Jump to content

Why Did It Take So Long to Accept the Facts About Covid?


You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 120 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

smothering-related panic attacks

Fair enough reason. Have you considered trying one of those bracket inserts to wear underneath the mask? It should prevent the cloth from going inside the nostrils every time you breathe in.

I'm debating whether or not I should get this particular mask:

51XZTjR0z5L._AC_SL1200_.jpg

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, PermaRuthed said:

Have you considered trying one of those bracket inserts to wear underneath the mask? It should prevent the cloth from going inside the nostrils every time you breathe in.

It has nothing to do with any portion of the mask going inside my mouth or nostrils.  It is all a mental thing, due to long ago trauma.  I just have to concentrate really hard, to keep from psyching myself into a panic attack, whenever anything is covering my mouth.

 

I was very leery of the vaccines at first - due to how fast they were getting through the approval process.  Forum posts and my own research finally made me feel better about them.

Additionally, while I am highly against anyone forcing me to show proof of vaccine for every freakin activity, I don't have a problem with me volunteering the information if it allows me to not wear a mask.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

Surprisingly enough, virus evolution cares not a ding-donged thing about the number and order of letters and numbers in their common description:

https://www.ucdavis.edu/news/understanding-evolution-sars-and-covid-19-type-viruses

What does this have to do with the price of apples in Denmark?  

You can see I use "odd" names in my layman's hypothesis such as "original SARS" because I didn't even take the time to look up the name because the names do not matter.

What matters is the intermediate hosts would be available in both situations, whether lab or wet market. 

The difference in the lab is the what if testing the SARS virus on the intermediate host animals in the laboratory caused the mutation?  In this hypothesis, they obviously would have been trying drug treatments on SARS, hence the animals would have to be injected with the SARS virus.  Coronaviruses don't care about which one is more ancient either.  They are all ancient.    

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 hours ago, LittleMe Jewell said:

It has nothing to do with any portion of the mask going inside my mouth or nostrils.  It is all a mental thing, due to long ago trauma.  I just have to concentrate really hard, to keep from psyching myself into a panic attack, whenever anything is covering my mouth.

 

I was very leery of the vaccines at first - due to how fast they were getting through the approval process.  Forum posts and my own research finally made me feel better about them.

Additionally, while I am highly against anyone forcing me to show proof of vaccine for every freakin activity, I don't have a problem with me volunteering the information if it allows me to not wear a mask.

Understandable. I'm sorry for your trauma.

I was also skeptical about the vaccine considering the speed it was pushed out. I was taught that clinical research takes 6-7 years to complete. I figured I'd weigh my chances with the vacine; either the side effects will do me in or it won't. The other alternative is the 'rona. I heard it's an awful way to go.

If everyone could get their acts together, hopefully there will come a time when we all won't need masks.

Edited by PermaRuthed
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, FairreLilette said:

What does this have to do with the price of apples in Denmark?  

You can see I use "odd" names in my layman's hypothesis such as "original SARS" because I didn't even take the time to look up the name because the names do not matter.

What matters is the intermediate hosts would be available in both situations, whether lab or wet market. 

The difference in the lab is the what if testing the SARS virus on the intermediate host animals in the laboratory caused the mutation?  In this hypothesis, they obviously would have been trying drug treatments on SARS, hence the animals would have to be injected with the SARS virus.  Coronaviruses don't care about which one is more ancient either.  They are all ancient.    

The fact that, as was explained in the article I posted, "SARS-2" didn't evolve from "SARS-1" - the virus lines split some time ago. "SARS" is a description of a disease ("Sudden Acute Respiratory Syndrome"), not a virus.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Theresa Tennyson said:

The fact that, as was explained in the article I posted, "SARS-2" didn't evolve from "SARS-1" - the virus lines split some time ago. "SARS" is a description of a disease ("Sudden Acute Respiratory Syndrome"), not a virus.

