Click to Translate to English Click to Translate to French  Click to Translate to Spanish  Click to Translate to German  Click to Translate to Italian  Click to Translate to Japanese  Click to Translate to Chinese Simplified  Click to Translate to Korean  Click to Translate to Arabic  Click to Translate to Russian  Click to Translate to Portuguese  Click to Translate to Myanmar (Burmese)

PANDEMIC ALERT LEVEL
123456
Forum Home Forum Home > Main Forums > General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Is this the smoking gun?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Online Discussion: Tracking new emerging diseases and the next pandemic since 2005; Coronavirus COVID-19 Pandemic Discussion Forum.

Is this the smoking gun?

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Usk View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2020
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 5560
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Usk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Is this the smoking gun?
    Posted: May 29 2021 at 3:56pm

Did these scientists find the proof needed that the Chinese need to be held accountable?

https://www.foxnews.com/world/explosive-study-claims-to-prove-chinese-scientists-created-covid

Back to Top
CRS, DrPH View Drop Down
Expert Level Adviser
Expert Level Adviser


Joined: January 20 2014
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 25305
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote CRS, DrPH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2021 at 9:50pm

Originally posted by Usk Usk wrote:

Did these scientists find the proof needed that the Chinese need to be held accountable?

https://www.foxnews.com/world/explosive-study-claims-to-prove-chinese-scientists-created-covid

I don't believe one bit of that.  

a)  Fox News - consider the source, they are beating a loud political drum on this one. 

b)  If China was attempting "gain of function" research, they messed up mightily by not developing their own vaccine FIRST!  This is the cardinal rule of biowarfare (I've been trained in this since the USSR days).  The only folks who spew bioweapons around without a vaccine are doomsday cults and Jihadists.  

China may have let the virus escape its BSL4 lab in Wuhan, and I think this is very plausible.  However, that type of thing has happened with BSL labs in the past, including smallpox and flu.  This is interesting:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-anthrax-labs-analysis/how-to-fix-u-s-biosecurity-leaks-close-some-labs-idUSKBN0FJ0BC20140714

CRS, DrPH
Back to Top
Dutch Josh View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: May 01 2013
Location: Arnhem-Netherla
Status: Offline
Points: 54822
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote Dutch Josh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 29 2021 at 10:03pm

Dealing with this pandemic should-for now-be the ONLY priority ! We have several very serious variants spreading all over the globe !

Finding out how this pandemic started would need good research-international cooperation...(and NOT cold war mentality !). It took decades to find out more on the Spanish Flu-do not expect easy answers on the start of this pandemic either...

For me it is clear international air travel should have stopped when Wuhan went into lockdown-january 2020. Also it is clear corona virus diseases are widespread in other animals-it would one day jump to human hosts...If a lab was involved it may be hard to find out. Labs often speed up natural processes (recombinations, gain of function)...so this pandemic may have started in a China Lab-or some other lab...but lets try to save lives first !

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein
Back to Top
Usk View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2020
Location: Virginia
Status: Offline
Points: 5560
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Usk Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 30 2021 at 2:45am

CRS- Do you not know who BirgerSorenson is??? You really should read up before commenting about Fox news source. The world press was first to cover the story!! If you really are a virologist you would know that his findings of four positively charged amino acids in a row is not natural and defied natural law like in if newtons first law was suddenly not valid anymoreJNorweign scientists  says COVID-19 was manufactured, claim backed by ex-British  ) A new study about the possible origin of the coronavirus has found that Covid-19 is not natural in origin. The study, led by Norwegian virologist Birger 

https://thenewsglory.com/scientists-have-announced-evidence-of-laboratory-origin-of-covid-19/


https://thenewsglory.com/scientists-have-announced-evidence-of-laboratory-origin-
Back to Top
CRS, DrPH View Drop Down
Expert Level Adviser
Expert Level Adviser


Joined: January 20 2014
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 25305
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote CRS, DrPH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 30 2021 at 11:20pm

