Drew Dowdell

Coronaviruses are a group of related RNA viruses that cause diseases in mammals and birds. In humans and birds, they cause respiratory tract infections that can range from mild to lethal. Mild illnesses in humans include some cases of the common cold (which is also caused by other viruses, predominantly rhinoviruses), Coronavirus - Wikipedia

At least one if not two of those is a rendering. The third looks like it’s from an electron microscope. But what you’re saying is just scientifically incorrect. It’s the same as saying station wagons and sedans are the same because they both have 4 wheels and a motor up front. look up the RNA virus list on Wikipedia. Influenza and Corona viruses are in two different families. Sure they’re both round with spikes, but even those spikes are different. (and the common cold has spikes too).

I think the confusion is around the conflation of terms in the link you sent, and also in common vernacular when news reports refer to "The Corona Virus". The article refers to Influenza viruses in general but then SARs-CoV-2 (Covid-19) specifically. But SARs-CoV-2 and other SARs and MERs and Common Cold are all Corona Viruses... so when ABC 6 News says "The Corona Virus" it is being unspecific even though we all know they mean Covid-19/SARs-CoV-2. Influenza has it's own types as well.. H1N1, Swine Flu, Bird Flu, etc... but they are all some variant of one of the 4 types of Influenza virus.

Yes, because you don’t seem to be following what I’m saying. No, it’s not, and this is why I’m making the car comparison because you’re not following. COVID-19 cannot be closer in structure to the flu than a Corona virus because it is a Corona virus. The common cold is also a Corona virus. Thus common cold and COVID-19 share a common structure. Influenza may be similar, but it cannot be “closer” than something that has a shared structure. Corona Viruses are sedans. Common cold and Covid-19 are both sedans. And there are many makes models and trim levels. Some are relatively safe, some can be deadly. Influenza is a station wagon. Close but not the same as a sedan. Also have many makes, models, and trim levels. Some are relatively safe, some can be deadly. But just like you can get a Charger with a wimpy 2.7 liter or a supercharged hemi, they share the same platform and body configuration. Common Cold Corona virus and Covid-19 share a platform and body configuration. Influenza has a different body configuration. Ill make you a Venn diagram if I need to

The common cold *is* a Corona virus. (Usually). Corona virus is to Sedan as Covid-19 is to 1997 Camry with an LS swap. Coronavirus can mean anything from a Sonic LS sedan to a Charger Hellcat. Saying COVID-19 is a very specific make, model, and year. From Wikipedia: Coronaviruses are a group of related RNA viruses that cause diseases in mammals and birds. In humans and birds, they cause respiratory tract infections that can range from mild to lethal. Mild illnesses in humans include some cases of the common cold, while more lethal varieties can cause SARS, MERS, and COVID-19.

People compare it to the flu because the symptoms and spread can be similar though more intense with Covid. The comparison I made to the common cold is regarding the physical structure of the virus. There are many many coronaviruses out there and you’ve probably caught a few in your lifetime. They would have been diagnosed as a common cold or a respiratory infection. You eat chicken soup, stay in bed a few days, and you get over it. Covid-19 is just a highly intense version of that which can trigger overreaction by the immune system causing severe illness and death. Structurally it’s the common cold, but in practice it is way more intense. Beige ‘97 Camry with in LS swap.

Google translate didn’t work for your post.... this is all that came through.

In the 20+ years they've been researching this, there has been no indications of it being cancer causing. Furthermore, due to the nature of the way it works, there is no reason to believe it even could be cancer causing. Certainly watch the data for the unknown, but the mechanism with which this process works doesn't suggest that possibility.

