Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Discussion: Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) in Wuhan has been working with bats and coronavirus for many years - DNA manipulations, cloning....

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts



  • 2 comments

    • #271.1
      JJackson commented
      Today, 01:39 PM
      I have wasted a lot of time debunking some of the posts in this thread and I have not seen anything yet that that implicates either the WIV or CCDC in the zoonotic emergence of SARS-CoV-2. I would be grateful if someone could explain exactly what they are being accused of. To the best of my knowledge the WIV has played a key role in the primary research which we have used in developing drugs and vaccines and the CCDC has done a far better job than any of its international counterparts in containing the virus's spread. Beyond being in Wuhan what is it that they are being accused of and where is the evidence to support the accusations.
      • Edit
      • Flag

    • #271.2
      longshots commented
      Today, 01:59 PM
      I believe the WIV and/or CCDC are being accused of doing research, possibly GoF, in order to anticipate future outbreaks and develop ways to combat them and that they accidentally released the virus. Yes, there are those who think it was done maliciously, but I don't. There are examples of this happening at labs around the world including the US. We humans do stupid stuff and make stupid mistakes... and then we try to hide it...
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I agree with longshots.

    I know for 100% certain that there have been lab accidents in the world involving dangerous human pathogens in the past.

    Thank you to everyone participating on this thread. We are not big social media and we allow controversial topics on this site. And we will continue. No one owns us.

    No one needs to explain anything. It is obvious what is going on here. Just ridiculous.

    The emperor is not wearing any clothes.


    Comment


    • JJackson
      JJackson commented
      Editing a comment
      Lab escapes happen occasionally and are a major concern and WIV may have been performing some gain of function experiments, they are a standard research tool. How you make the jump from the fact there is a lab to this virus came from that lab, or any other lab is beyond me. The fact that flu GoF experiments were carried out in labs in Amsterdam and Chicago did not cause everyone to assume all flu that winter came from them. There is no evidence this is a lab escape and genetically it fits well with a natural zoonotic emergence. Since SARS-1 Corona viruses got some attention and it was clearly pointed out that the genetics of the virus in the bat population meant it was ripe to do it again. It has, to nobody great surprise. Why has this zoonotic emergence's batch of people claiming a lab escape not been ignored as a conspiracy theory like the crop that comes up every time? I can only see it as because the lab was in China not the US, is there any evidence apart from the politics and who you happen to trust or distrust. I am in the UK so have no reason to believe a lab escape is less likely to happen in China, the US or EU. I do have the greatest respect for the work done at the WIV which is at the forefront of Corona virus research, not surprising as it is endemic in their bat population and has jumped species twice into humans and once into pigs in the last twenty years and is likely to do so again.

  • https://nonproliferation.org/op-49-a...break-origins/
    OP #49: A Guide to Investigating Outbreak Origins


    October 28, 2020
    Richard Pilch, Miles Pomper, Jill Luster, and Filippa Lentzos


    COVID-19 has exposed key gaps in the global community’s ability to assess infectious disease outbreaks of international concern, in particular the ability to differentiate between natural and laboratory sources of infection. The risk of natural outbreaks is increasing as unchecked population growth, industrial expansion, and corresponding ecological disruption increases the likelihood that novel disease agents will come into contact with na?ve human populations. Likewise, the risk of laboratory accidents is increasing as more high-containment laboratories are built and higher risk experiments are conducted around the world. Meanwhile, a deliberate biological attack may resemble an outbreak of natural or accidental origin, and a natural or accidental outbreak may be misattributed as an attack.
    Hat tip to https://twitter.com/Ayjchan
    _____________________________________________

    Ask Congress to Investigate COVID Origins and Government Response to Pandemic H.R. 834

    i love myself. the quietest. simplest. most powerful. revolution ever. ---- nayyirah waheed

    (My posts are not intended as advice or professional assessments of any kind.)
    Never forget Excalibur.