Originally posted by Usk Usk wrote:

CRS- Do you not know who BirgerSorenson is??? You really should read up before commenting about Fox news source. The world press was first to cover the story!! If you really are a virologist you would know that his findings of four positively charged amino acids in a row is not natural and defied natural law like in if newtons first law was suddenly not valid anymoreJNorweign scientists  says COVID-19 was manufactured, claim backed by ex-British  ) A new study about the possible origin of the coronavirus has found that Covid-19 is not natural in origin. The study, led by Norwegian virologist Birger 

https://thenewsglory.com/scientists-have-announced-evidence-of-laboratory-origin-of-covid-19/


https://thenewsglory.com/scientists-have-announced-evidence-of-laboratory-origin-

I do not know of Sorensen, the world is awash with "experts" these days.  BTW, I'm a charter signatory member of the Cambridge Working Group (2014), formed to oppose Gain of Function (GOF) research.  

The SARS-CoV2 coronaviruses are RNA viruses with a very primitive genome of 29,811 nucleotides, encoding for 29 proteins.   There are many variations that occur naturally, I see nothing in this heavy-breathing report to lead me to believe anything but that the Chinese were collecting lots of coronaviruses in their lab, and something escaped.  RNA viruses are notorious for rapid mutation, so I take what they say with a grain of salt.  

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7293463/

The sudden emergence of severe respiratory disease, caused by a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has recently become a public health emergency. Genome sequence analysis of SARS-CoV-2 revealed its close resemblance to the earlier reported SARS-CoV and Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV). However, initial testing of the drugs used against SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV has been ineffective in controlling SARS-CoV-2. The present study highlights the genomic, proteomic, pathogenesis, and therapeutic strategies in SARS-CoV-2 infection. We have carried out sequence analysis of potential drug target proteins in SARS-CoV-2 and, compared them with SARS-CoV and MERS viruses. Analysis of mutations in the coding and non-coding regions, genetic diversity, and pathogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 has also been done. A detailed structural analysis of drug target proteins has been performed to gain insights into the mechanism of pathogenesis, structure-function relationships, and the development of structure-guided therapeutic approaches. The cytokine profiling and inflammatory signalling are different in the case of SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also highlighted possible therapies and their mechanism of action followed by clinical manifestation. Our analysis suggests a minimal variation in the genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2, may be responsible for a drastic change in the structures of target proteins, which makes available drugs ineffective.

CRS, DrPH
Back to Top
CRS, DrPH View Drop Down
Expert Level Adviser
Expert Level Adviser


Joined: January 20 2014
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 25305
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CRS, DrPH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 30 2021 at 11:28pm

On May 23, The Wall Street Journal reported that the illness of employees of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in November 2019 may speak of the correctness of the theory of the artificial origin of the coronavirus.

Absolute rubbish! Illness among the scientists has not been serologically confirmed, they may have had seasonal influenza.  The Political Right Wing is attempting to stir up conspiracies where none are likely to exist. 

CRS, DrPH
Back to Top
Technophobe View Drop Down
Assistant Admin
Assistant Admin
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2014
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 86330
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (2) Thanks(2)   Quote Technophobe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 31 2021 at 4:42am

I agree.  



This article came out nearly a whole year ago, as did Sørensen 's original paper with Dalgleish.  article refuting Sorenson's claims

Since then, Sørensen  has been 'tweaking' his results and expanding his claims.  The original paper was peer reviewed, but most of the additions have not even been included - let alone reviewed.  

His claims about the frequency of mono-valency amino acids occuring in nature is still unproven.  It does seem to be the case, as opposites attract in most chemical bonds and simalirity repels therein, but that is not the same as proven, especially as the series of amino acids in a specific protein does not randomly occur, but is 'built' by the RNA evolved for their construction.  Valency2 is less of an issue with this process than structure; that process is aided by the fact that most amino acids are chiral1.  Common is not the same as universal and likely is not the same as guaranteed.  He is making exceptional claims and they require exceptional proof.