And that is 100% for sure?  According to who?  I didn't know why you were linking me as it's too long, didn't read, just glanced.  I'm not a scientist and I don't want to read a bunch of long articles.   I have other things I am busy with.   But, I looked up the names and the articles have their names as SARS-cov1 and SARS-cov2.  Still don't know what that has to do my layman's hypothesis about intermediate hosts?  

It's a layman's hypothesis period.  I don't want to read a bunch of scientific jargon articles nor discuss anything science as a layman's hypothesis doesn't need it and  I don't have the time.  

EDIT:  So you are saying with your article, two different SARScov viruses have been unleased in the 21st Century.  That sounds pretty fantastical to me.  With the way this coronavirus mutates, it would have had to mutate in an intermediate host in the laboratory animal in my hypothesis.  It doesn't really matter their names in my hypothesis but that it would have mutated in an intermediate host.  All viruses care about is a host and for coronaviruses, an intermediate host.

Edited by FairreLilette
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found an interesting article on wired that may also contribute to this conversations.  The article  is called "The 60-Year-Old Scientific Screwup That Helped Covid Kill" and makes for an interesting read as well as understanding as to the events that lead to where we are now.

"All pandemic long, scientists brawled over how the virus spreads. Droplets! No, aerosols! At the heart of the fight was a mysterious error in decades-old research."

You can read it on wired:
https://www.wired.com/story/the-teeny-tiny-scientific-screwup-that-helped-covid-kill/

Although it may be behind a pay / subscription wall which is annoying.  I used outline.com to bypass it, from my understanding deleting cookies will also bypass it as you are allowed to read a few articles from wired before the wall 'o doom appears to block out 90% of your screen.

https://outline.com/nRXjqZ

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, FairreLilette said:

So you are saying with your article, two different SARScov viruses have been unleased in the 21st Century.  That sounds pretty fantastical to me.  With the way this coronavirus mutates, it would have had to mutate in an intermediate host in the laboratory animal in my hypothesis.  It doesn't really matter their names in my hypothesis but that it would have mutated in an intermediate host.  All viruses care about is a host and for coronaviruses, an intermediate host.

