Tuesday, February 16, 2021

On The Origin Of The Home Of COVID-19 - 21

I. Where

This series asks what others have also asked (e.g. Where Did SARS-CoV-2 Come From?).

But, Dredd Blog asks the question "where" in terms of not the planet, not the nation, not the state, county, city, nor mammal, but in terms of what single-celled microbe host did the SARS-CoV-2 virus come from.

Microbes are the most abundant single-celled life in and/or on the human body (see video below).

Further, what food source (animal host) does that particular microbe have a mutualistic/symbiotic relationship with?

The candidates which have microbes that SARS-CoV-2 comes from are: avian food (e.g. poultry/birds chickens, turkeys, and ducks); bovine food (e.g. cattle, buffalo, beefalo); porcine food (pork); and, offal from any or all of those (see On The Origin Of The Home Of COVID-19 - 15). 

The predecessor of SARS-CoV-2 is SARS-CoV-1, which had a food related fingerprint:

"On 16 November 2002, an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) began in China's Guangdong province, bordering Hong Kong. The first case of infection was traced to Foshan. This first outbreak affected people in the food industry, such as farmers, market vendors, and chefs."

(SARS-CoV-1 outbreak, emphasis added). This series also hypothesized that SARS-CoV-2 comes from damaged or killed (by antibiotics and other toxins) microbes in those food animals during mass production by the food industry (see "III. Big Slaughter Economy" here).

The general scenario is that poor living conditions, in terms of too many animals in a small space, unsanitary conditions, overuse of antibiotics and other drugs/chemicals, along with the food that such animals are fed, cause the demise and/or death of a vast number of microbes within those for-food animals.

As animal-inhabiting-microbes sicken or die within those for-food animals, their replication system composed of machines (ribosomes, ribozymes, etc.) degenerate or malfunction, and cease to properly replicate the viruses within them.

The viruses and microbes within a microbiome (e.g. intestinal microflora) of those for-food animals become damaged or malformed, which we then describe with words such as "mutant", "replicant", "variant", "pathogen", and the like.

When we humans or other animals (e.g. offal-eating mink) ingest any such for-food animal, we ingest any damaged microbes and viruses within them.

II. How

How can SARS-CoV-2 navigate from the enteric realm's microbiome (i.e. microbes in the intestines) into other body locations?

Are viruses alive?

Long story short, that would be, among others, "vascular endothelial cells" where there are ACE-2 entry receptors:

"ACE-2 is an Entry Receptor for SARS-CoV-2" (ACE-2: The Receptor for SARS-CoV-2) ...

"The vascular endothelium is the inner-most structure that coats the interior walls of arteries, capillaries and veins. Endothelial cells (EC) were described to anchor to an 80-nm-thick basal lamina (BL). Both EC and BL constitute the vascular intima, establishing a hemocompatible surface, estimated a total combined surface area of 3000–6000 m2 in the human body, comprising 1 to 6 × 1013 EC ... From their first description in 1865 until the early 1970s, this monolayer was regarded as a mere inert barrier separating blood cells from the surrounding tissue."...

"ACE-2 is a type I transmembrane metallocarboxypeptidase with homology to ACE, an enzyme long-known to be a key player in the Renin-Angiotensin system (RAS) and a target for the treatment of hypertension. It is mainly expressed in vascular endothelial cells ..."

(Vascular Endothelial Cell Biology: An Update, emphasis added). Note that ACE-2 is a good fit for SARS-COV-2 in the abundant realm of vascular endothelial cells.

In the normal, healthy enteric environment there are protections from improper crossing-over from microbiome to bloodstream:

"The intestinal barrier prevents the passage of gut microbiota into the circulation yet allows nutrients to be absorbed. Bacteria that do manage to cross the intestinal epithelium are prevented from entering the bloodstream, despite the close proximity of blood vessels to epithelial cells. “We wondered why bacteria would not easily enter the blood vessels and reach the liver ... thus, we hypothesized that the endothelial cells of the blood vessels might generate a barrier [to bacteria],” explains corresponding author Maria Rescigno."

(Gut endothelial cells — another line of defense). This begs the question how is the determination made as to which microbe is friend and which is foe?

The same question applies to those in the mass animals-for-food industry: what specific microbe contains the SARS-CoV-2 virus?

The vast crowd of microbes, good and bad, must be distinguished for a safe application of microbial justice to take place.

Do the police fire shotguns into a crowd ... or must their arrests be specific and based upon a search warrant identifying with particularity the subject to be arrested?