For what it is worth, it could well have come out of the lab (it would be a perfect bioweapon, as it destroys societal infrastructures rather than people), the point where I disagree with Sørenson is in the level of proof claimed.  An hypothesis, however good, is not proof - it's not even a theory yet.





1 left or right handed - ie constructed by shape not 'electrical' charge.
2 carrying an extra electron or, one less so that there is an electrical charge to the molecule or molecular part. Incidentally most amino acids are zwitterions3
3  a zwitterion, also called an inner salt, is a molecule that contains an equal number of positively- and negatively-charged functional groups.




WillowbyBrat wishes to add the following codicil:  Religion requires faith, science requires proof and idiots like Sorenson require neither.

Believers don't need proof and sceptics won't accept proof.
Back to Top
Technophobe View Drop Down
Assistant Admin
Assistant Admin
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2014
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 86330
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Technophobe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 31 2021 at 5:03am

Ps.  I used to watch Fox news regularily.  I like to have both viewpoints on political arguments.  Only then can you have a ballanced view.

Unfortunately, this is not the first time Fox came up with mistakes or outright lies (which I have enough knowledge about to spot) which they have not later refuted.  

Now I am bereft of a right-wing news source to follow.  


I would appreciate suggestions. Polite, sensible ones anyway.

Believers don't need proof and sceptics won't accept proof.
Back to Top
Dutch Josh View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: May 01 2013
Location: Arnhem-Netherla
Status: Offline
Points: 54822
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dutch Josh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 31 2021 at 7:57am

Beside the point if this virus did or did not come from a (Wuhan) lab-I think almost all agree that if international airtravel stopped when Wuhan-a mega city-went into lockdown-most of this pandemic may have been avoided. 

We maybe would have a situation more like SARS-1 [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002%E2%80%932004_SARS_outbreak#Timeline[/url] or https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002%E2%80%932004_SARS_outbreak#Timeline -much more limited in spread, time, cases/deaths...

This pandemic is the outcome of inaction...NOT stopping travel in time. The India-variant spread in the UK (etc) shows we did not learn much...


We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein
Back to Top
CRS, DrPH View Drop Down
Expert Level Adviser
Expert Level Adviser


Joined: January 20 2014
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 25305
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CRS, DrPH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 31 2021 at 2:06pm

Originally posted by Technophobe Technophobe wrote:

I agree.  

This article came out nearly a whole year ago, as did Sørensen 's original paper with Dalgleish.  article refuting Sorenson's claims

Since then, Sørensen  has been 'tweaking' his results and expanding his claims.  The original paper was peer reviewed, but most of the additions have not even been included - let alone reviewed.  

His claims about the frequency of mono-valency amino acids occuring in nature is still unproven.  It does seem to be the case, as opposites attract in most chemical bonds and simalirity repels therein, but that is not the same as proven, especially as the series of amino acids in a specific protein does not randomly occur, but is 'built' by the RNA evolved for their construction.  Valency2 is less of an issue with this process than structure; that process is aided by the fact that most amino acids are chiral1.  Common is not the same as universal and likely is not the same as guaranteed.  He is making exceptional claims and they require exceptional proof.



For what it is worth, it could well have come out of the lab (it would be a perfect bioweapon, as it destroys societal infrastructures rather than people), the point where I disagree with Sørenson is in the level of proof claimed.  An hypothesis, however good, is not proof - it's not even a theory yet.





1 left or right handed - ie constructed by shape not 'electrical' charge.
2 carrying an extra electron or, one less so that there is an electrical charge to the molecule or molecular part. Incidentally most amino acids are zwitterions3
3  a zwitterion, also called an inner salt, is a molecule that contains an equal number of positively- and negatively-charged functional groups.




WillowbyBrat wishes to add the following codicil:  Religion requires faith, science requires proof and idiots like Sorenson require neither.