Again. mRNA vaccines are not new. They have been working on them for over 2 decades. What has changed is the speed at which we can extract the DNA, analyze it, and construct the mRNA. The first mRNA vaccine was reported on in testing in 1993 - Induction of virus-specific cytotoxic T lymphocytes in vivo by liposome-entrapped mRNA - PubMed (nih.gov) Here it is in 2009 being used for fragile cancer patients who needed extremely customized vaccines made in tiny batches for genetically specific cases - Direct Injection of Protamine-protected mRNA: Results of a P... : Journal of Immunotherapy (lww.com) Back in 2012 there was discussion about how flexible mRNA vaccines are and the realization of what a huge breakthrough it was. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3597572/ Money Quote: In 2013 there was discussion on how effective and safe mRNA vaccines are because of how specific the targeting process is. Money Quote And again in 2019 there was over 20 years of data showing: Challenges and advances towards the rational design of mRNA vaccines: Trends in Molecular Medicine (cell.com) So bottom line: these aren’t new, this is literally late 80's / early 90's technology the only thing that has changed is the speed at which we can sequence DNA there’s lots of info showing they’re safe the reason they weren’t widely used before had nothing to do with their safety they are ideally suited as the first response to a fast-moving pandemic I was not making a hyperbole when I stated that mRNA vaccines are the 3D Printing of the vaccine world. YES! They have been working on these for decades! There is data going back to when AMC was still an independent company! mRNA is safer because it is so tightly targeted. All it does is make replicas of one part of the membrane of the viral cell so that your body will recognize it. It's like passing out 3d mug-shots to every police officer in town so they can recognize the bad guy. The side effects that some people experience from the second dose are a good sign! It means that your body recognized the intruder and went to Red Alert thinking it was a real invasion... and with the second dose your body takes it even more serious. I got no side effects from the first shot but I got major side effects within 12 hours of the second shot.... that was my body mounting a defense. After 4 days or so, the vaccine was completely expelled from my body. And now I have those anti-bodies... just like I have antibodies to this year's flu, and the measles, and mumps, and Hep A/B, and others. Those antibodies do not cause cancer and anti-bodies for Covid do not cause cancer. You have antibodies to many common cold viruses already. Having antibodies to Covid-19 is no different. Everyone reading this please try to understand.... Covid-19 is not a particularly special virus, it's new, but not special. It is most closely related to the common cold. The only thing that is special about it is the intensity of the infection and it's ability to be more easily transmitted. To put it in car terms, Covid-19 is the beige 2003 Camry LE that someone did an LS swap into. Absolutely nothing special, but it can go fast and kill people. That's all it is.

Some of them look like the products of a woman infected with Zeka virus during pregnancy.

I've made my peace with the idea that I've probably bought my last V8s ever, and the ones I own are going to have to stay with me. Any new ICE vehicles I get will probably be 6es boosted either with turbos or electric motors (or both if I shop at Volvo). Albert will probably have one more vehicle with an ICE after the 300C but it will probably be a plug-in hybrid. He has said he will want to go back to an SUV next time, so it will probably be an Aviator plug-in or XC90 plug-in. I'm going to keep the Avalanche forever, but it will eventually stop being a daily and I'll have an EV or Plug-in Hybrid for a daily. I like the Rivian the best right now for myself but that is years away (but I waited years for the Avalanche, 300C, and BMW Motorcycle... so once I have my heart set on something.....) I'm making double payments on both, so the loans will be gone in under 3 years.

*sigh* ... someone is posting fuselage bodies in the Beautiful Cars Appreciation thread again.... time to get out the ban hammer... and yes, I know one of them is a Mercury, but it still manages to look fuselage.

Different definitions of beauty certainly. I think, with automobiles especially, there is distinct difference between handsome, beautiful, and attractive. I couldn't call the Chrysler beautiful either... I reserve that more for the 20's-30's cars, the ones with the flowy curves. Handsome would be like the '56 Continental, '57 Eldorado Brougham, and I know most will disagree, the '80 - '85 Seville. Then there are cars that are good looking enough but don't fall into those categories, but they have gravitas, just the pull of "This is something/someone important". The '63 Continental, '64 Imperial LeBaron, the CT6 (particularly the refresh), the '91 - '98 S-Class all fall into that group for me. And then there's the over the top gaudy, which I love but also doesn't fit into the above slots. '58 Buicks and Olds go here, all of the Big-Finned Cadillacs, the '61 and '62 Imperial Crown, Lincoln Continental Mark IV, and the '57 Chevy in a blue-collar sort of way.