Every defense has an offense it would seem:

"Antibiotics can selectively decrease tissue invasion and eliminate aggressive bacterial species or globally decrease luminal and mucosal bacterial concentrations, depending on their spectrum of activity. Alternatively, administration of beneficial bacterial species (probiotics), poorly absorbed dietary oligosaccharides (prebiotics), or combined probiotics and prebiotics (synbiotics) can restore a predominance of beneficial Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium species."

(Therapeutic Manipulation of the Enteric Microflorain Inflammatory Bowel Diseases:Antibiotics, Probiotics, and Prebiotics). In the responses to unhealthy events in the microbiome, a lot is known and a lot is unknown (Enteric microflora contribute to constitutive ICAM-1expression on vascular endothelial cells).

It is known that a lot of the problems are engendered by what goes into our mouths:

"Enteric bacteria typically enter the body through the mouth. They are acquired through contaminated food and water, by contact with animals or their environments, by contact with the feces of an infected person. Every year, millions of cases of foodborne illness and thousands of associated deaths occur in the United States, and the illness burden is even higher in developing countries. Much of this burden could be prevented with better science and prevention tools. We are working to meet national goals to decrease the burden of bacterial diarrheal illness by the year 2020." 

(Enteric Diseases Epidemiology Branch, emphasis added). And so it goes.

III. Closing Comments

The transfer of  "'mutant', 'replicant', 'variant', 'pathogen', and the like" entities mostly takes place undetected:

"In this decision analytical model of multiple scenarios of proportions of asymptomatic individuals with COVID-19 and infectious periods, transmission from asymptomatic individuals was estimated to account for more than half of all transmissions."

(SARS-CoV-2 Transmission From People Without COVID-19 Symptoms, emphasis added). Clearly, the knowledge base must be improved before we can competently proceed to avoid the next pandemic.

The previous post in this series is here.

Video Index (time - subject)

00:21 - microbes are oldest life forms on Earth
01:03 - 10 times more microbes than human cells in us
01:31 - 100 times more microbial genes than human genes in us
02:00 - microbes are 99% of our make-up; they keep us alive
02:20 - microbes are vital for keeping us alive and healthy
04:20 - microbes talk with a molecular language
07:50 - quorum sensing (like a census) to know population count
08:20 - Intra species communication (shape of words) dialects
10:50 - microbes communicate with other microbes (multi-lingual)
11:20 - they take a census of all other microbes around them
12:30 - synthetic molecules-words interrupt communication
13:50 - synthetic molecules-words confuse the microbes
15:00 - they have collective, community behaviors
15:20 - microbes made the rules for multi-cellular development
16:00 - microbes invented multi-cellular behavior inside us
17:15 - the team

Dr. Bonnie L. Bassler, Princeton University:

Tuesday, February 9, 2021

On The Origin Of The Home Of COVID-19 - 20

It has a home

There is sure to be a mystery enclosed within an enigma when it comes to considering the world of viruses, especially the SARS-CoV-2 virus.

"It came from China" (D.J. Trump); "no it didn't" (W.H.O.); it came from "Brazil" (MedRx); it came from "France" (Science Direct); it came from "food" (Science Direct); "it was suggested that SARS-CoV-2 might have evolved in a canid [dog] gastrointestinal tract prior to transmission to humans" (Molecular Biology); "a bat" (The Lancet); "The origin of the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus causing the COVID-19 pandemic has not yet been fully determined" (US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health).

One thing which the CDC of D.J. Trump trumpeted was that there was "no evidence" that it could be transmitted by food or things we touch while producing meats that become food (Why You Probably Don’t Need to Worry About Catching COVID-19 from Food).

Oh? ... what about:

"Early in the pandemic, scientists discovered that fecal matter contains bits of the genetic material from SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, up to a week before a person tests positive. Sewage couldn’t tell you exactly who is infected, but it could reveal if there were infections afoot in a region—potentially, even before people started feeling sick."

(Old sewers are becoming a modern Covid-19 watchdog, emphasis added). It was detected in the sewers of other countries before the China discovery:

"We analysed human sewage located in Florianópolis (Santa Catalina,[sic] Brazil) from late October until the Brazil lockdown on early March. We detected SARS-CoV-2 in two samples collected independently on 27th November 2019 (5.49±0.02 log genome copies/L)." 

(MedRx, emphasis added; cf. here). Among other things, this begs the question: "How does it get into our digestive tract and then our feces (if not through food)?" (SARS-CoV-2 monitoring in wastewater/sewage: e.g. here, here, here, here, etc.).

That is why this series has put forth a contrary hypothesis (On The Origin Of The Home Of COVID-19, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19). 