As far as I can see, Fairre, you're basing your hypothesis on an erroneous assumption, but it's not fantastical that we're encountering more deadly viruses in recent years, some lethal to humans, and so your theory in and of itself cannot point to a more likely spread from a lab.  Here's an article and graph explaining why it's not fantastical that we're encountering more deadly pathogens due to continuing encroachment into natural spaces:

~~~~~

The pandemic is your fault.

Yes, yours.

If you are avoiding people, wearing a mask and generally following what public health officials tell you to do (even if that has been a moving target), the notion that you have anything to do with why this pandemic occurred may seem ridiculous.

After all, it’s easy to look for blame in others.

You may be pointing your finger at Chinese officials for not acting fast enough. A recent Pew study suggested 78 percent of Americans place “a great deal of the blame for the global spread of the coronavirus on the Chinese government’s initial handling” of the outbreak.

Maybe you blame politicians who have prioritized their political well being over the health of the people they govern? Or are other people’s diets the problem? A dinner party? A beach party? The police?

There is enough blame to go around.

Finding blame in yourself can be a more difficult task. But experts say you have played a role whether you know it or not.

“What we eat, what we wear, all the other kinds of things that we buy, whether we have a cellphone or not, how many children we have (if we have children), how much we travel — all of those choices put varying degrees of pressure on the rest of the natural world,” the pandemic-focused author David Quammen told me in a Zoom interview.

It’s that simple. We’ve created a world where it’s impossible to make choices that don’t impact the natural world.

“The more we disrupt wild, diverse ecosystems, the greater jeopardy we have of contacting all of the very diverse viruses that wild animals carry,” said Mr. Quammen.

Still not convinced? Do you own a cellphone?

“Owning a cellphone makes you a customer for a mineral called coltan,” Mr. Quammen explained

When coltan is refined it makes tantalum. And there’s a trace amount of it inside that phone or computer you are using to read this story. Problem is, it’s only found in a few remote places.

“One of which is a highly diverse forest area in the eastern Democratic Republic of The Congo,” Mr. Quammen continued.

“So when I buy a cellphone, I’m a customer for tantalum and I’m sending a miner into a forest area in eastern Congo. And that miner is probably going to eat bushmeat. So I own a little of the responsibility for the jeopardy that that miner may come in contact with a new virus and spread it to others.”

An awkward pause took hold as I contemplated Mr. Quammen’s proposal.

“Maybe spread it back to you?” I asked.

“Yes, maybe spread it back to me.”

I was talking to Mr. Quammen while doing research for “How to Stop the Next Pandemic,” a 14-minute Times documentary that ask the questions: Why do pandemics happen? And how do we stop them in the future?

The short film highlights a scary trend largely overshadowed by the coronavirus ravaging the globe: New pathogens that may cause pandemics are on the rise.

https://vp.nyt.com/video/2020/08/18/88047_1_pandemics-over-time-cinemagraph_wg_720p.mp4

 

Trends in historical data charting the incidents of new emerging infectious diseases point to a future with more Covid-19-like events, not fewer.
“Yes, they’re increasing over time in direct correlation with human population growth and our ecological footprint,” said Peter Daszak, president of the EcoHealth Alliance, a nonprofit that aims to protect the public from the emergence of disease.

If you’re not already concerned about future pandemics, talking to a disease ecologist focused on zoonoses (diseases that pass between animals and humans) will likely open your eyes.

Dr. Daszak, who has a knack for monologuing about pathogens, has been warning the world for decades about potential pandemics. In 2008 he co-authored a study titled “Global trends in emerging infectious diseases,” which showed how emerging infectious disease events “have risen significantly over time.”

“These pandemics have been with us throughout history,” Dr. Daszak said. “But what’s happening now is we’ve globalized the planet, we’ve colonized the planet, and we’re now coming across the last remaining viruses that wildlife carry that we’ve never experienced before.”

If you don’t want to see more Covid-19-like events in the future, I urge you to watch our short film to become more aware of their origins, what role you play in them and most importantly what we can do to stop them.

Before finishing my interview with Dr. Daszak, I cautiously joked, “With Covid-19, is nature sending us a message?”

Dr. Daszak stared at me without smiling.

“Nature didn’t send us this message. We sent it to ourselves,” Dr. Daszak said.

Our consumer habits have changed the planet so significantly that “we dominate every ecosystem on earth right now,” he said.

“And our response is: we blame one country, versus another. We blame people who eat one species over people who eat another. And we blame nature. Well, no, we need to point the finger directly at ourselves, understand what’s going on and change it.”

The call ended.

And just like that, the pandemic was my fault.

Yours too.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/09/01/video/coronavirus-pandemics-causes.html

Edited by Luna Bliss
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

“But what’s happening now is we’ve globalized the planet