    Comment


    • JJackson commented
      Today, 02:10 AM
      Lab escapes happen occasionally and are a major concern and WIV may have been performing some gain of function experiments, they are a standard research tool. How you make the jump from the fact there is a lab to this virus came from that lab, or any other lab is beyond me. The fact that flu GoF experiments were carried out in labs in Amsterdam and Chicago did not cause everyone to assume all flu that winter came from them. There is no evidence this is a lab escape and genetically it fits well with a natural zoonotic emergence. Since SARS-1 Corona viruses got some attention and it was clearly pointed out that the genetics of the virus in the bat population meant it was ripe to do it again. It has, to nobody great surprise. Why has this zoonotic emergence's batch of people claiming a lab escape not been ignored as a conspiracy theory like the crop that comes up every time? I can only see it as because the lab was in China not the US, is there any evidence apart from the politics and who you happen to trust or distrust. I am in the UK so have no reason to believe a lab escape is less likely to happen in China, the US or EU. I do have the greatest respect for the work done at the WIV which is at the forefront of Corona virus research, not surprising as it is endemic in their bat population and has jumped species twice into humans and once into pigs in the last twenty years and is likely to do so again.

      -----------------------------------------------------

      People can easily read through this thread and review all of the reasons why the most likely scenario for the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 is a lab escape. No matter how often you call it a conspiracy theory, the observable facts are still there.

      China shut down all meaningful investigation so there will never be direct evidence. But logic usually prevails anyway. China has a long history of coverups and this continues today. It is a waste of time to deny this - everyone knows it. It is not a matter of politics. I have seen this myself over many years of tracking disease in China. No politics needed. One place China money has not reached is me and FluTrackers. I say what I think and no amount of pressure will make me change my mind or back off.

      As to the current scientific work being done in China on coronavirus - well...they have very competent professionals. I do not think anyone has said anything else.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by sharon sanders View Post
        JJackson commented
        Today, 02:10 AM
        Lab escapes happen occasionally and are a major concern and WIV may have been performing some gain of function experiments, they are a standard research tool. How you make the jump from the fact there is a lab to this virus came from that lab, or any other lab is beyond me. The fact that flu GoF experiments were carried out in labs in Amsterdam and Chicago did not cause everyone to assume all flu that winter came from them. There is no evidence this is a lab escape and genetically it fits well with a natural zoonotic emergence. Since SARS-1 Corona viruses got some attention and it was clearly pointed out that the genetics of the virus in the bat population meant it was ripe to do it again. It has, to nobody great surprise. Why has this zoonotic emergence's batch of people claiming a lab escape not been ignored as a conspiracy theory like the crop that comes up every time? I can only see it as because the lab was in China not the US, is there any evidence apart from the politics and who you happen to trust or distrust. I am in the UK so have no reason to believe a lab escape is less likely to happen in China, the US or EU. I do have the greatest respect for the work done at the WIV which is at the forefront of Corona virus research, not surprising as it is endemic in their bat population and has jumped species twice into humans and once into pigs in the last twenty years and is likely to do so again.

        -----------------------------------------------------

        People can easily read through this thread and review all of the reasons why the most likely scenario for the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 is a lab escape. No matter how often you call it a conspiracy theory, the observable facts are still there.

        China shut down all meaningful investigation so there will never be direct evidence. But logic usually prevails anyway. China has a long history of coverups and this continues today. It is a waste of time to deny this - everyone knows it. It is not a matter of politics. I have seen this myself over many years of tracking disease in China. No politics needed. One place China money has not reached is me and FluTrackers. I say what I think and no amount of pressure will make me change my mind or back off.

        As to the current scientific work being done in China on coronavirus - well...they have very competent professionals. I do not think anyone has said anything else.

        In Hunt for Virus Source, W.H.O. let China take charge


        November 2, 2020


        snip

        By the summer, even the W.H.O. was frustrated. Two experts who went to China in July to define the terms of the investigation spent two weeks in quarantine. They interviewed experts by phone but did not go to Wuhan.


        Chinese officials then said that the organization should start investigating in Europe, pointing to reports that the virus had been discovered in sewage systems there last year.