Great post, Techno!  You might enjoy this:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9.pdf

CRS, DrPH
Back to Top
CRS, DrPH View Drop Down
Expert Level Adviser
Expert Level Adviser


Joined: January 20 2014
Location: Arizona
Status: Offline
Points: 25305
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote CRS, DrPH Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 31 2021 at 2:17pm

I spent a lot of time working on the SARS (2003) outbreak, and even wanted to go to Toronto to witness their infection control response!  (my wife, who is smarter than I am, said "No way!")

This article shows that the Chinese have had serious breaches of lab biosecurity in the past, with the 2003 SARS situation being most closely related to SARS-CoV2 and COVID-19. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7096887/

CRS, DrPH
Back to Top
Technophobe View Drop Down
Assistant Admin
Assistant Admin
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2014
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 86330
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Technophobe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 09 2021 at 11:21am

[Technophobe:   An update of sorts:]


  • NEWS EXPLAINER  

           

The COVID lab-leak hypothesis: what scientists do and don’t know

                                           

  Nature examines arguments that the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 escaped from a lab in China, and the science behind them.                

      

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

 The Wuhan Institute of Virology building in Wuhan, China

The Wuhan Institute of Virology has carried out research on coronaviruses for years because these pathogens are endemic to the region where it's located.Credit: Kyodo News via Getty

Debate over the idea that the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus emerged from a laboratory has escalated over the past few weeks, coinciding with the annual World Health Assembly, at which the World Health Organization (WHO) and officials from nearly 200 countries discussed the COVID-19 pandemic. After last year’s assembly, the WHO agreed to sponsor the first phase of an investigation into the pandemic’s origins, which took place in China in early 2021

Most scientists say SARS-CoV-2 probably has a natural origin, and was transmitted from an animal to humans. However, a lab leak has not been ruled out, and many are calling for a deeper investigation into the hypothesis that the virus emerged from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), located in the Chinese city where the first COVID-19 cases were reported. On 26 May, US President Joe Biden tasked the US Intelligence Community to join efforts to find SARS-CoV-2’s origins, whatever they might be, and report back in 90 days.

 

Australia, the European Union and Japan have also called for a robust investigation into SARS-CoV-2’s origins in China. The WHO has yet to reveal the next phase of its investigation. But China has asked that the probe examine other countries. Such reticence, and the fact that China has withheld information in the past, has fuelled suspicions of a ‘lab leak’. For instance, Chinese government officials suppressed crucial public-health data at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, and during the 2002–04 severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) epidemic, according to high-level reports1,2.

At the assembly, Mike Ryan, director of health emergencies at the WHO, asked for less politicization of calls for an origin investigation, which have, in many ways, devolved into accusations. “Over the last number of days, we have seen more and more and more discourse in the media, with terribly little actual news, or evidence, or new material,” said Ryan. “This is disturbing.”

Nature looks at the key arguments that support a lab leak, and the extent to which research has answers.

There’s not yet any substantial evidence for a lab leak. Why are scientists still considering it?

Scientists don’t have enough evidence about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 to rule out the lab-leak hypothesis, or to prove the alternative that the virus has a natural origin. Many infectious-disease researchers agree that the most probable scenario is that the virus evolved naturally and spread from a bat either directly to a person or through an intermediate animal. Most emerging infectious diseases begin with a spillover from nature, as was seen with HIV, influenza epidemics, Ebola outbreaks and the coronaviruses that caused the SARS epidemic beginning in 2002 and the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) outbreak beginning in 2012.

 Intermediate Horseshoe Bat (Rhinolophus affinis),that live in caves Is a nocturnal animal Foul and dirty.

Scientists found SARS-CoV-2's closest known relative, RATG13, in a horseshoe bat.Credit: Shutterstock

Researchers have some leads that support a natural origin. Bats are known carriers of coronaviruses, and scientists have determined that the genome of SARS-CoV-2 is most similar to that of RATG13, a coronavirus that was first found in a horseshoe bat (Rhinolophus affinis) in the southern Chinese province of Yunnan in 20133. But RATG13’s genome is only 96% identical to SARS-CoV-2’s, suggesting that a closer relative of the virus — the one passed to humans — remains unknown.