I do see this as a huge problem and believe this is also the reason for the spreading of COVID.  Although the WHO lists shutting down international travel as a last resort.  I also believe "meat" a problem too.  So, the miner eats bushmeat, it says above....  And, I'm not all about "blame" Luna but this needs to be stopped, all these viruses in the 21st Century.  It's an extreme danger period and cause needs to be established.    Most international travel is not necessary as they can teleconference like Star Trek. 

This from the recent articles that have been discussed in this thread....

The WHO was then hindered by its own regulations that travel restrictions should be a last resort, the panel said, adding that Europe and the US wasted the entire month of February and acted only when their hospitals began to fill up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

I do see this as a huge problem and believe this is also the reason for the spreading of COVID.  Although the WHO lists shutting down international travel as a last resort.  I also believe "meat" a problem too.  So, the miner eats bushmeat, it says above....  And, I'm not all about "blame" Luna but this needs to be stopped, all these viruses in the 21st Century.  It's an extreme danger period and cause needs to be established.    Most international travel is not necessary as they can teleconference like Star Trek. 

This from the recent articles that have been discussed in this thread....

The WHO was then hindered by its own regulations that travel restrictions should be a last resort, the panel said, adding that Europe and the US wasted the entire month of February and acted only when their hospitals began to fill up.

I'm challenging you on a specific point within your hypothesis -- your assertion that it's fantastical for a greater number of viruses to be occurring recently, and then using this assumption to imply a greater likelihood of a lab origin for the virus.
The article demonstrates why we are encountering more pathogens, and if you believe these researchers it is not "fantastical" that we're encountering more pathogens.

I was responding to a topic that you began -- your hypothesis implicating a lab origin for Covid-19. I certainly don't know, and as far as I see at this point nobody knows for sure, but it's an interesting topic to explore.

So what do you believe about a lab origin now? Did the article change your mind about whether the origin is from a lab or from the wild? If you do believe now that it's not fantastical that a greater number of viruses are emerging as problems in recent years due to human encroachment of natural spaces, are there other reasons you believe Covid-19 could be due to lab experimentation vs a process happening naturally in the wild?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
33 minutes ago, Luna Bliss said:

I'm challenging you on a specific point within your hypothesis -- your assertion that it's fantastical for a greater number of viruses to be occurring recently, and then using this assumption to imply a greater likelihood of a lab origin for the virus.
The article demonstrates why we are encountering more pathogens, and if you believe these researchers it is not "fantastical" that we're encountering more pathogens.

I was responding to a topic that you began -- your hypothesis implicating a lab origin for Covid-19. I certainly don't know, and as far as I see at this point nobody knows for sure, but it's an interesting topic to explore.

So what do you believe about a lab origin now? Did the article change your mind about whether the origin is from a lab or from the wild? If you do believe now that it's not fantastical that a greater number of viruses are emerging as problems in recent years due to human encroachment of natural spaces, are there other reasons you believe Covid-19 could be due to lab experimentation vs a process happening naturally in the wild?

Well, it's a hypothesis based on simple logic really that intermediate hosts could be in the laboratory.  However, hypothesis need to be proved and there is no proof yet.  All WHO will say is "it came from an animal".  Currently, as of last week, I believe, a group of scientists are gathering now to see if they can determine a specific cause or not but those findings wouldn't be released for awhile yet.  I never for once believed in any bioweapon as the cause, however.  I was fact checking something this morning and came upon my copy and paste below that the WHO believes it came from an animal and that is all.  As far as any member of the WHO and China in bed together well I'm sure that the CIA and other intelligence agencies would be wire-tapping and know the truth if there was any foul play on ANY WHO member's part, so that remains a rumor or the CIA and other intelligence agencies either do not want to divulge any information or there is no information.  So, that remains a rumor and it's something for the CIA and others to deal with if there is any foul play anywhere.

What researchers say: COVID-19 likely originated in nature

Researchers have been racing to learn about the virus since it was recognized in December 2019 as a new strain. Medical journals have pointed toward animals in nature as the origin of the virus.

On April 21, the World Health Organization noted at a briefing that available evidence indicates coronavirus originated in animals in China late last year and was not manipulated or produced in a laboratory as has been alleged.

"It is probable, likely, that the virus is of animal origin," WHO spokeswoman Fadela Chaib said.

Richard Ebright, a professor of chemical biology at Rutgers University, said earlier this year in an interview with The Washington Post: “Based on the virus genome and properties, there is no indication whatsoever that it was an engineered virus.”