        In a letter to Chinese officials described to The Times, the health organization expressed frustration at China’s delays and insisted that the investigation begin in Wuhan, if only because the first infections were found there.

        None of these frustrations spilled into public. The organization described only progress. Yet it repeatedly declined requests by multiple governments to disclose the investigation terms it had negotiated with China. On Friday, the organization told the Times that it would soon make the documents public.

        An executive summary of the documents, obtained by The Times, shows that the health organization’s virus origin studies will unfold in two phases. One will look for the first patients by reviewing hospital records and interviewing people who were treated for the virus in December. The team will also investigate what wildlife was sold at the Wuhan market and follow the supply chain, according to the summary.

        The W.H.O. has agreed this phase will be led by Chinese scientists, with outsiders reviewing their work remotely.

        In the second phase, international experts will work with Chinese colleagues to find the virus among animal hosts and a possible intermediate host.

        No date has been set for a visit, though diplomats say China and the health organization appear eager to pause until after the American election. Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic nominee, has said he will keep the U.S. in the organization if he wins.

        The organization solicited experts for the mission and the United States recommended three government scientists. None made the team, a senior American official said. But the W.H.O. has not made the list public. It said on Monday morning that an independent American scientist was on the list.

        On Friday, the team finally held its first virtual meeting.

        “It is difficult to do this work in a politically intoxicated environment,” Dr. Ryan, the organization’s emergency director, said at a news conference later that day.

        “It is hard for scientists to do what they have to do and want to do in situations like this,” he said.

        https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/02/w...ronavirus.html

        Comment


        • Source: https://www.nationalgeographic.co.uk...re-are-the-new

          The WHO is hunting for the coronavirus’s origins. Here are the new details.
          Disease detectives who have worked on similar hunts say the investigation is business as usual—but now with advanced tools and techniques that should aid the process.
          Monday, 9 November 2020
          By Larry Mullin

          Ten months have passed since health officials cited Wuhan’s Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market as ground zero for the COVID-19 pandemic—and a global debate over how the pandemic began has existed for nearly as long. But the public may soon learn answers as the World Health Organisation embarks on the final stages of a search for the coronavirus’s origins.

          During an October 23 news conference, Michael Ryan, the WHO Health Emergencies Programme executive director, said Chinese scientists have already begun early studies for the two-phase investigation. Based on what those experts find, the WHO will then deploy an international team in China to collaborate with many of the country’s top scientists in tracing COVID-19’s roots. A week later, WHO director-general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said a group of international experts had held a first virtual meeting with their Chinese counterparts, before pledging the WHO’s full support for the process. And on November 5, the WHO quietly released details on its mission with China, which it describes as a global study of the origins of SARS-CoV-2...

          Comment


          • Le regard des experts de l'O.M.S sur les pourquoi de l'arr?t de l'?levage avec subventions de la production de "rat des bambous" me semble souhaitable. C'est un vrai dossier ONE HEALTH.

            "En f?vrier, la plus haute commission l?gislative de la Chine a temporairement interdit tout commerce et toute consommation d’animaux sauvages ? la suite de la crise sanitaire.

            ? l’?poque, il y avait environ 25 millions de rats de bambou dans diverses fermes chinoises, principalement dans les r?gions du sud du pays, comme le Guangxi et le Guangdong, o? les habitants accueillent la viande exotique.

            Dans le Guangxi, une province largement agricole qui compte environ 50 millions d’habitants, plus de 100 000 personnes ?l?vent environ 18 millions de rats de bambou, a d?clar? un responsable local ? China News Weekly."