Still, the possibility remains that SARS-CoV-2 escaped from a lab. Although lab leaks have never caused an epidemic, they have resulted in small outbreaks involving well-documented viruses. A relevant example happened in 2004, when two researchers were independently infected by the virus that causes SARS at a virology lab in Beijing that studied the disease. They spread the infection to seven others before the outbreak was contained.

What are the key arguments for a lab leak?

In theory, COVID-19 could have come from a lab in a few ways. Researchers might have collected SARS-CoV-2 from an animal and maintained it in their lab to study, or they might have created it by engineering coronavirus genomes. In these scenarios, a person in the lab might have then been accidentally or deliberately infected by the virus, and then spread it to others — sparking the pandemic. There is currently no clear evidence to back these scenarios, but they aren’t impossible. 

People have made a number of arguments for a lab origin for SARS-CoV-2 that are currently conjecture.

 

One holds that it’s suspicious that, almost a year and a half into the pandemic, SARS-CoV-2’s closest relative still hasn’t been found in an animal. Another suggests it is no coincidence that COVID-19 was first detected in Wuhan, where a top lab studying coronaviruses, the WIV, is located. 

Some lab-leak proponents contend that the virus contains unusual features and genetic sequences signalling that it was engineered by humans. And some say that SARS-CoV-2 spreads among people so readily that it must have been created with that intention. Another argument suggests that SARS-CoV-2 might have derived from coronaviruses found in an unused mine where WIV researchers collected samples from bats between 2012 and 2015.

So what do infectious disease researchers and evolutionary biologists say about these arguments?

Is it suspicious that no animal has been identified as transmitting the virus to humans? 

Outbreak-origin investigations often take years, and some culprits remain unknown. It took 14 years to nail down the origin of the SARS epidemic, which began with a virus in bats that spread to humans, most likely through civets. To date, a complete Ebola virus has never been isolated from an animal in the region where the world’s largest outbreak occurred between 2013 and 2016.

Origin investigations are complicated because outbreaks among animals that aren't the main hosts of a particular virus, such as civets in the case of SARS, are often sporadic. Researchers must find the right animal before it dies or clears the infection. And, even if the animal tests positive, viruses found in saliva, faeces or blood are often degraded, making it difficult to sequence the pathogen’s whole genome.

 

Scientists have made some progress since the pandemic began, however. For example, a report, posted to the preprint server bioRxiv on 27 May, suggests that RmYN02, a coronavirus in bats in southern China, might be more closely related to SARS-CoV-2 than RATG13 is4.

As for finding an intermediate host animal, researchers in China have tested more than 80,000 wild and domesticated animals; none have been positive for SARS-CoV-2. But this number is a tiny fraction of the animals in the country. To narrow the search down, researchers say, more strategic testing is needed to isolate animals that are most susceptible to infection and those that come in close contact with people. They also suggest using antibody tests to identify animals that have previously been infected with the virus.

Is it suspicious that the WIV is in Wuhan?

Virology labs tend to specialize in the viruses around them, says Vincent Munster, a virologist at the Rocky Mountain Laboratories, a division of the National Institutes of Health, in Hamilton, Montana. The WIV specializes in coronaviruses because many have been found in and around China. Munster names other labs that focus on endemic viral diseases: influenza labs in Asia, haemorrhagic fever labs in Africa and dengue-fever labs in Latin America, for example. “Nine out of ten times, when there’s a new outbreak, you’ll find a lab that will be working on these kinds of viruses nearby,” says Munster. 

Researchers note that a coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan isn’t surprising, because it’s a city of 11 million people in a broader region where coronaviruses have been found. It contains an airport, train stations and markets selling goods and wildlife transported there from around the region5 — meaning a virus could enter the city and spread rapidly.

Does the virus have features that suggest it was created in a lab?