The Washington Post reported most countries have abandoned their bioweapons programs after years of work did not yield satisfactory results.

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, PermaRuthed said:

I was also skeptical about the vaccine considering the speed it was pushed out. I was taught that clinical research takes 6-7 years to complete.

Every fall, there's a new flu vaccine available, targeted at the best guess for that year's predominant strain. Researchers are familiar with the influenza family of viruses and don't need to start from scratch every year. I haven't seen public hand-wringing over the speed of pushing out those yearly updates.

The same is true of coronaviruses. The research community had a long head start...

https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/public-health/how-decade-coronavirus-research-paved-way-covid-19-vaccines

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7371592/

Edited by Madelaine McMasters
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/14/2021 at 5:42 PM, Luna Bliss said:

They mention the development of therapeutics on page 63, so it's not true that they only focus on vaccines. Again on page 77 (#10 - Therapeutics).
Plus, there are many labs that have been working on viral treatments for decades.
Following are the evidence-based therapeutics for Covid according to the AMA:
https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/public-health/covid-19-therapeutics-what-evidence-shows

Right, note the word "development" rather than repurpose existing antiviral agents of which there are a number that have shown efficacy for reducing the severity and mortality of the Covid19 virus. Problem is the Government agencies made billions of dollars of promises to vaccine makers right from the start whereas they didn't start looking at treatments, new or repurposed until October of last year. 

Quote

“The goal here is to identify as quickly as possible the experimental therapeutics that demonstrate the most clinical promise as COVID-19 treatments and move them into larger-scale testing,” said NIAID Director Anthony S. Fauci, M.D. “This study design is both an efficient way of finding those promising treatments and eliminating those that are not.”

Even then, they chose to study a couple of candidates that had little data to show any real benefit and passed over a number of anti-viral agents that already had plenty of safety data for their intended purposes and had been shown to have good effects on Covid 19 in smaller studies. We could blame the typical government inefficiency and ineffectiveness but it was so blatant that one has to wonder if the the FDA and NIH were not more interested in patentable vaccines which NIH happens to be the co-owner of.

Quote

I can't imagine why you would think it's better to treat a virus than to simply prevent it from spreading in the first place though! Or why you even make the issue into an 'either-or' dilemma -- I mean...can't it be both...can't we use both vaccines and therapeutics?

To start with, producing enough therapeutics to treat those with symptoms is much faster than producing enough to vaccinate 7. billion +, never mind the cost in money and resources to administer it all nor even considering the required boosters to deal with variants. Vaccines were of no benefit to the 2 million who have died since the first vaccine was given an EUA and is still of not much value to those dying now. A therapeutic like Ivermectin on the other hand with its 80% reduction of symptoms could have saved at least half of those and would have been available for use much sooner as they already had data for its safety from years of use on other ailments. Why is that so difficult to grasp? It's like passing up on an aspirin for a headache because one would rather wait for a vaccine to hopefully cure all headaches.

 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Luna Bliss said:

could be due to lab experimentation vs a process happening naturally in the wild?

The other thing though Luna if it's so random over the whole world due to pollution and an industrialized global world, why so many viruses from China, namely SARS 1, H1N1, SARS2 in the span of about 17 years?  Doesn't that seem nearly impossible if it's due to industrialization all over the world?  Why so many from China?  I think it makes my lab animal hypothesis even more logical.  Because under your hypothesis and your article's hypothesis it would be happening all over the world, which in a way it is with flu, but flu has always been here since I was a kid but I'm talking more deadly zoonotic viruses - 3 from China, not all over the world.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of where the virus originated from, an accidental release or from bat soup, in the end, it benefited China greatly. First and foremost it helped  Trump out of office, and got a China bot as POTUS instead. Secondly it devastated western world economies - with there to pick up the pieces and profit from it

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 4
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
36 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

The other thing though Luna if it's so random over the whole world due to pollution and an industrialized global world, why so many viruses from China, namely SARS 1, H1N1, SARS2 in the span of about 17 years?  Doesn't that seem nearly impossible if it's due to industrialization all over the world?  Why so many from China?  I think it makes my lab animal hypothesis even more logical.  Because under your hypothesis and your article's hypothesis it would be happening all over the world, which in a way it is with flu, but flu has always been here since I was a kid but I'm talking more deadly zoonotic viruses - 3 from China, not all over the world.  

