all 9 comments

[–]SMCAB 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

SAFE AND EFFECTIVE!

SAFE AND EFFECTIVE!

SAFE AND EFFECTIVE!

[–]Drewski 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

If it saves one life...

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

If it saves one life, then it doesn't matter how many people it kills.

[–]Dunwidit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

20% less effective against what? A computer model?

THERE IS NO ISOLATED COVID GENOME.

SO... NO COVID.

[–]SoCo[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'm not sure why people say that. There's several isolated full genomes publicly available.

[–]Dunwidit 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Computer models.

[–]SoCo[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

These are not computer models, they are (purportedly) samples from patients. If you are suggesting they are fake, I have no way to judge that, but otherwise, there are a bunch of fully sequenced isolated Covid samples out there. Scientists love to get career name recognition by publishing them to these public gnome database banks.

[–]jamesK_3rd 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well, using my pandemic logic, that's honestly why people should be required to get at least 5 of them.

[–]jagworms 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Whatever they'll admit to, it's worse than that.