Subsequently, other researchers have also advocated for more research into that source:

"In recent months, nearly all countries tried to decrease human-to-human contact as the principal mode of transmission of SARS-CoV-2. However, other modes of transmission also need to be clarified in more depth, especially, the foodborne transmission. We assessed the effect of animal origin foods consumption on the pandemic of COVID-19. For this purpose, we studied the relationship among 20 food supply as independent variables, and the parameter of Total Cases as dependent variable. Here we show a relationship between a group of animal origin foods and total cases."

(Keen relationship between COVID_19 and food supply suggest some animal origin foods as excellent vehicle of SARS-Cov-2, emphasis added). This seems reasonable since the predecessor of SARS-CoV-2 is SARS-CoV-1, which had a food related fingerprint:

"On 16 November 2002, an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) began in China's Guangdong province, bordering Hong Kong. The first case of infection was traced to Foshan. This first outbreak affected people in the food industry, such as farmers, market vendors, and chefs."

(SARS-CoV-1 outbreak, emphasis added). Since the "origin of the severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus causing the COVID-19 pandemic has not yet been fully determined" (US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health, link above), the Dredd Blog hypothesis can't be rejected outright, especially since:

"During the first wave of the coronavirus pandemic, rural meatpacking counties [food makers] had infection rates 10 times higher than rates in other rural counties, said the USDA on Thursday. And despite improvements, the COVID-19 rate in the 49 U.S. counties that rely on meat plants [food makers] for jobs remains somewhat higher than in the rest of rural America as the disease surges again."

(COVID-19 cases in meatpacking counties were 10 times those in other rural counties). The closer one looks the more one realizes that "virus" is a mystical word to not only the general public but to general science as well.

This is all the more obvious when the simple fact that there are more viruses than there are stars and planets (The Real Dangers With Microbes & Viruses).

Thus, if they were really out to get us, if we were really their number one enemy, they would have no problem destroying us, even to the last person.

But little rays of light are shining in on researchers:

"It is astonishing that with our more than thirty-five combined years of working in the field of virology, we continue to read on a regular basis about novel emerging viruses infecting species from all three domains of life. The focus of our research is on single-stranded DNA viruses. Even for this apparently small group of viruses, many new members are identified each year that need to be characterized, providing seemingly endless opportunities for new research directions. Indeed, studying these new viruses does not end with characterization of their physical properties or disease-causing phenotypes, because many have the potential to be developed into useful biologics with therapeutic benefits to humans. Our experience as virologists suggests that the use of “good” viruses is common practice. If a survey were to ask non virologists for their opinions about viruses, the word “good” would be unlikely to arise. Instead, words such as “disease,” “infection,” “suffering,” or “life-threatening” would likely dominate, as people primarily think of viruses such as HIV, Ebola virus, Zika virus, influenza virus, or whatever new outbreak is in the news. However, as we are now finding out, not all viruses are detrimental to human health. In fact, some viruses have beneficial properties for their hosts in a symbiotic relationship (1), while other natural and laboratory-modified viruses can be used to target and kill cancer cells, to treat a variety of genetic diseases as gene and cell therapy tools, or to serve as vaccines or vaccine delivery agents. The ability to treat diseases using viruses, often referred to as virotherapy, has become the subject of intensive research in recent years. Cancer is one of the leading causes of death worldwide. According to the World Health Organization, about 8.8 million people died from cancer in 2015."

(The good that viruses do, cf. here). One can quickly become suspicious of the powers that be in the sense that "security" is the number one "product" of some of our largest institutions.

Big Pharma, Big Media, and the military specialize in their combined product "security", so, it is no wonder that their take on it is that any virus is a "threat to our security".

They sometimes tell us that a virus mutates on its own and reproduces itself on its own (NBC). 

That is false and an outcome of, among other things, the "Teleology" plague (Teleology, Wiki, Weekend Rebel Science Excursion - 24).

The most incredible fable which the public is fed is that a tiny, by comparison, virus busts into a world-or-so-larger microbe then has its way with the vast, by comparison, machinery within the microbe.

These two Dredd Blog series will shed some light on that dark fable (The Uncertain Gene, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11; On the Origin of the Genes of Viruses, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15).

So, if we think that a virus, after breaking into a microbe, just simply has its way with the single-celled microbe composed of, among other things, highly complex molecular machinery (inside the microbe), we need to meditate a bit about it so as to accurately contemplate the real experience of a virus.

Enjoy the short video below while doing that meditation, because it is what a virus really would go through:

The next post in this series is here, the previous post in this series is here.

Friday, February 5, 2021

Will Elections Cure The Disease? - 5

"Just have an election"
About a decade ago the question presented in the title of this post was set forth here on Dredd Blog (Will Elections Cure The Disease?, 2, 3, 4).

