No, we're not talking about cover ups. We're talking about studying the virus and it escaping by accident. Also, there is a history of lab leaks so it stands to reason...
The title is "Lab Leak 2.0". The '1.0' is referring to the popular story about a covered up lab leak in China and the ensuing conspiracy to keep it all a secret.
Well, "overweight" by CDCs definition (BMI > 25 == overweight). But there's a strong link between complications from COVID and Obesity. It's a shame nobody wants to make the obese pay for their externalities -- even the people who'd like to make the unvaccinated "pay" in some way turn a blind eye to this issue.
If you want to make "the obese" "pay for their externalities", I do hope you have a fantastic plan in place to break the backs of the Nabiscos of the world who literally-not-figuratively design for habituation and drum their marketing into every place they can.
The situation was not caused by overstressed people going "you know, I really want to be fat".
The reality of food scientists designing these things to feel good and to habituate in a world of constant stress with few affordable and time-permitting outlets is a pretty obvious problem with this sort of claim. So is the fact that these bastards push to kids, and a reasonable person might find it a little odd that, at best and most generously, you want to punish people for the outcomes of inadequate parenting.
But it's much easier to blame fat people than the pushers, and it feels so much more satisfying to break out the hauteur about them as opposed to the businesses that tech people with tech salaries might someday seek to emulate, so--I guess I get it.
That's the issue though, everyone points out the correlation, but of course there's a correlation. Everyone's overweight. Need more analysis to show just how much it affects COVID outcomes. While it would have been nice for the governments to make more of an effort to get people to lose weight during the pandemic, it's not guaranteed it would have had the results some people expect.
3 day average is only 48 deaths per day in all of South Africa. We are at the 3 week mark. If Omicron was half as deadly as Delta we'd be seeing a corresponding spike as we saw the initial burst of cases weeks ago. We're not, it's a slight uptick. Another week and we can be quite confident.
It's easy. They have to hold themselves accountable for their own (weekly?) mistakes. People would trust them again (imo) if they called themselves out and proactively fixed their mistakes.
The glib answer is, "They publish corrections." Which many do.
But I don't think that addresses the (valid) criticism about the Iraq invasion: while there were some errors of fact, there were primarily errors of omission, where the media were too willing to act as uncritical stenographers for politicians' claims.
We see, in a way, the same phenomenon in the Trump era: whatever lunatic allegation Trump or his acolytes would make, the media felt the need to cover it; after all, whatever the President says is inherently news, no matter how crazy.
Yet in both of these examples, the problem isn't that the media represent some sort of powerful cabal, which I think was what the OP implied: it's that the media are too spineless to truly hold to account those in power (in both cases, the President of the US). Viewed that way, the premise of the original question is incongruous: it's deeply strange to criticize only the "Princeton and Columbia"-educated "media elites" who too-uncritically reported on the claims of the President, and not the Yale- and Harvard-educated President (and son of a President)--or the billionaire heir to a fortune President who came later--who uttered those false claims.
The media absolutely deserve to be criticized for their uncritical reporting before the invasion of Iraq, as I said before, but the original criticism sounded like we want a weaker media who will be less able to question false narratives espoused by powerful players. And I think if you look at these stories more closely, you'll realize we want the opposite.
Repeated exposure increases your chances of disease not serious disease. Increased Viral load increases chances of serious disease. Apologies if that didn't come across clearly.
Not an assumption. Just the data showing this to be true almost universally across the US. Statistically, breakthrough cases also skew older. Locally where I live >95% of patients in the hospital with COVID are unvaccinated.
