He died from a MRSA infection, which can and does kill people at any stage of life. That shit is everywhere, but whether you get sick or not is kinda a crap shoot.
MRSA is not that common. Most people get it from contact in medical facilities, but some people (very few) do carry it around.
When someone contracts it and becomes seriously ill, it usually means they weren't a carrier to begin with, or had an immunodeficiency that allowed the pathogen to overtake an equilibrium with their immune system. They do hardcore contact tracing if someone actually dies from it, and if nobody around this guy had it...quite suspicious. That's all I'm saying.
He was sick in hospital with pneumonia, before he got MRSA though. In hospitals there's a higher chance to catch MRSA, especially if someone is already weakened by a severe lung infection.
I’d like one example where MRSA has been used for bioterrorism. Never heard of it when I was a medical lab tech in the military, nor as a medical lab scientist later in my life. Bioterrorism is extremely rare, and MRSA is a poor choice for a biological weapon.
E. coli O157:H7 would be a better choice, or Vibrio, or really any of the enteric pathogens introduced to food or water supplies.
Well, the 1984 bioterror attack associated with the Rajneeshee was done with salmonella. The question this raises is if there are any advantages to cultivating it as an assassin's weapon.
I'm not saying I know it is, only that the two associated deaths make for a pretty amazing coincidence.
Salmonella is not MRSA (methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus). The point I was trying to make is Staph isn’t a good bioterrorism agent. It doesn’t spread like weaponized anthrax, it’s not particularly deadly, and it can’t be spread by food/water like the enteric pathogens. It’s just not suitable or we’d have researched the fuck out of it at USAMRIID.
Hey guys, unless I missed Boeing getting into biological warfare, I'm pretty sure an infection had nothing to do with them. It's funny to circlejerk though, I know.
They would use the child as much as possible to save themselves. Noisemaker for a search party, small hands to reach into tight spaces, easy bear escape mechanism, etc.
Well yeah -- The loss of decorum in the ruling class/aristocracy started rolling down the hill with Newt. Once you get a Caeser it's just a matter of time before your Nero shows up.
What a dumb strawman, you're guessing just like everyone else! Absolutely no one's saying they manufacture bioweapons. But one of the biggest companies ever, with almost 80 billion in revenue each year definitely has access to shady methods, even if they wouldn't put it on itemized expenses reports.
1 whistleblower dying before they can testify is a huge coincidence, 2 is an extraordinary one.
There's a conspiracy theory (not entirely without merit, but generally assumed to be baseless) that people with negative information about the Clintons end up dead suspiciously. Epstein was one such person, under this theory.
Why didn’t they kill Monica? This conspiracy theory is actual garbage.
Both of the Clintons are garbage human beings who didn’t/don’t deserve to be in office (which is true of most politicians). Bill definitely coerced women into sex. But when the loudest critics of the Clintons are tinfoil loons, it takes all of the air out of the room.
That's the biggest hole in the theory for me. If they're willing to disappear people, there are a lot of people they seem to have missed.
There's a sort of counter theory that says that the Clintons themselves started the conspiracy theory as a way of putting all Clinton dissent under the heading of a conspiracy, and honestly I find that much more believable.
Right, there are a lot of possible names to blame for Epstein for sure. Like I said, it's a theory that's largely considered to be baseless. The Clintons have a lot of faults, but I haven't seen any indication that they're into assassinations.
“The Congressional Record (1994) stated that the compiler of the original list, Linda Thompson, admitted she had "'no direct evidence' of Clinton killing anyone. Indeed, she says the deaths were probably caused by 'people trying to control the president' but refuses to say who they were."
“Several sources have discredited the conspiracy theory, such as the Congressional Record,[4] the Lakeland Ledger, the Chicago Tribune, Snopes and others, pointing to detailed death records, the unusually large circle of associates that a president is likely to have, and the fact that many of the people listed had been misidentified or were still alive. Others had no known link to the Clintons.“
Any doctors here know what causes sudden fast spreading infection in a person with a fully functional immune system, and what type of infection it might have been?
This sounds almost exactly like what happened to a colleague of mine last year. Guy aspirated some food. Lead to an infection. Turned into pneumonia. Died.
It's the chain of events that could be suspicious, or totally random.
A person has trouble breathing, which could have been induced, or just bad luck, then goes to hospital and dies of MRSA - which also could have been induced, or just bad luck.
The most logical explanation is that bad things happen to people all the time and it's usually not murder.
However, because of the widespread press coverage of the previous "suicide", it makes sense that if additional whistleblowers were being killed, that the methods would grow increasingly complex and obfuscated.
Remember, these were all long time employees. Boeing is going to have all sorts of information on them, including their medical history and that's not even factoring in the resources they have available.
It's not hard to imagine that they would know how to create a situation where a person gets hospitalized, without causing suspicion, and have the resources to finish them off inside that hospital with something like a rapid MRSA infection.