Several researchers have looked into whether features of SARS-CoV-2 signal that it was bioengineered. One of the first teams to do so, led by Kristian Andersen, a virologist at Scripps Research in La Jolla, California, determined that this was “improbable” for a few reasons, including a lack of signatures of genetic manipulation6. Since then, others have asked whether the virus’s furin cleavage site— a feature that helps it enter cells — is evidence of engineering, because SARS-CoV-2 has these sites but its closest relatives don’t. The furin cleavage site is important because it's in the virus's spike protein, and cleavage of the protein at that site is necessary for the virus to infect cells.

 

But many other coronaviruses have furin cleavage sites, such as coronaviruses that cause colds7. Because viruses containing the site are scattered across the coronavirus family tree, rather than confined to a group of closely related viruses, Stephen Goldstein, a virologist at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, says the site probably evolved multiple times because it provides an evolutionary advantage. Convergent evolution — the process by which organisms that aren’t closely related independently evolve similar traits as a result of adapting to similar environments — is incredibly common. 

Another feature of SARS-CoV-2 that has drawn attention is a combination of nucleotides that underlie a segment of the furin cleavage site: CGG (these encode the amino acid arginine). A Medium article that speculates on a lab origin for SARS-CoV-2 quotes David Baltimore, a Nobel laureate and professor emeritus at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, as saying that viruses don’t usually have that particular code for arginine, but humans often do — a “smoking gun”, hinting that researchers might have tampered with SARS-CoV-2’s genome. 

Andersen says that Baltimore was incorrect about that detail, however. In SARS-CoV-2, about 3% of the nucleotides encoding arginine are CGG, he says. And he points out that around 5% of those encoding arginine in the virus that caused the original SARS epidemic are CGG, too. In an e-mail to Nature, Baltimore says Andersen could be correct that evolution produced SARS-CoV-2, but adds that “there are other possibilities and they need careful consideration, which is all I meant to be saying”.

Is it true that SARS-CoV-2 must have been engineered, because it's perfect for causing a pandemic?

Many scientists say no. Just because the virus spreads among humans doesn't mean it was designed to do so. It also flourishes among mink and infects a host of carnivorous mammals. And it wasn’t optimally transmissible among humans for the better part of last year. Rather, new, more efficient variants have evolved around the world. To name one example, the highly transmissible variant of SARS-CoV-2 first reported in India (B.1.617.2, or Delta) has mutations in the nucleotides encoding its furin cleavage site that appear to make the virus better at infecting cells8.

“This was not some supremely adapted pathogen,” says Joel Wertheim, a molecular epidemiologist at the University of California San Diego.

Did researchers collect SARS-CoV-2 from a mine? 

Researchers from the WIV collected hundreds of samples from bats roosting in a mine between 2012 and 2015, after several miners working there had gotten sick with an unknown respiratory disease. (Last year, researchers reported that blood samples taken from the miners tested negative for antibodies against SARS-CoV-2, meaning that the sickness was probably not COVID-199.) Back at the lab, WIV researchers detected nearly 300 coronaviruses in the bat samples, but they were only able to get whole or partial genomic sequences from less than a dozen , and none of those that were reported were SARS-CoV-29,10. During the WHO-led origins probe earlier this year, WIV researchers told investigators that they cultured only three coronaviruses at the lab, and none were closely related to SARS-CoV-2.

 

Although the investigators didn’t sift through freezers at the WIV to confirm this information, the low number of genomes and cultures doesn’t surprise virologists. Munster says it’s exceedingly difficult to extract intact coronaviruses from bat samples. Virus levels tend to be low in the animals, and viruses are often degraded in faeces, saliva and droplets of blood. Additionally, when researchers want to study or genetically alter viruses, they need to keep them (or synthetic mimics of them) alive, by finding the appropriate live animal cells for the viruses to inhabit in the lab, which can be a challenge. 

So, for SARS-CoV-2 to have come from this mine in China, WIV researchers would have had to overcome some serious technical challenges — and they would have kept the information secret for a number of years and misled investigators on the WHO-led mission, scientists point out. There's no evidence of this, but it can't be ruled out.