            https://www.fr24news.com/fr/a/2020/0...ronavirus.html

            Comment


            • The genetic structure of SARS‐CoV‐2 does not rule out a laboratory origin


              Rossana Segreto

              Yuri Deigin


              Abstract

              Severe acute respiratory syndrome‐coronavirus (SARS‐CoV)‐2′s origin is still controversial. Genomic analyses show SARS‐CoV‐2 likely to be chimeric, most of its sequence closest to bat CoV RaTG13, whereas its receptor binding domain (RBD) is almost identical to that of a pangolin CoV. Chimeric viruses can arise via natural recombination or human intervention. The furin cleavage site in the spike protein of SARS‐CoV‐2 confers to the virus the ability to cross species and tissue barriers, but was previously unseen in other SARS‐like CoVs. Might genetic manipulations have been performed in order to evaluate pangolins as possible intermediate hosts for bat‐derived CoVs that were originally unable to bind to human receptors? Both cleavage site and specific RBD could result from site‐directed mutagenesis, a procedure that does not leave a trace. Considering the devastating impact of SARS‐CoV‐2 and importance of preventing future pandemics, researchers have a responsibility to carry out a thorough analysis of all possible SARS‐CoV‐2 origins.


              https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/...bies.202000240


              Funny enough, this paper has been published the same day the journal Nature finally published an addendum to the Zhou paper to clarify some open questions about RaTG13

              https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2951-z

              What were the miners doing in 2012 in the cave were RaTG13 was in 2013 collected, before to become sick with COVID19 symptoms? Mining copper as stated by Nature or cleaning the mine from bat guano as stated here:

              https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/s...aled-l5vxt7jqp

              The mine was abandoned.

              Four miners were tested positive for IgG antibody in 2012, but now all the samples retested are negative. Are the tests still valid after so many years of storage?


              Comment


              • A Nature article
                Addendum: A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin
                https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2951-z.pdf

                Covers the renaming on RtG13, those who got ill working in the bat cave and just how many corona viruses you can get in from bat guano.

                Comment


                • We waited 9 months to receive from Nature a clarification about RaTG13 and what they present now in the Addendum open more questions than the ones answered.

                  New questions are:

                  1) A detailed description of methods, storage conditions of samples, controls, and results of the assays performed on the miners’ samples mentioned is missing. How a leading scientific journal as Nature could accept to publish this Addendum without giving all these details?

                  2) Only serum samples are mentioned but the assays described are not optimal for such samples. Were also other samples collected from the miners and analysed? If not, why only serum samples were collected and not other samples with higher viral load such as throat or nasal swabs?

                  3) Why WIV didn’t re-test the miners’ samples for SARS antibodies? The 2016 Huang PhD thesis has reported that back in 2013 WIV confirmed the presence of IgG SARS antibodies in 4 miners’ samples.

                  4) Why the sample RaBtCoV/4991 described in Ge et al.

                  https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12250-016-3713-9

                  was really renamed? The host, Rhinolophus affinis, was already indicated in the original name (which was not ID4991 as written in the Addendum but RaBtCoV/4991).

                  5) Is RaTG13 a consensus sequence of the 9 viruses mentioned in the Addendum as suggested by Peter Daszak

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Et3CHcteWNw (Time: 50 – 55)


                  (little extra: Daszak gives a false information about sampling site of RaTG13, which is not the one described in this paper: https://journals.plos.org/plospathog...l.ppat.1006698

                  but in this paper:

                  https://link.springer.com/article/10...250-016-3713-9)
                  @ JJacksonconfirmed some time ago that RaTG13 is a consensus sequence, which is quite different from affirming that RaTG13 andRaBtCoV/4991 are the same virus.

                  https://twitter.com/BillyBostickson/...49960492822539

                  Specification about sample names and sampling years of the other 8 betacoronaviruses collected with RaBtCoV/4991 is a key information also missing in the Addendum.

                  6) It remains also a mystery the origin of the 5’ end of the RaTG13, which was missing in the original sequence but then uploaded on Oct 13th in NCBI. This is unexpected because Shi Zhengli told Science Mag. that the sample was finished during sequencing in 2018 and it is not mentioned in the Addendum.

                  https://twitter.com/franciscodeasis/status/1319936430362296321


                  https://science.sciencemag.org/conte...03/487/tab-pdf

                  7) Why Peter Daszak affirmed that RaBtCoV/4991 was renamed RaTG13 following 2019 sample naming, when the name RaTG13 was already decided and in use since 2018?

                  https://twitter.com/Ayjchan/status/1320352930344652800

                  A long list of questions can be found also here:


                  https://monalirahalkar.wordpress.com...ou-et-al-2020/


                  Attached Files

                  Comment


                  • bump this

                    Comment


                    • mercy Kathy,
                      ce jour ce ne sont que des bonnes nouvelles, car, entre ta prose et celle de TETANO:
                      https://flutrackers.com/forum/forum/...he-common-cold

                      franchement , il reste des experts ?