Or maybe all this means is that corporations really are people and Boeing is the reincarnation of Jesus Christ. Now, God is an enacting revenge on the people who have testified against his favorite son, and our Savior: Jesus Boeing Christ.
However, because of the widespread press coverage of the previous "suicide", it makes sense that if additional whistleblowers were being killed, that the methods would grow increasingly complex and obfuscated.
This only matters if 1) you don't want anyone to know it was you, or 2) you want people to know it was you to send a message, and you're not afraid of any repercussions.
If you're Boeing, or even just a rogue Boeing executive/team, the best way to make sure you fail at this would be to leave an obvious trail of bodies.
These ambiguous deaths are plausibly unrelated enough to justify no one looking too closely, but are clear enough for their intended audience.
Hell, even if Boeing just got insanely "lucky" and these two deaths are as they appear, it's still going to have a massive chilling effect on anyone else who might have been considering coming forward.
White House heads need to be dropped head on from building height to mysteriously stop the deaths of whistleblowers and activists. It will be a coincidence, I guarantee. Nothing related.
Yeah Boeing out there giving people pneumonia and then a MRSA secondary infection. Couldn't have happened naturally that's unheard of! Nobody has ever had complications after pneumonia so young.
Your typo took me way back. There was a game called "Wall Street Kid" for the NES where you could "invest" in companies in the stock market, with the hopes to make it big. Many of the companies in it were a play on words of real-world companies. Boeing's was "Boing Boing". Thanks for the nostalgia today, though I wish it would have arrived on a more optimistic post.
Ah yes bringing in Russia in a post where USA is committing these deeds, classic US empire cocksucking skills. Bet you vooote for Biden and love your iPhone and Amazon Prime too!
In computer science, wouldn't that be like proprietary software only being auditable by cherry picked 3rd parties? In this case I should also need to trust the auditor.
In contrast, in FOSS software, all code is open to the public and can be audited publicly.
Edit2: I value privacy, that's why I use Linux and Librewolf. I just don't understand how that translate to this case.
As I now understand how my original post was conveying a different message from what I intended to ask, I copy it below:
Would you trust an anonymous source ?
Downvotes to an honest question. I should take a break from internet.
We already have enough evidence to verify a lot of the horrible things that has happened at these two companies. So what you wrote might be true in some situations, but it has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
This is how you end up with police making up an "anonymous tip" which allows them to gain a warrant and dig through the personal possessions of anyone they don't like.
The problem isn't solve with anonymity, but by actually protecting the whistle blowers.
I’d say we could trust the police to verify but yeah… I’d trust an anon source verified by AP more than the local police in most areas by a fucking mile.
In cases like this where anonymity is likely necessary to divulge crucial information and survive? Absolutely. You sound like you have no idea how journalism in general and confidential sources in particular works.
Downvotes to an honest question
Honest question, my ass! It was obviously a rhetorical question meant to imply that anonymous sources are inherently not trustworthy.
Downvotes take content to the bottom, diminishing it's relevancy. It's not egotistical. I had a question that I wanted to ask in order to learn. Later I learned that my question was conveying the wrong message, so I edited my post to better communicate my doubt. You may interpret that internet points equal ego points, but they are in fact relevancy points. In this case in particular, asking about anonimity and trust, is as on-topic as it can get, so I do question the reason for less relevancy to my question now. But I acknowledge the reason for less relevancy in my original post, as it was being interpreted as I wasn't asking a question but conveying an opinion.
Edit: healthy discussion is what Lemmy is all about. Downvoting an honest question is hindering that principle.
Obviously it depends on the quality of the information, doesn't it
like if it's some rando just bullshitting, that's gonna be obvious
if he's dropping insider secrets or sounding authoritative, that requires investigation
but we're a bit past all that right
Like you are aware of the wider context of what often happens to whistleblowers, time and again, ... like you're not just in here shooting your mouth off right, you know something about it when you deign to ask such a glib question? Or have you done none of your homework and just wanted to bless us with the annoying noise you made?
I wouldn't doubt the psychopathy of Boeings leadership — their execs and management have already murdered hundreds of people, and dozens of them should be serving life in prison — but dying of MRSA after 2 weeks of pneumonia sure sounds like a legitimate coincidence. The first whistleblowers death not so much.
Why do you think this? Is it that you believe that it's not possible that someone would be able to give someone a pneumonia+MRSA case?
Or are you in the camp that doesn't believe anyone with a financial interest in Boeing would be willing to have someone killed to suppress future whistle blowers?
E: sorry, it sounds like you do believe the first one was a murder
When you fuck as much stiff as Boeing has you are going to get a lot of whistle blowers, statistically some of them will die, it would be suspicious if none of them died.
Y'all fall for click bait so fucking easily it's embarrassing.
The only reason this is reported on at all is that conspiracy theorists will see connections in anything.
