31 December 2021

Pas op voor zogenaamde tijdelijke abonnementen van de NRC!

Ooit had ik een vast abonnement op een papieren krant. Ik ben daar lang geleden mee gestopt. Maar soms kom je iets tegen dat achter een betaalmuur zit. Toen zag ik een aanbod om een tijdelijk digitaal 36 maanden abonnement op de nrc te nemen, dat automatisch zou stoppen.

Dus geen gevaar dat je het zou vergeten stop te zetten. Anders zou ik het nooit gedaan hebben. Zo ongeveer in het derde jaar (denk ik) begon ik me af te vragen wanneer het zou aflopen. Ik wist de begin datum niet meer, en in de account pagina van de nrc stond geen begin en einddatum van het abonnement. Dat vond ik vreemd. Maar goed, het zou vanzelf stoppen. Ik heb toen de begin en einddatum gevonden in mijn eigen administratie. Maar tot mijn grote verbazing en ergernis zag ik dat na die einddatum toch nog bedragen van mijn rekening werden afgeschreven. Ik heb toen de nrc gebeld om opheldering. De dame beweerde dat ik zelf had moeten opzeggen. Mijn protest dat ik een 36 maanden automatisch aflopend abonnement had, was tegen dovemansoren gericht. Om het nog erger te maken zei ze dat de abonnee niet gewaarschuwd werd. Dat  vond ik helemaal smerig. Expres de abonnee niet op de hoogte brengen dat je zelf moet opzeggen. Dubbel bedrog! Uiteindelijk heeft ze me doorverbonden naar de abonnementen afdeling waar ik mijn zgn. automatisch aflopend abonnement zelf moest opzeggen.

Is dit ordinaire oplichting of opzettelijke misleiding? 

1) op de nrc website stond een voordeel actie met uitdrukkelijk vermeld dat het een 36 maanden periode is, anders had ik het nooit gedaan,  2) de einddatum stond niet in de 'welkomst' mail, 3) dat je een abonnement blijkt te hebben van onbeperkte duur staat ook niet in je account gegevens, toeval?, 4) er staat ook geen einddatum van het abonnement (je zou eens op een idee kunnen komen!), 5) je krijgt geen mail als het stilzwijgend wordt verlengd, 6) je krijgt te maken met hogere abonnementskosten, kennelijk omdat het 36 maanden abonnement 'voordelig' was?

Is dit ordinaire oplichting of gewoon opzettelijke misleiding?

Denken ze nu werkelijk bij de nrc dat je op deze manier klanten kunt winnen? Hoe waanzinnig kortzichtig en dom!

Voor mij is deze hele zaak een dermate traumatische ervaring geworden dat ik nooit meer een abonnement neem op de nrc. Op geen enkele krant. Ik vertrouw ze gewoon niet meer. Ik ben er helemaal klaar mee. Ik lees nos.nl en verder wat er gratis te vinden is op het internet. En natuurlijke goede boeken! Daar betaal ik graag voor. Want dat verplicht je niet tot eindeloos boeken aanschaffen!

Nog regelmatig krijg ik brieven van de nrc met zgn. aanbiedingen. Die gaan rechtstreeks de papierbak in. Ergernis. Ook kreeg ik regelmatig telefoontjes die achteraf van de nrc blijken te zijn. Die nummers heb ik geblokkeerd. Ze gebruiken verschillende telefoon nummers!

 

Postscript 5 Feb 2022

NRC heeft weer gebeld met weer een ander nummer 030 3402572 dat nog niet geblokkeerd was. Ze blijven het proberen met een zgn. aanbieding! Trap er niet in! Er is al een hele lijst van klachten op Wie heeft gebeld. Heb me op niet-bellen lijst laten zetten. (duurt 2 weken voordat het effectief is volgens die meneer!).


Postscript 31 mrt 2022

Brief van NRC postbus 554 Alphen uit de Rijn (A4) gekregen. Ergerlijk! Ongeopend Retour afzender! Ik ben hier niet van gediend! Houdt dit nu nooit op!

Postscript 23 juni 2022

Een papieren reclame folder van de NRC op de mat. Aanbieding: een abonnement met korting voor een periode van naar keuze 3, 2, of 1 jaar. Het misleidende is dat er niet bij staat dat het abonnement na die periode automatisch afloopt. Nee, na die periode wordt je abonnement automatisch verlengd maar dan voor het volle tarief. Zo zijn we dat gewend van de NRC: NIETS ZEGGEN, STIEKEM AUTOMATISCH VERLENGEN. Wat een laag-bij-de-grondse oplichters praktijken van een zgn. 'kwaliteitskrant'.
In een hoek staat in kleine letters: Wenst U geen reclamepost meer op dit adres, ga naar postfilter.nl.

