I believe what I can see.



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Krakatoa



How can the OP not see that was the case unless they didn't actually read the article and just posted this thread in response to the sensationalist title?


Been there, done that. MSM programming can be very insidious, I could go through your threads and grab a similar example. And there's hope the OP and our readers will see the source in a different light, the critical method is highly contagious.
Mission accomplished!





posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 10:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: rickymouse
Viruses are one of natures ways of keeping the population down.


Bingo! So is war, mass exterminations, etc.. Humankind would have extincted ourselves long ago without "unnatural" ends to our life.



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 10:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: toolgal462
OP please correct this as the virus has mutated into a less aggressive strain according to the article.



No, it doesn't. It says the less aggressive strain was the ancestor, meaning the less aggressive strain came first and then mutated into a more aggressive strain. But it also says the less aggressive strain, that ancestor, accounts for most of the current cases, whereas the more aggressive strain accounted for more earlier cases.


The less aggressive strain, identified as ‘S’ appeared to be the ancestor of the more aggressive one, ‘L’.

Strain ‘L’ was found to be more prevalent at the start of the original outbreak in Wuhan but began to subside in early January. The S type has since become more common.



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 12:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: rickymouse

Hundreds of new viruses are discovered each year. Do you believe they were all created by anything other than nature or god if you lean towards that?I

Not everything stems from nefarious means or conspiracies.

Why can't anything ever just be normal # that happens.

No, here in ATS land the whole world is a jigsaw puzzle.


There is no conspiracy with this virus, research WAS being done on this particular type of virus and it just escaped from the lab somehow. I am commenting on this particular virus, it is stated by many professionals that that much mutation of that type would almost be impossible to create naturally. Chances of this mutating in nature to match the multiple mutations they were creating in the lab is nearly impossible, Was this intentionally left out, I doubt it, but there is still more of a chance that someone purposely released this than there is that these similar mutations could have occurred at the same time. Now if a person with AIDS did get a coronavirus, it may be possible that horizontal transfer between these two viruses could occur, meaning that they shared their technology with each other. That could be similar to what was created in the labs for research they were doing, but I doubt that is the case.

I am a realist, not a conspiracy theorist. I automatically go look for reputable sites to find out what is happening, but also know that the parameters of research are created by someone to find the answer to what they are looking at, and know that this research is being applied incorrectly by many professionals in the country. So, half the stuff on medical sites is not the whole truth, not a lie but based an miss-interpretated evidence that wasn't applicable to what they were applying it to. Strangely I find that sometimes there are alternate pathways that actually make the result right on some of this, but pharma science often creates new meds that do not share that pathway....hence side effects change with alterations to the molecular structure..



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: rickymouse
Viruses are one of natures ways of keeping the population down.


Bingo! So is war, mass exterminations, etc.. Humankind would have extincted ourselves long ago without "unnatural" ends to our life.


Yup.
Yup.

Had to say it twice, one liners are not allowed.



posted on Mar, 5 2020 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse

Do you think the virus was created in a lab in Wuhan? I’ve read about the mutations not being natural and it all points to being created.



new topics




 
23
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join