                      Comment


                      • I want to make a comment here about something I saw being talked about. There is speculation that the China government is pushing the "COVID-19 found on imported frozen food packaging" agenda to blame other countries for being the origin of the disease. I think not. The China government did not start mentioning the "frozen" mantra until June:

                        China - Beijing coronavirus outbreak, frozen food blamed - June 12, 2020+ - cases have spread to 4 provinces

                        If frozen food packaging was the scapegoat for the origin of COVID-19 then the China government would have started blaming "frozen" much earlier. Like January 1, 2020.

                        I think these "frozen" discoveries are mostly new outbreaks that they are blaming on frozen imports as an excuse since they are doing such a great job on controlling COVID-19 in a population of 1.4 billion people. Yup. Since the large outbreaks in the spring, the government usually reports that the new outbreaks are all caused by imported people or imported frozen food packaging - with very few exceptions.

                        Others think that China is blaming "frozen" imports to play games with international trading partners. I also think not. China needs the food.

                        Comment


                        • sharon sanders
                          sharon sanders commented
                          Editing a comment
                          I want to clarify that I do not know if SARS-CoV-2 can survive frozen on packaging with enough strength to infect people. The numerous China outbreaks of SARS-CoV-2 cited as originating from frozen packaging on imported goods is not generally accepted. It is, however, very interesting. I am following these instances because I think it is a sign of something - I am just not sure of what....

                      • Je crois me souvenir qu'il avait ?t? ?mis l'hypoth?se , vu la survie du virus au frois que ces emballages pourraient permettre de dater le d?but et la provenance .

                        Qu'il fasse du travail c'est vrai , mais c'est ?trange il ne parle que des produits des autres ...

                        Comment


                        • Source: https://www.daijiworld.com/news/news...?newsID=776745

                          Experts debunk Chinese scientists' Covid virus India origin claim
                          Mon, Nov 30 2020 05:36:11 PM

                          New Delhi, Nov 30 (IANS): Health experts in India have refuted a claim made by Chinese scientists in a preprint paper that suggests that the Indian subcontinent might be the place where the earliest human-to-human SARS-CoV-2 transmission occurred.

                          The claim contradicts reports that have said that the virus originated in Wuhan in China's Hubei province late last year.

                          "This is a speculative theory without scientific basis," Jyoti Mutta, Senior Consultant, Microbiology, Sri Balaji Action Medical Institute in New Delhi, told IANS.

                          "Any outbreak investigations need to start from where the first case emerged," she said.

                          However, the new paper by scientists in China argues that the Covid-19 outbreak might have occurred in India, "which was three or four months prior to the Wuhan outbreak".

                          "Furthermore, based on the SARS-CoV-2's mutation rate, we estimate that the earliest SARS-CoV-2 transmission in human hosts could be traced back to July or August of 2019," the scientists wrote in the paper.

                          The new theory sprouts at a time when when the World Health Organization announced the start of the long-awaited investigation into the source of the virus responsible for Covid-19...

                          Comment


                          • Ce serait bien pour les Chinois de nous rendre accessible le dossier rat des bambous dans tous ses d?tails. Cette producttion subventionn?e a ?t?, avec subvention, stopp?e , mais on sait quoi de ce qui se trouvait dans ces ?levages ?

                            Les virus trouv?s ont ?t? signal? ? L'O.I.E, par exemple ?

                            Je dis cela , car on se demande parfois ce que veut dire le mot v?t?rinaire en Chine ?

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X