So how exactly a bat virus transmits much better in humans than a human virus?

So Chinese authorities say covid is a bat virus. When people put on mask, boom, no flu, only covid. So here's the thing. flu is a human virus well adapted for human transmission. So how exactly masks killed off the flu but has no effect on covid?

a reply to: ResistanceFighter

""So how exactly a bat virus transmits much better in humans than a human virus?""

It doesn't 😎🦇

originally posted by: ResistanceFighter
So Chinese authorities say covid is a bat virus. When people put on mask, boom, no flu, only covid. So here's the thing. flu is a human virus well adapted for human transmission. So how exactly masks killed off the flu but has no effect on covid?

Must be the sizes of the organisms are different and some blow through some mask maybe 😎🦇

a reply to: ResistanceFighter

Occam's Razor, they are classifying flu cases as COVID. If a motorcycle death is COVID, why wouldn't the flu be COVID?

originally posted by: ResistanceFighter
So Chinese authorities say covid is a bat virus. When people put on mask, boom, no flu, only covid. So here's the thing. flu is a human virus well adapted for human transmission. So how exactly masks killed off the flu but has no effect on covid?

Actually, seasonal flu is quite a bit less contagious than COVID19.

“ The reproductive number, R0 (pronounced R naught), is a value that describes how contagious a disease is. For the flu, the R0 tends to be between 1 and 2, which means that for every person infected with the flu, they will infect one to two additional people. For the original COVID-19 variant, the R0 is higher than the flu, between 2 and 3. Since the end of July 2021, more than 97% of sequenced samples in Virginia have been identified as the Delta variant. Delta is different. It is more than twice as contagious as previous variants of COVID-19, with an R0 that is estimated to be between 5-7.”

www.vdh.virginia.gov...

a reply to: 1947boomer

So you are saying some cat virus transmits better in humans than in cats and vice versa?

a reply to: ResistanceFighter

It's easy when it's been genetically modified and turned lose on a unsuspecting populace.

Officially, it is because of the unvaccinated.
If everybody had been vaccinated prior to the pandemic, the pandemic would have been less pandemic than it actually is.

But I think you meant the biological mechanisms that allowed this?

I'd say if you play with a microorganism's constitution and modify it, things might be possible then.

originally posted by: 1947boomer

originally posted by: ResistanceFighter
So Chinese authorities say covid is a bat virus. When people put on mask, boom, no flu, only covid. So here's the thing. flu is a human virus well adapted for human transmission. So how exactly masks killed off the flu but has no effect on covid?

Actually, seasonal flu is quite a bit less contagious than COVID19.

“ The reproductive number, R0 (pronounced R naught), is a value that describes how contagious a disease is. For the flu, the R0 tends to be between 1 and 2, which means that for every person infected with the flu, they will infect one to two additional people. For the original COVID-19 variant, the R0 is higher than the flu, between 2 and 3. Since the end of July 2021, more than 97% of sequenced samples in Virginia have been identified as the Delta variant. Delta is different. It is more than twice as contagious as previous variants of COVID-19, with an R0 that is estimated to be between 5-7.”

www.vdh.virginia.gov...

Or...

They simply had crappy testing and every flu case was counted as COVID because "pandemic" and, even if they tested for flu, it isn't reportable so the case gets filed under COVID. Flu is estimated.

You realize unless flu is novel it's not a reportable disease, right? So minus a flu test in the early days of crap testing all symptomatic flu cases underwent COVID testing as part of the proper protocols. This will have significant implications on all this data everybody is so sure of on transmission rates and flu numbers. Now we're testing every person that walks within half a mile of a hospital and that's going to further screw data because we're adding in hundreds of thousands of asymptomatic cases that would not be counted for non-COVID strains that aren't novel.

I'm not even reading the rest of what you linked. I'm barely halfway through and they've already "politely" said most of what I did. Lol. OP is nonsense, but instead of just telling them it's nonsense you had to throw in your COVID propaganda.

It's very simple, flu didn't disappear it was mostly attributed to COVID year one. Increased number of overall deaths exceeded previous years, but had been on a predicted increasing trajectory anyway without figuring in a pandemic. By using that fact without disclosing it and by crappy testing they managed to convince you and most of the world that COVID was some existential threat to humanity. Now with testing of every gd person on the planet, symptomatic or not, they've stacked the deck in favor of "Delta" being far more transmissible.