This series assumes, for the purpose of discussion, that civilizations can become sick.

I am not referring to a pandemic composed of physical conditions that render the populace physically sick, such as Covid-19. 

Instead, I am referring to psychological sickness such as denial, depression, mania, and psychosis that isn't physically apparent (in the pandemic sense).

It's a mental realm type of discussion.

A historian who was at one time the most often quoted historian, alluded to this type of sickness:

"In other words, a society does not ever die 'from natural causes', but always dies from suicide or murder --- and nearly always from the former, as this chapter has shown."

(A Study of History, by Arnold J. Toynbee). Mass psychosis is involved when a large group either kills itself, or kills another group.

Toynbee's study covered about 26 prior civilizations, but the disease did not end way back then:

The Act of Killing focuses on Anwar Congo, one of the self-proclaimed "gangsters" who executed over a million suspected Communists and ethnic Chinese in Indonesia during the bloodbath of 1965-66. Congo, much like his fellow executioners that he remains friends with, has yet to face prosecution for the war crimes he committed as a younger man and lives as a national hero.

Congo is a man who appears to live in an eternal cinematic fantasy. He's always dressed sharp—inspired by his Hollywood heroes John Wayne, Marlon Brando, and Elvis Presley. What exactly inspired him to murder a thousand people is never quite explained. The only slight ever mentioned that he takes from the communists was their desire to block screenings of his beloved American films. Tapping into this love of cinema, Oppenheimer offers him the opportunity to tell his story by making a dramatic film in which he's the star of his own story.

This does not end up being The Act of Killing itself, but a meta film-within-a-film that allows Congo to tell his own story as he chooses to see it, guts and all. He casts his own friends, adds a romantic subplot where one of his friends dresses in drag, and even has musical finale at the foot of a waterfall where his own victims thank him for murdering [them]. But despite all of these flourishes, he manages to stay true to the story in the recreation of his preferred method of execution.

Demonstrating to Oppenheimer's documentary crew how he strangles his victims with wire, he boasts that he learned it from American gangster films.

(Hypothesis: The Cultural Amygdala - 2). It's a group thing eh?

Another famous "old timer", who is called the "father of psychoanalysis", was on to this phenomenon:

"If the evolution of civilization has such a far reaching similarity with the development of an individual, and if the same methods are employed in both, would not the diagnosis be justified that many systems of civilization——or epochs of it——possibly even the whole of humanity——have become neurotic under the pressure of the civilizing trends? To analytic dissection of these neuroses, therapeutic recommendations might follow which could claim a great practical interest. I would not say that such an attempt to apply psychoanalysis to civilized society would be fanciful or doomed to fruitlessness. But it behooves us to be very careful, not to forget that after all we are dealing only with analogies, and that it is dangerous, not only with men but also with concepts, to drag them out of the region where they originated and have matured. The diagnosis of collective neuroses, moreover, will be confronted by a special difficulty. In the neurosis of an individual we can use as a starting point the contrast presented to us between the patient and his environment which we assume to be normal. No such background as this would be available for any society similarly affected; it would have to be supplied in some other way. And with regard to any therapeutic application of our knowledge, what would be the use of the most acute analysis of social neuroses, since no one possesses power to compel the community to adopt the therapy? In spite of all these difficulties, we may expect that one day someone will venture upon this research into the pathology of civilized communities. [p. 39]"
"Men have brought their powers of subduing the forces of nature
to such a pitch that by using them they could now very easily exterminate one another to the last man. They know this——hence arises a great part of their current unrest, their dejection, their mood of apprehension. [p. 40]"

(Civilization and Its Discontents, Sigmund Freud, 1929, emphasis added). The gist of it is that "group psychology" of the type we have developed nowadays is not what Freud had in mind.

Our "treatment" or therapy is to have an election (Etiology of Social Dementia - 18). But our forefathers knew that even the realm of psychology was not the only source of knowledge that is instructive, that offers an answer:

An answer from the sages in our past who we are very fortunate to have had, but sages which we have ignored to our great demise in recent times.

An answer that seems today to be totally and completely at odds with the conventional wisdom-hype and propaganda, which is composed of the glorification of the greatest source of the toxins of power.

Our founders were well aware of the question and the answer hundreds of years ago.

They spoke the answer with unmistakable words and with certain clarity:

Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes; and armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended; its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied: and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force, of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war, and in the degeneracy of manners and of morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare. Those truths are well established.
(James Madison, emphasis added). The visionary who made that statement was the 4th President of the United States, Bill of Rights author, Congressman, Cabinet Member, and who was also called the "Father of the U.S. Constitution".

