Boffins Closer than Ever to Bringing About Stephen King’s ‘The Stand’ IRL

 

Scientists in Boston have created a strain of Covid that is 80% fatal in mice.  And if you’ve met a lot of people from Boston, you wouldn’t blame them.

In the new research , which has not been peer-reviewed, a team of researchers from Boston and Florida extracted Omicron’s spike protein — the unique structure that binds to and invades human cells. It has always been present but it has become more evolved over time. Omicron has dozens of mutations in its spike protein that made it so infectious. Researchers attached Omicron’s spike protein to the original wildtype strain that first emerged in Wuhan at the start of the pandemic. The researchers looked at how mice fared under the new hybrid strain compared to the original Omicron variant

80 percent of mice died from the new man-made Covid strain, while none died from the milder Omicron variant alone, researchers at Boston University’s National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratories found.

We’re all going to die. So vote accordingly.

Published in Science & Technology
Tags:

This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 57 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. GFHandle Member
    GFHandle
    @GFHandle

    No wonder folks don’t want research labs in their back yards.

    • #1
  2. DonG (CAGW is a Scam) Coolidge
    DonG (CAGW is a Scam)
    @DonG

    Your tax dollars at work.   Most dystopian movies make the mistake of not starting with a scene with some bureaucratic grant application.

    • #2
  3. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat
    @FrontSeatCat

    I just saw this story and posted it in another forum on Ricochet.  Dear Lord Jesus – Help Us Please!

    • #3
  4. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Just received an email from Alex Berenson:

    “Yes, all the mice infected with the original Sars-Cov-2 died.

    Which is really bad. If you’re a mouse.

    I think we can agree that Sars-Cov-2 does not have a 100 percent mortality rate in humans.

    Nor did the researchers provide any evidence that the blended Omicron/wild-type coronavirus is able to defeat antibodies in people who have been infected with and recovered from Omicron. Which is basically all of us. (They did show that both the original Omicron and their variant beats the mRNA vaccines, but that fact is not a surprise either.)

    Further, this work was conducted in a Biosafety Level 3 lab, the second-highest level, used for most viruses that aren’t Ebola/Marburg or smallpox. Should the work have been done in a top-level BSL 4 lab, with positive pressure and all the rest? Maybe. But considering we’ve all been exposed to Omicron already, and considering that the infection fatality rate from even the wild-type is more like 0.3 percent – 3 in 1000 – than 30 percent – maybe not.

    Would it be a good idea to make this sort of fiddling with Sars-Cov-2 public BEFORE scientists conduct it, so virologists and the rest of us could discuss its risk? Yeah, more disclosure probably makes sense.

    But truly, if the last two years have taught us anything, it’s that the biggest risk from Sars-Cov-2 is hysteria, not the virus itself.

    Try not to fall into the trap.”

    • #4
  5. Front Seat Cat Member
    Front Seat Cat
    @FrontSeatCat

    Ann – I feel like the next shoe is about to drop,,,,planned 100% to control the population going into the mid-terms.

    • #5
  6. DrewInWisconsin, Oik Member
    DrewInWisconsin, Oik
    @DrewInWisconsin

    I think the next conservative administration needs to make “conserving humans” its goal. And to that end, outlaw lab-created viruses. And if caught creating viruses, you are sentenced to expose yourself to the pathogen you just created and placed in a controlled environment so we can watch what happens to you. Yes, your punishment is to become a lab rat. Fitting.

    • #6
  7. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Front Seat Cat (View Comment):

    Ann – I feel like the next shoe is about to drop,,,,planned 100% to control the population going into the mid-terms.

    I agree. But it’s also possible that the shoe that drops is panic.

    • #7
  8. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    The earlier part, for those interested:

    • #8
  9. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Victor Tango Kilo: Scientists in Boston have created a strain of Covid that is 80% fatal in mice

    So they’re only mostly dead?

    And if you’ve met a lot of people from Boston, you wouldn’t blame them.

    Now do DC.

    • #9
  10. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Just received an email from Alex Berenson:

    “Yes, all the mice infected with the original Sars-Cov-2 died.

    Which is really bad. If you’re a mouse.

    I think we can agree that Sars-Cov-2 does not have a 100 percent mortality rate in humans.

