hat tip FrenchieGirl
Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated
Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation
of Its Probable Synthetic Route
Li-Meng Yan (MD, PhD)1, Shu Kang (PhD)1, Jie Guan (PhD)1, Shanchang Hu (PhD)1
1
Rule of Law Society & Rule of Law Foundation, New York, NY, USA.
Correspondence:
team.lmyan@gmail.com
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has led to over 910,000 deaths
worldwide and unprecedented decimation of the global economy. Despite its tremendous impact, the
origin of SARS-CoV-2 has remained mysterious and controversial. The natural origin theory, although
widely accepted, lacks substantial support.
The alternative theory that the virus may have come from a
research laboratory is, however, strictly censored on peer-reviewed scientific journals.
Nonetheless, SARS-CoV-2 shows biological characteristics that are inconsistent with a naturally occurring, zoonotic
virus.
In this report, we describe the genomic, structural, medical, and literature evidence, which, when
considered together, strongly contradicts the natural origin theory.
The evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 should be a laboratory product created by using bat coronaviruses
ZC45 and/or ZXC21 as a template and/or backbone. Building upon the evidence, we further postulate a
synthetic route for SARS-CoV-2, demonstrating that the laboratory-creation of this coronavirus is convenient
and can be accomplished in approximately six months.
Our work emphasizes the need for an independent investigation into the relevant research laboratories.
It also argues for a critical look into certain recently published data, which,
albeit problematic, was used to support and claim a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2. From a public health
perspective, these actions are necessary as knowledge of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 and of how the virus
entered the human population are of pivotal importance in the fundamental control of the COVID-19
pandemic as well as in preventing similar, future pandemics.
1. Has SARS-CoV-2 been subjected to in vitro manipulation?
We present three lines of evidence to support our contention that laboratory manipulation is part of the
history of SARS-CoV-2:
i. The genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 is suspiciously similar to that of a bat coronavirus
discovered by military laboratories in the Third Military Medical University (Chongqing, China)
and the Research Institute for Medicine of Nanjing Command (Nanjing, China).
ii. The receptor-binding motif (RBM) within the Spike protein of SARS-CoV-2, which determines
the host specificity of the virus, resembles that of SARS-CoV from the 2003 epidemic in a
suspicious manner. Genomic evidence suggests that the RBM has been genetically manipulated.
iii. SARS-CoV-2 contains a unique furin-cleavage site in its Spike protein, which is known to greatly
enhance viral infectivity and cell tropism. Yet, this cleavage site is completely absent in this
particular class of coronaviruses found in nature. In addition, rare codons associated with this
additional sequence suggest the strong possibility that this furin-cleavage site is not the product of
natural evolution and could have been inserted into the SARS-CoV-2 genome artificially by
techniques other than simple serial passage or multi-strain recombination events inside co-infected
tissue cultures or animals.
more...
https://www.scribd.com/document/4759...eport#download