The above quote is from his "Political Observations," April 20, 1795, in Letters and Other Writings of James Madison, Volume IV, page 491-492.

Notice, in the quote above, how Madison equated or associated the toxins of power with disease epidemic concepts, saying that the war toxin "develops the germ of every other" anti-freedom toxin.

(The Greatest Source Of Power Toxins?).

(Extinction: Peace). Groups don't like to take their history medicine.

The previous post in this series is here.

Perhaps some clues (cultures hallucinating conflicting realities?) are presented in the following video:

Monday, February 1, 2021

Antarctica 2.0 - 11

Fig. 1 Antarctica Sectors & Zones

I. Background

This series details the textbook changes in our understanding of the "land down under the land down under".

It was the land that never changed, the land out of sight, and the land out of mind.

 Not much was known about it, except that it never changed in a million years because it was way down near, or at, the edge of the flat Earth where one could fall off the edge, never to see the light of day again (that was Antarctica 1.0).

 II. Nowadays

Nowadays, Antarctica is not only the largest desert on Earth, it is one of the most studied places on earth, one of the most consequential places on Earth, and perhaps even the greatest threat to modern civilization (Antarctica 2.0, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 [& supplements A, B, C, D, E, F], 7, 8, 9, 10).

Territory of Plumes
It is still controversial for a few scientists who do not know that it is the location of "The Ghost Plumes", which are surreptitiously, as it were, raising sea levels right under their noses (The Ghost Plumes, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14; The Ghost Photons, 2, 3).

To those scientists it is still Antarctica 1.0, a place which grows in terms of its number of gigatons of ice, because they think that the annual precipitation increases the ice mass there (They do not consider that the Sahara Desert receives more annual precipitation per square mile than Antarctica, the greatest desert on Earth, receives).

III. Today's Focus

Today we get back to the "Grounding Line", a place that is what we should focus on and pay special attention to, according to Dr. Rignot (see the video below if you haven't already).

In compliance with his urging, I have isolated the focus into six "areas" or "sectors" of the tidewater glacier coastline, where the grounding lines tend to be (Fig. 1). 

The grounding line is constantly changing, more in some areas/sectors than others, as today's appendices point out.

A lot of the WOD zones (Fig. 1) along the grounding line have not yet been measured in situ by researchers with CTD drones or otherwise, so the grounding line conditions in such zones are not featured in today's presentation. 

Thus, as it turns out, today's presentation likely contains understatements in terms of the potential sea level impact that tidewater glacier melt at the grounding lines is having.

Today, however, I am not going to speculate on how much more sea level rise would ensue if we knew the in situ values of the WOD zones in those, at this time, missing values.

So, on with the show:

Antarctica SectorAppendix
Indian Ocean A
Western Pacific
Ross Sea C
Amundsen Sea D
Weddell Sea F
All Sectors


IV. What To Focus On

While reading the appendices, keep in mind the focus of the formulas being applied to the in situ measurements.

That focus is on the melting ice at the grounding line, which is ice that is land based.

That means the melt water from that grounding line ice has an SLE (sea level equivalent) factor unlike the floating ice shelf beyond the grounding line (i.e ice that is floating in the tidewater).

The ice shelf beyond the grounding line has already displaced sea water, which impacts the sea level, however the ice sitting on land at the grounding line does not have an impact on sea level until it melts.

Another factor is acceleration via "buoyancy", in that, there is an additional upward acceleration of the plume melt water flow in addition to the buoyancy flow caused by the density difference between the fresh-water plume and the ambient seawater (sea water is more dense than they fresh-water plume).

That additional upward acceleration factor is caused by the impact of the seawater as it flows into the volume gap caused when the ice becomes water (ice takes up more space than fresh water does, so, a small void is created when melt takes place).

And finally for today, note that the values in those appendices listed above (in section III) are based on a one meter (1m) melt face (i.e a 1m plume height).

That tiny 1m of melt action, creating an upward flowing plume, totals (adds up) to a "4.26196 mm yr" SLE.

 That is, it would cause 4.26 mm of mean sea level rise (see Appendix Combo).

That 4.26 mm yr figure is more than the actual mean average sea level rise (which is ~3.5 mm yr).

Thus, we know that less than 1m of melt takes place along the 46,387 (km) grounding line length being focused on ... which means ... drum roll ... that a lot of melt potential is there at the grounding line (ibid).

Some of the glaciers have many, many meters of ice there waiting to melt into plumes.

V. Closing Comments

Here are some graphs showing the difference between plume density and ambient seawater density (Graphs).

The plume density is less than the seawater density, so the plume water is forced upward.

The previous post in this series is here.