    Nor did the researchers provide any evidence that the blended Omicron/wild-type coronavirus is able to defeat antibodies in people who have been infected with and recovered from Omicron. Which is basically all of us. (They did show that both the original Omicron and their variant beats the mRNA vaccines, but that fact is not a surprise either.)

    Further, this work was conducted in a Biosafety Level 3 lab, the second-highest level, used for most viruses that aren’t Ebola/Marburg or smallpox. Should the work have been done in a top-level BSL 4 lab, with positive pressure and all the rest? Maybe. But considering we’ve all been exposed to Omicron already, and considering that the infection fatality rate from even the wild-type is more like 0.3 percent – 3 in 1000 – than 30 percent – maybe not.

    Would it be a good idea to make this sort of fiddling with Sars-Cov-2 public BEFORE scientists conduct it, so virologists and the rest of us could discuss its risk? Yeah, more disclosure probably makes sense.

    But truly, if the last two years have taught us anything, it’s that the biggest risk from Sars-Cov-2 is hysteria, not the virus itself.

    Try not to fall into the trap.”

    Seems to me the biggest risk from infectious diseases is poorly-thought-through gain-of-function research.

    • #10
  11. Henry Racette Member
    Henry Racette
    @HenryRacette

    And Salt. The. Ground.

    • #11
  12. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    BDB (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Just received an email from Alex Berenson:

    “Yes, all the mice infected with the original Sars-Cov-2 died.

    Which is really bad. If you’re a mouse.

    I think we can agree that Sars-Cov-2 does not have a 100 percent mortality rate in humans.

    Nor did the researchers provide any evidence that the blended Omicron/wild-type coronavirus is able to defeat antibodies in people who have been infected with and recovered from Omicron. Which is basically all of us. (They did show that both the original Omicron and their variant beats the mRNA vaccines, but that fact is not a surprise either.)

    Further, this work was conducted in a Biosafety Level 3 lab, the second-highest level, used for most viruses that aren’t Ebola/Marburg or smallpox. Should the work have been done in a top-level BSL 4 lab, with positive pressure and all the rest? Maybe. But considering we’ve all been exposed to Omicron already, and considering that the infection fatality rate from even the wild-type is more like 0.3 percent – 3 in 1000 – than 30 percent – maybe not.

    Would it be a good idea to make this sort of fiddling with Sars-Cov-2 public BEFORE scientists conduct it, so virologists and the rest of us could discuss its risk? Yeah, more disclosure probably makes sense.

    But truly, if the last two years have taught us anything, it’s that the biggest risk from Sars-Cov-2 is hysteria, not the virus itself.

    Try not to fall into the trap.”

    Seems to me the biggest risk from infectious diseases is poorly-thought-through gain-of-function research.

    But we had it done in Wuhan so it wouldn’t affect us here in America.

    • #12
  13. BDB Inactive
    BDB
    @BDB

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Just received an email from Alex Berenson:

    “Yes, all the mice infected with the original Sars-Cov-2 died.

    Which is really bad. If you’re a mouse.

    I think we can agree that Sars-Cov-2 does not have a 100 percent mortality rate in humans.

    Nor did the researchers provide any evidence that the blended Omicron/wild-type coronavirus is able to defeat antibodies in people who have been infected with and recovered from Omicron. Which is basically all of us. (They did show that both the original Omicron and their variant beats the mRNA vaccines, but that fact is not a surprise either.)

    Further, this work was conducted in a Biosafety Level 3 lab, the second-highest level, used for most viruses that aren’t Ebola/Marburg or smallpox. Should the work have been done in a top-level BSL 4 lab, with positive pressure and all the rest? Maybe. But considering we’ve all been exposed to Omicron already, and considering that the infection fatality rate from even the wild-type is more like 0.3 percent – 3 in 1000 – than 30 percent – maybe not.

    Would it be a good idea to make this sort of fiddling with Sars-Cov-2 public BEFORE scientists conduct it, so virologists and the rest of us could discuss its risk? Yeah, more disclosure probably makes sense.

    But truly, if the last two years have taught us anything, it’s that the biggest risk from Sars-Cov-2 is hysteria, not the virus itself.

    Try not to fall into the trap.”

    Seems to me the biggest risk from infectious diseases is poorly-thought-through gain-of-function research.