And the swine flu (H1N1) originated in Mexico.  The avian flu in Italy in 1878 in chickens.

Edited by Rowan Amore
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
4 minutes ago, Rowan Amore said:

And the swine flu originated in Mexico.  The avian flu in Italy in 1878 in chickens.

Okay, I got that wrong as the article I read quoted three coming from China.

It must have meant the new "swine flu", this...

The new strain, G4 EA H1N1, emerged on China's pig farms, and the researchers said it has all the hallmarks of a pandemic virus.Jul 1, 2020

EDIT:  However, I did read about The Spanish Flu from 1918 a bit (not an expert) but I believe those pigs were imported to Mexico from Eurasia.  

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, FairreLilette said:

Okay, I got that wrong as the article I read quoted three coming from China.

It must have meant the new "swine flu", this...

The new strain, G4 EA H1N1, emerged on China's pig farms, and the researchers said it has all the hallmarks of a pandemic virus.Jul 1, 2020

EDIT:  However, I did read about The Spanish Flu from 1918 a bit (not an expert) but I believe those pigs were imported to Mexico from Eurasia.  

And Ebola started in Central Africa along with the Zika virus. You can blame Europe for syphilis, Egypt for smallpox.  The fact is, they can start anywhere.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Rowan Amore said:

And Ebola started in Central Africa along with the Zika virus. You can blame Europe for syphilis, Egypt for smallpox.  The fact is, they can start anywhere.

No, my counterpoint was in regards to Luna's counterpoint and her article about industrialization and encroachment NOW, nothing much else.  The article Luna is citing doesn't include industrialization and encroachment which has been going on a long, long time.  The article is basically saying "21st Century globalization and encroachment are the problem".  I'm saying but the problem of viruses occurring is not everywhere even though we have globalization and encroachment just about everywhere.  Why?  And, I don't mean the pandemic when I say everywhere...I mean viruses and new strains.

Edited by FairreLilette
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Because China and the southeast Asian countries are some of the most densely populated areas on the planet.  India also and see what a mess.they've had recently.

Edited by Rowan Amore
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FairreLilette said:

Okay, I got that wrong as the article I read quoted three coming from China.

It must have meant the new "swine flu", this...

The new strain, G4 EA H1N1, emerged on China's pig farms, and the researchers said it has all the hallmarks of a pandemic virus.Jul 1, 2020

EDIT:  However, I did read about The Spanish Flu from 1918 a bit (not an expert) but I believe those pigs were imported to Mexico from Eurasia.  

I always called it the "Hiney Flu", because H1N1 and I'm really immature.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Jackson Redstar said:

Regardless of where the virus originated from, an accidental release or from bat soup, in the end, it benefited China greatly. First and foremost it helped  Trump out of office, and got a China bot as POTUS instead. Secondly it devastated western world economies - with there to pick up the pieces and profit from it

Awww, don't hold back. Tell us how you really feel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Virus it self still kinda failure. Imagine a virus with long incubation period with no symptoms and very high death rate. This pandemic could end up as disaster. It is bad but could be worse.

I don't think it is engineered or intentionally released because they apparently had better options for it if it was their aim.

Their vaccine turned out somewhat less effective (or non effective 50% not considered as effective). Why release a virus if you are not going to make profit from medicine. Political and economic outcome also unpredictable, a gamble.

It is usual pharma company tactic often used underdeveloped countries but usually used for agricultural products. Release a disaster to kill agricultural products and release cure for it.. They are doing to for years. But i don't think covid this kind of event..

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, Rowan Amore said:

Because China and the southeast Asian countries are some of the most densely populated areas on the planet.  India also and see what a mess.they've had recently.

No, not talking about the pandemic.  The article stated globalization and encroachment as a reason for the virus BUT the virus or two coronaviruses came out of only one area, not globally yet globalization and encroachment are everywhere but not new and different viruses everywhere.  Luna and I were having a discussion about the article she posted.  India's virus IS the pandemic.  That's not what we were discussing so this has nothing to do with populated areas as India doesn't have a different virus altogether, they have a variation of the coronavirus.  We were discussing how it may have started not the pandemic; started due to globalization and encroachment.  But, if that is true, then why aren't there viruses everywhere as globalization and encroachment are everywhere? 

Edited by FairreLilette
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 120 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...