What’s next for lab-leak investigations? 

Biden asked the US Intelligence Community to report back to him in 90 days. Perhaps this investigation will shed light on undisclosed US intel reported by The Wall Street Journal suggesting that three staff members at the WIV were sick in November 2019, before the first cases of COVID-19 were reported in China. The article claims that US officials have different opinions on the quality of that intel. And researchers at the WIV have maintained that staff at the institute tested negative for antibodies that would indicate SARS-CoV-2 infection prior to January 2020.

Last week, Anthony Fauci, Biden’s chief medical adviser, asked Chinese officials to release the hospital records of WIV staff members. Others have asked for blood samples from WIV staff members, and access to WIV bat and virus samples, laboratory notebooks and hard drives. But it’s unclear what such asks will yield because China has not conceded to demands for a full lab investigation. A spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China, Zhao Lijian, said that US labs should instead be investigated, and that some people in the United States “don't care about facts or truth and have zero interest in a serious science-based study of origins”.

As Biden's investigation commences and the WHO considers the next phase in its origin study, pandemic experts are bracing themselves for a long road ahead. “We want an answer,” says Jason Kindrachuk, a virologist at the University of Manitoba in Winnipeg, Canada. “But we may have to keep piecing bits of evidence together as weeks and months and years move forward.”

                                            

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01529-3

           


                            

References

  1. 1.

    The Independent Panel for Pandemic Preparedness & Response COVID-19: Make it the Last Pandemic (Independent Panel, 2021).

  2. 2.

    Huang, Y. in Learning from SARS: Preparing for the Next Disease Outbreak: Workshop Summary (eds Knobler S. et al.) (National Academies Press, 2004).

                        Google Scholar                 

  3. 3.

    Zhou P. et al. Nature 579, 270–273 (2020).

    PubMed     Article                         Google Scholar                 

  4. 4.

    Lytras, S. et al. Preprint at bioRxiv https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.01.22.427830 (2021).



Source:   Nature Magazine


Believers don't need proof and sceptics won't accept proof.
Back to Top
carbon20 View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: April 08 2006
Location: West Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 56566
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote carbon20 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 09 2021 at 4:20pm

I find it odd that amongst all of this theory , people seem to have forgotten that this is a  novel virus ,it's not behaving like a known virus,just because we haven't found the vector is really no big mystery to my train of thought.

We are (maybe) dealing with a one off event ,in which as we all know can happen as easily as a pig catching a cold.....

And passing it on to his owner who is just leaving for market with a few dozen bats he just caught the night before!!!!!

Or someone got careless and made a mistake in bio level 4

and then went to market.......

We will never know.......

And as i said before what is the point.....

As far as I'm concerned we all on this site  have being expecting a pandemic

Best thing all of can can learn is theses things happen be prepared......

Take care all 😷😉

Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.🖖

Marcus Aurelius
Back to Top
carbon20 View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: April 08 2006
Location: West Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 56566
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote carbon20 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 09 2021 at 4:49pm
Everything we hear is an opinion, not a fact. Everything we see is a perspective, not the truth.🖖

Marcus Aurelius
Back to Top
EdwinSm, View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: April 03 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 21620
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote EdwinSm, Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 09 2021 at 11:03pm

Thanks Techno.   Good article.  

Back to Top
Technophobe View Drop Down
Assistant Admin
Assistant Admin
Avatar

Joined: January 16 2014
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 86330
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Technophobe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 10 2021 at 3:20am

Thank you, Edwin!

Personally, I think where it came from is not the main question.   Wether it was a "wet market" consequence (horrific, cruel and risky) or a lab release (deliberate or accidental) China's initial secrecy allowed it to spread worldwide (despite the lessons of SARS 1, which were not learned - although they claimed they were).  China, if you want to save face, tell the truth earlier!  But even that is not what counts now.

What really matters currently is how we deal with it.

Believers don't need proof and sceptics won't accept proof.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down