    But we had it done in Wuhan so it wouldn’t affect us here in America.

    cf. “poorly-thought-through”

    • #13
  14. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    But the virus in “The Stand” was just the beginning, wasn’t it Satanically-enhanced somehow?

    • #14
  15. JoelB Member
    JoelB
    @JoelB

    Gee, I guess we better all mask up and lock down again.

    (I think this whole scenario smells fishy.) 

    • #15
  16. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    JoelB (View Comment):

    Gee, I guess we better all mask up and lock down again.

    (I think this whole scenario smells fishy.)

    Put on the mask and you won’t smell it (as much).

    • #16
  17. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Front Seat Cat (View Comment):

    Ann – I feel like the next shoe is about to drop,,,,planned 100% to control the population going into the mid-terms.

    Not  through science but through propaganda.

    • #17
  18. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    BDB (View Comment):

    Victor Tango Kilo: Scientists in Boston have created a strain of Covid that is 80% fatal in mice.

    So they’re only mostly dead?

    And if you’ve met a lot of people from Boston, you wouldn’t blame them.

    Now do DC.

    So all the rats were only 80% dead.  That’s a lot better than what I thought they were saying.

    • #18
  19. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Just received an email from Alex Berenson:

    “Yes, all the mice infected with the original Sars-Cov-2 died.

    Which is really bad. If you’re a mouse.

    I think we can agree that Sars-Cov-2 does not have a 100 percent mortality rate in humans.

    Nor did the researchers provide any evidence that the blended Omicron/wild-type coronavirus is able to defeat antibodies in people who have been infected with and recovered from Omicron. Which is basically all of us. (They did show that both the original Omicron and their variant beats the mRNA vaccines, but that fact is not a surprise either.)

    Further, this work was conducted in a Biosafety Level 3 lab, the second-highest level, used for most viruses that aren’t Ebola/Marburg or smallpox. Should the work have been done in a top-level BSL 4 lab, with positive pressure and all the rest? Maybe. But considering we’ve all been exposed to Omicron already, and considering that the infection fatality rate from even the wild-type is more like 0.3 percent – 3 in 1000 – than 30 percent – maybe not.

    Would it be a good idea to make this sort of fiddling with Sars-Cov-2 public BEFORE scientists conduct it, so virologists and the rest of us could discuss its risk? Yeah, more disclosure probably makes sense.

    But truly, if the last two years have taught us anything, it’s that the biggest risk from Sars-Cov-2 is hysteria, not the virus itself.

    Try not to fall into the trap.”

    Seems to me the biggest risk from infectious diseases is poorly-thought-through gain-of-function research.

    But we had it done in Wuhan so it wouldn’t affect us here in America.

    No, so it could be done in secret.

    • #19
  20. Bob Thompson Member
    Bob Thompson
    @BobThompson

    Flicker (View Comment):

    Bob Thompson (View Comment):

    BDB (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    Just received an email from Alex Berenson:

    “Yes, all the mice infected with the original Sars-Cov-2 died.

    Which is really bad. If you’re a mouse.

    I think we can agree that Sars-Cov-2 does not have a 100 percent mortality rate in humans.

    Nor did the researchers provide any evidence that the blended Omicron/wild-type coronavirus is able to defeat antibodies in people who have been infected with and recovered from Omicron. Which is basically all of us. (They did show that both the original Omicron and their variant beats the mRNA vaccines, but that fact is not a surprise either.)

    Further, this work was conducted in a Biosafety Level 3 lab, the second-highest level, used for most viruses that aren’t Ebola/Marburg or smallpox. Should the work have been done in a top-level BSL 4 lab, with positive pressure and all the rest? Maybe. But considering we’ve all been exposed to Omicron already, and considering that the infection fatality rate from even the wild-type is more like 0.3 percent – 3 in 1000 – than 30 percent – maybe not.

    Would it be a good idea to make this sort of fiddling with Sars-Cov-2 public BEFORE scientists conduct it, so virologists and the rest of us could discuss its risk? Yeah, more disclosure probably makes sense.

    But truly, if the last two years have taught us anything, it’s that the biggest risk from Sars-Cov-2 is hysteria, not the virus itself.

    Try not to fall into the trap.”