As with everything, each according to his tastes.... however... the Italians were quite capable of building beautiful cars: It was the reliability that was always suspect. That said... I have lately been having an unhealthy obsession with these: 1990 Bentley Turbo R But I need an 80's British car like I need a hole in my head (which Albert would likely provide if I did buy one) And in looking for those photos, I stumbled upon this beauty: 1957 Bentley Continental S1 Fastback

I warned you against politics, you ignored it, so now you're getting warning points. Talking about our experiences getting the vaccine is not political. The fact that you think us discussing how we got the vaccine or the side effects we might have experienced is political says more about you than it does about us. It also goes back to my complaint in the Bad Behavior thread where I said: As far as my quote from the NYT.... what I provided was EVIDENCE from the New England Journal of Medicine. It was just a quote from the NYT summarizing in plainer language what the NEJM said. Compare that to your links (which will be removed): LawEnforcementToday triggers this warning in my browser: And even by their own admission, they are an OPINION site with anonymous sources and no accountability BorderReport is owned by NexStar which, like Sinclair group, is right wing propaganda masquerading as "Your Friendly Local News Channel". TFIGlobalNews is an Indian news site which runs Trump puff pieces.... an article dated today is talking about how Trump is going to win (riddled with spelling errors I might add). So, on my side I have a respected medical journal largely regarded as one of the standards of the world and to counter that, you provide a link to a site that causes a browser warning, a right-wing propaganda conglomerate, and a news outlet from India with a hard on for Trump.... NONE of which refute my statement (backed by the NEJM) that the vaccine offers greater protection from the virus than being infected does. So, I'm not going to even address the rest of your lies, I'm just going to delete them as I hand you your warning. You said your piece here. You're wrong about virtually every "fact" you've posted. Stay out of this thread. Further posts in this thread will result in further warnings until suspension kicks in.

The New York Post is a trash tabloid, but even then, the quotes are telling "half the nurses in the facility would not get the vaccine, citing political reasons." and "Survey respondents leaning against taking the vaccine said, among other reasons, that they were concerned how politics influenced the development of the vaccine". Also, that article is from December 30th, just a few weeks after the vaccine had been released. How about some up to date data, no? FALSE: The pandemic is not winding down. There are spikes again in a number of major cities including my own. ALSO FALSE - The administration has not changed testing procedures at the boarder. Anyone caught by CBP is held for 72 hours while they are tested. This is carry over policy from the previous administration. Biden Hasn't Reduced COVID-19 Testing at the Border - FactCheck.org - Lots of sources at the bottom too. But you're getting dangerously close to bumping into the No Politics rule. You've already used your final opportunity on that one. So move on from that point. ALSO FALSE - It is being well documented, however the full extent of the greater benefit is not yet fully known. ‘Natural Immunity’ From Covid Is Not Safer Than a Vaccine - The New York Times (nytimes.com) "Early evidence suggests that the Covid-19 vaccines may fall into this category. Volunteers who received the Moderna shot had more antibodies — one marker of immune response — in their blood than did people who had been sick with Covid-19." If you follow that link in the quote, it will take you to the NEJM where it will state in the report that people who had Covid-19 had 80% effectiveness while the vaccines have ~95% effectiveness. 80% < 95% Not my opinion... take it up with the New England Journal of Medicine, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the 31 doctors that worked on the study. If you think you're more qualified to make an assessment than those doctors and organizations, please provide some credential so we know it's not just your opinion.