People get sick and die all the time.
MRSA killed 100k people in 2019 alone. It's hard as hell to clean up and people catch it easily.
He had trouble breathing so he went to the hospital (probably COVID) and got intubated. MRSA from an intubation is unfortunately normal. It's a major risk to be intubated.
Hi! I'm a microbiologist and you have some facts either without useful context or that are just incorrect.
MRSA is methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The methicillin resistance is notable as it shows a resistance to beta-lactam antibiotics, which constitutes a large portion of antibiotics in use in medicine.
MRSA is "easy to catch" in that it lives harmlessly on the skin of about 2% of the global population, but MRSA bacteremia, a pathogenic MRSA infection, is actually pretty uncommon, at around 400,000 people a year worldwide, of which around 100k people die. That's nothing. The common cold, the influenza viruses, infect an estimated over 1 billion people annually and kill an estimated 400,000, and they're pretty mild but they're rather infectious.
MRSA is typically easy to treat - that's why about 75% of patients live - with the remainder either having an infection in an unfortunate location, like the blood, immune deficiency, a strain of MRSA that happens to not be susceptible to available antibiotics, or just a lack of prompt treatment.
On the conspiracy bullshit part, I could absolutely give someone MRSA pneumonia, a particularly fatal form of both MRSA infections and pneumonia in general. What could be telling is determining his initial infection. If it was MRSA, sequencing that particular infection (or at least looking for the presence of notable genes using rtPCR) to determine its likely origin could be insightful. Without knowing the identity of his primary infection, though, we're left at guessing.
What IS interesting is that both Boeing whistleblowers have died from relatively uncommon causes, suicide and pneumonia in a healthy individual, in rapid succession. That's one hell of a coincidence.
"healthy" when he went to the hospital for breathing issues before getting pneumonia.
Man had COVID. He was immunocompromised and got MRSA in his blood from intubation. This isn't unheard of insanity: intubation is a risky maneuver because it kills people like this all the time.
The way you phrase that is troubling. Intubation doesn’t kill people. People get intubated because they’re going to die without it. Every invasive procedure has its risks, and those are weighed before doing it.
Intubation is risky because the act of intubation itself can introduce deadly pathogens, like MRSA, into the lungs.
Catheterization kills people too, for similar reasons.
People get intubated because they will die without it, meaning the risk of dying from intubation outweighs the guarantee of dying without it.
Intubation is more likely than not going to give you a nasty infection. More than 60% if patients intubated during the pandemic caught some form of secondary infection from the process.
When your response requires you to quote information out of context and to fill in information you don't have with guesses (COVID and immunocompromisation), you're just making things up to suit your belief. Your premise is that other people are just making things up to suit their beliefs. I'll just stop there.
He was listed as having issues before going to the hospital. They said "otherwise healthy" in the same paragraph as "went to the hospital for trouble breathing"
COVID is still a raging pandemic no matter how far you shove your head up your own ass.
There you go again, making up things so you can make a point. No one ever said or even hinted COVID isn't present, although I'd argue it is now and will for the foreseeable future be firmly endemic. I'm a microbiologist, remember? I actually worked in public health for years. We tend to believe in science.
There are also numerous things that aren't COVID that can cause pneumonia. Until we know what that might have been in this case, any statements claiming with any surety that COVID caused these symptoms are purely supposition.
Edit: Oh no! OP caught that I accidentally posted and immediately deleted this comment on my old .world account. Such scandal!
MRSA is typically easy to treat - that’s why about 75% of patients live
So 25% die even when under treatment? That seems high. A similar mortality rate is the untreated form of dengue fever, severe dengue. Am I totally off the mark?
The answer is it depends. It's about 23.5% worldwide if I recall correctly, though I'm having trouble finding the paper I originally pulled that figure from. The paper linked puts it around 30-40%. Keep in mind that MRSA is pretty prevalent, so most people who have it have a commensal "infection" that just hangs out on their skin and, even if it does become pathogenic, it's often subclinical, so many of the less serious cases go unreported. It's only when it's pretty bad or when people are undergoing medical treatment already that it's actually discovered and even then often not in a way that can be reported. On top of this, treatment varies depending on numerous factors, so areas with fewer medical resources will have significantly higher mortality rates.
I mean, I'm not trying to play DA for shitty-ass Boeing here, but coincidences do happen. I'm certainly more likely to believe this death was a result of bad luck than the suicide from a guy who told his family, and I quote: "If anything happens, it's not suicide."
Oh, totally. It's possible it's a coincidence, it's just also possible that it was Boeing. I'm withholding my final judgment because I can't know either way with any surety, but I'd be incredibly unsurprised if, were we to ever determine a definite cause plus the existence of a perpetrator, that it was Boeing. Either way, fuck Boeing.
If I was one of the remaining five recent whistleblowers, I'd be looking over my shoulder hard right now.
seattletimes.com
Active