Postscript vrijdag 13 januari 2023

Die nrc idioten sturen weer een brief welke ik ongeopend en verscheurd in de papierbak heb gegooid.

Postscript april 2024

Die oplichters van de nrc hebben weer post gestuurd. Het lijkt dat je er levenslang aan vastzit. En dat voor een tijdelijk abonnement dat vanzelf afloopt. Wat een hufters.

 

Postscript december 2024

Houdt dat nu nooit op GVD! Ongeopend verscheurd en in de papierbak.

 

 

Vorig blog in de categorie misstanden


17 December 2021

Did Omicron evolve in a mouse intermediate? (with postscripts)

Evolution of Omicron Spike S1. Science, Vol 374, Issue 6572
red line and dots is Omicron
 

Three days ago I illustrated the exceptional nature of the Omicron variant with a stunning evolutionary tree. But now I have found an even better illustration (see above). It shows the mutations Omicron accumulated in the S1 subunit of the Spike protein. It's clear: Omicron stands apart from all the other SARS-CoV-2 variants. 

In addition its roots are relatively very old. The data indicate that it should have diverged from other variants as early as February 2020. That is just 2 months after the first covid-19 cases. Why did we detect Omicron only in November 2021? Where has it been hiding? Now Chinese scientists propose a new hypothesis, maybe as weird as Omicron itself: it may have been living and evolving for more than a year in a mouse population!

Zoonotic jump from human to mouse and back. ©Gert Korthof
Green virus is SARS-CoV-2 adapted to human host,
Red virus is adapted to mouse host
.

They found that Omicron acquired 45 point mutations  since its divergence from the SARS-CoV-2 B.1.1 lineage. Especially the Spike protein showed an exceptionally high number of mutations. They concluded that the Omicron spike protein was subjected to stronger positive selection than that of any reported SARS-CoV-2 variants known to evolve persistently in human hosts. Further, they noted that the mutation fingerprint of Omicron was significantly different from SARS-COV-2 viruses evolving in humans, but was highly similar to that of a virus that had evolved in a mouse. As if the virus has been evolving in mouse populations. Omicron seemed to be adapted to the mouse ACE2 receptor, not the human ACE2 receptor. While the virus was living and evolving in the mouse it went undetected. So the huge amount of new mutations in Omicron was not really a jump. Those mutations most likely accumulated gradually in a mouse species. Apparently, the mouse adapted Omicron seemed to be pre-adapted to the human ACE2 receptor and started a new outbreak in humans. And it performed very well in humans.

The researchers did not claim anything specific about what mouse species was involved, or where all this happened. They did not mention South-Africa. They did not sample mouse populations in South-Africa. Their conclusion is solely based on comparing the SARS-CoV-2 RNA sequences from humans and other mammals found in public databases (GISAID, Nextstrain). The publication was posted on biorxiv.org and has not yet been peer-reviewed.


 

 

This is #38 in the Corona update series

 

 

 

 


Postscript

3 Jan 2022

The idea that the human SARS-CoV-2 could infect wild animals has shown to be happening: SARS-CoV-2 infection in free-ranging white-tailed deer (Nature, 23 Dec 2021): "that free-ranging white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) are highly susceptible to infection with SARS-CoV-2 virus, are exposed to a range of viral diversity from humans, and are capable of sustaining transmission in nature." According to NBS News after some time establishing itself in the deer population "We could be caught by surprise with a completely different variant."

My comment: that is exactly what could have happened with the Omicron variant in wild mouse populations!

 

Postscript

3 Feb 22

See also an article in Nature: 'Where did Omicron come from? Three key theories' paragraph 'Mouse or rat'.


Postscript

7 Feb 22

In an article in Science it is suggested that Omicron could have originated in lab mice! "(There’s no clear explanation for how Omicron arose, which has also fed some speculation the variant came from lab mice infected with SARS-CoV-2 or other research.)"

 

Postscript

21 dec 2022

Science: A paper [5] published earlier this month by Science claiming the Omicron variant of SARS-CoV-2 arose gradually, across a broad area of Africa, before it was detected was retracted today by its authors. ... that crucial genome sequences on which the study based its conclusions were a result of contamination

Omicron was first discovered in late 2021 in Botswana and South Africa, quickly spread across the world, and has dominated the pandemic since. Its exact origin has been a mystery, in part because Omicron is so different from the variants circulating before it. Researchers have put forth several ideas to explain the genetic gap. 

  1. In one scenario, the virus went through an extended bout of evolution in an animal host and then spilled back into humans. 
  2. In another, it evolved over a long period of time in a single patient with a chronic infection. 
  3. A third possibility was that the virus had been quietly circulating and mutating in an area of the world where few viruses were being picked up and sequenced.