And the grift goes on.

originally posted by: ResistanceFighter
So Chinese authorities say covid is a bat virus. When people put on mask, boom, no flu, only covid. So here's the thing. flu is a human virus well adapted for human transmission. So how exactly masks killed off the flu but has no effect on covid?

Several things in that statement that I disagree with.

It wasn't the Chinese authorities that said SARS-CoV-2 is a bat virus. It probably began with the western media, who were suggesting that it came from someone eating bat soup.

What the Chinese 'authorities' agreed with was that there was a similar looking virus in bats. It turns out, that particular bat virus, however, doesn't really infect any humans, just like the SARS-Cov-2 human virus doesn't really infect any bats.

It has also been theorized that the virus came from pangolins, because, embarrassingly, they really can't identify a direct link between the bat and human diseases. They also can't identify a direct link between any pangolin disease and the human disease, but that's just an annoying detail.

No one can find the animal that gave people covid-19

This fact also raises some clear questions about how a human virus could have 'escaped' from a lab studying bat viruses, too?

One thing that has been noted, is that cats can catch the human virus. This has to do with the similarities between human and cat ACE2 receptors. You may recall in the news, zoos where big cats caught COVID-19. Yet, strangely, no-one suggests that the virus might have come from cats? Cats also predate on bats, which they eat raw, so perhaps they got the bat virus or something similar decades, or centuries ago, and have been hosting and mutating it for all that time, until it finally jumped to humans? Hmmm.

Eight big cats at St. Louis Zoo test positive for COVID-19

But really, the virus is strongly dependent on human ACE2 to do its infective trick. Far more than any other species (even cats), the virus is suited and totally adapted to humans.

Here's a weird idea - perhaps it came from humans and acquired its deadly traits more recently? Unpossible??

Also, masks have suppressed the flu, exactly like they suppressed COVID-19 in countries where people didn't go round belligerently attending super-spreader protests unmasked and in large close-contact numbers.

Because the flu was only slightly suppressed, it didn't stop (there were lower numbers of flu cases in the 2012 flu season, and no-one thought that was weird).

Past Seasons Estimated Influenza Disease Burden - CDC

a reply to: chr0naut

Well written, but the OP isn't going to read those links. A for effort.



So, are you saying flu numbers should have a proportionate decline in masked vs belligerent countries vs unmasked countries as COVID numbers in those countries (if we maintain respective R0 assumptions)? That would be the case if masks were effective, yes? Maybe slightly off because the typical flu has some regional variation, but relatively proportional in any country or within it's regions? They should at least be internally consistent, then their overall numbers should be consistent. There may be demographic adjustments beyond belligerence, but within whatever demo it should be consistent?

I wonder how an outbreak with severe systemic impacts would normally effect those already vulnerable to other infections? It would be great if there was a high potential for asymptomatic infection too, even issues with testing for presence of the disease, that could add more factors to compare. Then, if mitigation was used during the height of a novel virus like that and that mitigation was also effective at preventing other illness, might we have some old data that could shed light on this? I wonder if between R0, mortality, prophylaxis, asymptomatic transmission, and other factors there might be several erroneous assumptions being made about COVID that nobody is bothering to question? Maybe some contradictions to current methodology in past methodology? Maybe discrepancies in how similar data sets are used to affirm conflicting conclusions then and now?

I'm also looking for data on when DIY masks have been recommended for general public use for prevention of illness. You seem up on mask science. You must know where I can find that data right? They must have done it constantly with our seasonal flu killing so many over the years and it being so well tracked, right? That real-time tracking was probably very helpful giving them direct locations to recommend everybody mask with hankies everywhere within impacted regions, right? Health authorities, or those duly appointed by them, have been able to issue recommendations and mandates for a while. Maybe they recommended masks during other events that impact the same risks groups as COVID via respiratory infiltration? I wonder what other things may have prompted a mask recommendation and if, perhaps, those recommendations also came with specific warnings/contraindications about their use?

I wonder if anybody knows the answers to these questions?