Bio--the discipline, that is.
They looked at Pennsylvania and thought it was a good idea to have an out-of-stater run? They forgot to check how that one worked out.
I’m still wondering just how much hands-on work you have done on this virus? How many of the archival papers have you read? Do you know what is involved in the actual process of infection by this virus? Could you describe the structure of antibodies and the mechanisms by which they are made? I doubt that you can, so this is a waste of space to continue any discussion with you.
Given that CA and NY are # 1 and # 3 in total population. MA is #15, so it’s the oddball in your listing. I don’t think it’s a problem with those “other representatives”.
As a scientist who is well aware of the facts of the case, I can assure you that I understand much better than the average poster on this site. I have actually been involved in a section of research on the biophysical characteristics of SARS-C0V-2. What about you? How much work have you done on this virus?
A book was recently published entitled “Kentucky Domestic Violence” . A summary can be viewed at https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29763099/
I have to say this cartoon doesn’t seem to make much of a point, but maybe you have to be a good Fox viewer to see the “point”. I mean, potty jokes are cool with the Right?
FWIW,: Well over 200 virus strains are implicated in causing the common cold, with rhinoviruses, coronaviruses, adenoviruses and enteroviruses being the most common. Let’s hope that SARS-CoV-2 ends up at common cold level over time.
Motivemagus and I both have PhDs. We also have an agreement to help each other from our respective areas of expertise to maintain accurate posts about science. You might be surprised at the actual number of PhDs posting here, as many of them are those whom you have denigrated in your posts.
FWIW, at the start of this pandemic I and colleagues (as was most of the global scientific community) were working on discovering how and what SARS-CoV-2 was. Papers in journals on this virus and covid-19 were all open access, meaning you didn’t have to have a subscription to read them on the web. Those are the sources for my information. I don’t know what your background is, but I’m pretty sure it’s not the basic science that has informed our work on this virus since the only journals you mention are essentially clinical, and I see no reason to think that you have the biochemical background to evaluate this basic science. In short, you have displayed the same lack of comprehension as Rand Paul. I have often wondered how he passed the basic biochem course in his training at Duke. I took the same course in my time there, so I know what one should have learned from it.
Your grasp of virology is very poor. In addition, your grasp of the specific characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 is even worse. Children, like any other carrier of virus were as likely to spread the virus as adults. The initial difference was that children’s bodies, at least in the initial few variants, were less likely to die. That did NOT mean that they were less likely to sustain permanent damage from this virus. The wide-spread occurrence of microclots in various tissues practically guarantees permanent damage in a number of survivors. And would you like to explain why we should blame a victim of this disease for having pre-existing factors that increase their chance of dying? Like they chose to be a type 1 diabetic? Or they are so old, they should expect to die and not bother the rest of us? Your whole argument is scientifically invalid and totally lacking in any humanity or concern with personal responsibility.