(it seems it is still unclear how Omicron originated) 

 


Sources

  1. Kai Kupferschmidt (2021) Where did ‘weird’ Omicron come from? Science 1 Dec 2021
  2. Changshuo Wei et al (2021) Evidence for a mouse origin of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant, 14 Dec 2021
  3.  Gert Korthof (2021) The exceptional nature of the Omicron variant: a picture is worth a thousand words! 14 Dec 2021
  4. https://cov-lineages.org/lineage.html?lineage=B.1.1 There are 4 Omicron lineages listed on this page.
  5.  Gradual emergence followed by exponential spread of the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant in Africa. (retracted!)

14 December 2021

The exceptional nature of the Omicron variant: a picture is worth a thousand words!

SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant. ©wikipedia.
A picture is worth a thousand words!
(click on the image for the fireworks variant!)

Picture: Omicron and other SARS-CoV-2 variants depicted in a tree scaled radially by genetic distance, derived from Nextstrain on 1 December 2021. The centre of the tree represents the origin of the variants.

 

How the Omicron Variant Got So Many Scary Mutations So Quickly (Scientific American). Indeed, the Omicron variant has 60 mutations compared to the original Wuhan virus– with 32 in the Spike protein. That's a lot. But what is lacking in the SciAm article is a clear visual display. The image above from wikipedia makes it clear immediately: Omicron is exceptional. Whereas other variants keep accumulating mutations gradually and generate new variants, the Omicron variant seems to have made a giant jump. We don't see intermediates in the evolutionary tree. Omicron is not the result of adding some mutations to -say- the Delta variant. It is not a descendant of Delta. It sets itself apart from all other variants. In the evolutionary tree above it seems the origin of Omicron is situated very close to the first SARS-CoV-2 virus detected in 2019 in Wuhan [1]. It seems to appear out of nowhere, although there is no doubt that it is a SARS-CoV-2 virus [2]. If anything looks like a 'genetically engineered lab escape', it is Omicron, not the original Wuhan virus! (just kidding!) [4]

But how did the Omicron variant got so many mutations so quickly? We don't know for sure, but the Scientific American article has a few suggestions. The numerous changes in the coronavirus's Spike protein could have arisen in an isolated population or an immunocompromised person. Immunocompromised patients have  severely impaired immunity. A weakened immune system may result from various causes: due to treatment with drugs that suppress the immune system, after an organ transplant, due to bone marrow disease, or during cancer treatment or someone with HIV. In these persons the virus could stay and replicate for a much longer time than in persons with a normal immune system. During that time the virus has the opportunity 'to test' many mutants. A process of mutation and natural selection in the body of the patient. So, the origin of Omicron could be a single individual. According to the SciAm article, South African researchers described an HIV-positive woman who had a SARS-CoV-2 infection for more than six months! That is long enough to try thousands of mutants. HIV is the Human Immunodeficiency virus. It attacks the immune system. The very system that should protect us against viruses! In South Africa there are a lot of HIV patients. South Africa is the region where Omicron was first detected.

 

 

 

This is #37 in the series of Corona updates

 

 

 

 

Notes

  1. Omicron ... "descended not from one of the other variants of concern, such as Alpha, Beta or Delta, but from coronavirus that was circulating maybe 18 months ago. ... "The Alpha and Beta variants, first spotted last year in the UK and South Africa respectively, are widely thought to have emerged after long-term infections in patients." from: Why fighting Omicron should include ramping up HIV prevention, The Guardian, 11 Dec 2021
  2. Omicron is classified as B.1.1.529 (in the Pango classification system [3]), thus has been assigned to the B.1.1 lineage of SARS-CoV-2. See the website cov-lineages.org for a table of all variants. Surprisingly, there are indeed 529 variants in the B.1.1 lineage. Interestingly, the closest variant (with no issue) is: B.1.1.522 (Belgium lineage) from 2020-12-09. That means that B.1.1.529 is separated by 11 months with B.1.1.522. If we include lineages 'with issues' than B.1.1.528 is the closest lineage with the date 2020-12-07, that is also 11 months difference. So, there is a gap of 11 months between B.1.1.529 and its closest relatives. updated 18 Dec 21
  3. A dynamic nomenclature proposal for SARS-CoV-2 lineages to assist genomic epidemiology, Nature Microbiology, 15 July 2020 (Proposes the Pango nomenclature system used in cov-lineages.org).
    added 18 Dec 21
  4. “It just came out of nowhere,” says Darren Martin, a computational biologist at the University of Cape Town, South Africa. Nature 28 Jan 22 

 

 

Sources