    Seems to me the biggest risk from infectious diseases is poorly-thought-through gain-of-function research.

    But we had it done in Wuhan so it wouldn’t affect us here in America.

    No, so it could be done in secret.

    I know that!

    • #20
  21. Phil Turmel Inactive
    Phil Turmel
    @PhilTurmel

    I thought John Ringo’s Under a Graveyard Sky was just a fun romp in the world of zombie-apocalyptic fiction. With a semi-plausible twist (and a kick-butt heroine).  Hmm.   Such things seem to become more plausible each year. ):

    • #21
  22. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Annefy (View Comment):
    But truly, if the last two years have taught us anything, it’s that the biggest risk from Sars-Cov-2 is hysteria, not the virus itself.

    No, it’s the scientists who think they conduct these experiments without permission or oversight.

    • #22
  23. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):
    But truly, if the last two years have taught us anything, it’s that the biggest risk from Sars-Cov-2 is hysteria, not the virus itself.

    No, it’s the scientists who think they conduct these experiments without permission or oversight.

    To be clear, the quoted line was from Alex Berenson; not me.

    I agree with you @susanquinn. And I’d add a few names/agencies to the risk list.

    • #23
  24. Susan Quinn Contributor
    Susan Quinn
    @SusanQuinn

    Annefy (View Comment):

    To be clear, the quoted line was from Alex Berenson; not me.

    I agree with you @susanquinn. And I’d add a few names/agencies to the risk list.

    I realized that, Annefy, and I  agree with your additional comment.

    • #24
  25. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    kedavis (View Comment):

    But the virus in “The Stand” was just the beginning, wasn’t it Satanically-enhanced somehow?

    The virus in The Stand, which escaped from a biolab “base”, was just the beginning of the near end of the world; Satan (or one of his minions, Randall Flagg aka The Walking Dude) played a role once the virus had killed 99.4% of the population. 

    • #25
  26. Flicker Coolidge
    Flicker
    @Flicker

    Susan Quinn (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):
    But truly, if the last two years have taught us anything, it’s that the biggest risk from Sars-Cov-2 is hysteria, not the virus itself.

    No, it’s the scientists who think they conduct these experiments without permission or oversight.

    Or the bureaucrats and politicians who orchestrate cultural changes they want based on the “public health emergency” they’ve created.

    • #26
  27. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Annefy (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    But the virus in “The Stand” was just the beginning, wasn’t it Satanically-enhanced somehow?

    The virus in The Stand, which escaped from a biolab “base”, was just the beginning of the near end of the world; Satan (or one of his minions, Randall Flagg aka The Walking Dude) played a role once the virus had killed 99.4% of the population.

    Is that from the book version, or just the TV mini-series?  I never read the book, but I’ve read in comments about the TV mini-series that the virus by itself wasn’t that deadly; it was somehow enhanced by Evil.

    • #27
  28. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    But the virus in “The Stand” was just the beginning, wasn’t it Satanically-enhanced somehow?

    The virus in The Stand, which escaped from a biolab “base”, was just the beginning of the near end of the world; Satan (or one of his minions, Randall Flagg aka The Walking Dude) played a role once the virus had killed 99.4% of the population.

    Is that from the book version, or just the TV mini-series? I never read the book, but I’ve read in comments about the TV mini-series that the virus by itself wasn’t that deadly; it was somehow enhanced by Evil.

    hmm. I’ve read the book several times. I didn’t get that impression.

    • #28
  29. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Annefy (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    But the virus in “The Stand” was just the beginning, wasn’t it Satanically-enhanced somehow?

    The virus in The Stand, which escaped from a biolab “base”, was just the beginning of the near end of the world; Satan (or one of his minions, Randall Flagg aka The Walking Dude) played a role once the virus had killed 99.4% of the population.

    Is that from the book version, or just the TV mini-series? I never read the book, but I’ve read in comments about the TV mini-series that the virus by itself wasn’t that deadly; it was somehow enhanced by Evil.

    hmm. I’ve read the book several times. I didn’t get that impression.

    That’s weird, I’ve heard/read that more than once, but maybe it was in reference to a different story.

    • #29
  30. Victor Tango Kilo Member
    Victor Tango Kilo
    @VtheK

    Sidebar Question: How many of you had to look up “Boffin.” 

    • #30
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.