That's actually a lower rate than the article from Israel that I quoted, so I'm not sure why you think that helps your argument. And all it is saying is that the vaccine didn't protect everyone. We KNOW that. We knew it going into it. Vaccines rarely ever protect everyone and there is nearly always someone who is unable to take a vaccine for other health reasons. That is why it is so important for those of us who can take the vaccine to take the vaccine... to protect those who can't. That is the only ethical way we get to herd immunity. If 80% of people out there take the vaccine, this pandemic is over. By not taking it, you're only helping to extend it longer. Even if you had covid, you are not as protected from the virus or variants as you are if you took the vaccine.

I did... here's is a quote from one of them.... 271 out of 3,387,340 people got severely infected with Covid after being vaccinated (and we don't have any information on their underlying health conditions, so they could all be obese diabetics for all we know), and of those, 99 still died (but again, the article doesn't give info... did they die from Covid or were they already compromised in some way with severe co-morbities?) 0.2% of those vaccinated caught the virus, 2% of those people or 0.000029% of the total vaccinated, died. Only 0.00021% of those who were vaccinated caught covid and got serious illness. You don't get much more of a sure thing in risk management of any sort, in the world of vaccines, this is a grand slam hit out of the park success. By comparison, the Flu vaccine is between 40% and 60% effective depending on the strain in a given year. The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are ~95% effective. All numbers came from your article in the last link. I consider that one to be one of the best because Israel has by-far the highest Covid vaccination rate of any country, so I consider its data to be the most revealing.

My contribution to Easter Dinner. My entire pod is fully vaccinated now so we were able to gather for the first time in a year. Strawberry cheesecake, everything is homemade.

The reason they are still telling people to mask even if they’ve been vaccinated is that you can be an asymptomatic carrier. So even if your aren’t ill, you can carry the virus for a time and if you sneeze, say for seasonal allergies, you can spread the virus. That isn’t a reason to not get vaccinated. If the odds of winning a roll of the dice were 95% in a casino, I’ll take that bet every single time. Even if I hit the 5% and lose, I can roll again in 90 days. Risk assessment has been part of my job for over a decade and a half.

That is expected. The flu shot has a lower effectiveness than the Covid shot. None of the vaccines are expected to be 100%. However the vaccine is effective that even if you’re vaccinated and still get it you don’t end up in the hospital. so that is a major improvement over dying. That’s the point of the vaccine, to prevent mortality. That’s why getting the vaccine is important even with the variants.

Different markets. The Rivian prioritizes range over ultimate power. Also there is a big difference in size.

A lot of the Covid deniers will point to the survival rate (while also pointing at the wrong number), but survival does not equal recovery. People survive cancer all the time, but they are often not able to do the things they once did. My old boss was a multi-time cancer survivor (it did get him eventually) but even when he was in remission he was relegated to a lifetime of medications that had side effects and he couldn’t take the stairs going up because he no longer had adrenal glands. So yeah, he survived cancer for a time, but he never recovered. The same is happening to people who get Covid.

And the case of the Uglies rolls on with EVs. Why does every EV have to be so god damn ugly!?! I like the numbers from the power train, but the car could be powered by the risen Jesus pedaling hard and I still wouldn’t drive that thing. So far, the only EVs I think look decent are the Audi, Porsche, and Volvo/Polestar. The Rivians look great. The BMW, MB, Hummer, and Bolt all look ugly or dorky. The Teslas and Jaguar are meh. If the Cadillacs stay close to concept they should look pretty good, but Cadillac has a habit or producing gorgeous concepts and then dumbing them down a lot for production.

I have friends in Boulder Colorado who got it very early in the pandemic, just before things started getting locked down. They were sick for a month and pulled through, however a year later they still have after effects. This is a very healthy couple who would get out and exercise regularly and go hiking in the mountains. These days they get winded climbing up the one flight of stairs to their apartment. As far as I know they haven’t had any chest X-rays, but there’s plenty of evidence that they’ve suffered long term/permanent lung damage. They’re the same age as me.