• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

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

Mary, that statement doesn't address the lab leak theory. They do seem to politely question the frozen food theory, (as in common commercial frozen foods, not exotic susceptibles.) This post would be better in that thread about the WHO team visit, but I can't find that right now.
 
Lot's of emerging pathogen danger there - ethical, too. Just like GOF work it will be pretty much self-regulated.
 
https://www.desmoinesregister.com/s...c-world-health-organization-china/7206841002/
Opinion: Why we need to know the origin of COVID-19
The Chinese government owes the world complete transparency at the Wuhan lab. We need to know how to make virus research as safe as possible.
Greg Ganske
Guest columnist
April 15, 2021

We are now 16 months into the most serious global pandemic since the Spanish flu of 1919, and we still don?t know the origin of the virus. If we want to prevent the next epidemic, it is vital to find out. However, these efforts are mired in politics and incomplete information.

In the critical first weeks of the pandemic, Beijing suppressed essential information and prevented World Health Organization investigators from entering the country. When a Chinese biologist courageously posted the sequenced genome of the virus online, his lab was shut down for ?rectification.?..
 
Last but not least: Where did SARS-2 come from?

Analysis of the genetic sequences of SARS-2 viruses retrieved from some of the earliest people known to have been infected suggests the virus started transmitting among people sometime in the autumn of 2019. The original source of the virus is almost certainly a bat, but how did a bat virus find its way into humans? Were pangolins or mink or other wild animals sold as exotic foods in China?s wet markets the spark for the worst pandemic in a century?

Inquiring minds want to know ? and not just for curiosity?s sake. Knowing the virus? route will help the world prepare for future outbreaks. Research shows there are lots of bat coronaviruses we haven?t yet met.

A panel of international experts traveled to China earlier this year to dig into the question, but so far hasn?t come to a firm conclusion. Whether it ever will remains to be seen. Koopmans, of Erasmus Medical Center, was a member of the commission. She submitted several questions, the last of which was simply ?The origin ? of course.?

Kuppalli, the infectious diseases physician at the Medical University of South Carolina, said the opportunity to answer this key question could slip away, noting: ?The longer we get away from the start of the pandemic the harder it will be to find out these answers.?

https://www.statnews.com/2021/04/20...uU-lpmiHzNLgZGrcCR9_DyxHH7prAHi8vdEEzT_Slyp54
 
Coronavirus origins: how unseen Wuhan research notes could hold the answers ? and why lab-leak rumours refuse to die
...
Published: 6:30am, 10 Apr, 2021
...
The genetic analysis done by Shi?s team last year should have laid to rest any questions concerning a link between Covid-19 and the bat coronaviruses being researched in her Wuhan lab. Except that it did not.

Actions taken by China?s government in the wake of the virus outbreak were part of the reason for this, Gregory Koblentz, director of the Biodefence Graduate Programme at George Mason University in Virginia, said in a phone interview.

In February last year, the State Council ? China?s cabinet ? ordered that all research related to Covid-19 required government approval before publication, effectively imposing a gag order on the nation?s scientists.
...
China?s biosafety labs are inspected by the China National Accreditation Service for Conformity Assessment (CNAS) in Beijing, which also falls under the purview of the State Council.

An employee at CNAS who declined to be identified said by phone that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was classified as a ?secret institute?, so its audits were only available to specially authorised employees.

?We signed a privacy agreement with the Wuhan institute so documents relating to laboratory audits cannot usually be shared with third parties,? he said, giving a number for an authorised official in another department. Four phone calls to that number over several days went unanswered. Three phone calls to the CNAS public relations office were also not answered.
...
Professor Wanda Markotter, director of the Centre for Viral Zoonoses at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, said cover-ups of lab accidents could be revealed via individual interviews that exposed inconsistencies between researchers? accounts.

?Usually if you speak to different people alone at some point you will get a feeling if something was covered up, because people can?t say exactly the same thing if they are not in the same room. That immediately tells you if you think it?s worth doing an audit,? she said, adding that randomised individual interviews needed to be conducted for this approach to be considered credible.

WHO-appointed mission member Dr Dominic Dwyer, a professor of immunology and infectious diseases at the University of Sydney, made no mention of individual interviews conducted during the four-hour visit to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
?We spoke to the scientists there,? Dwyer, who did not respond to an emailed request for comment, wrote in a February 23 article published in The Conversation.
...
French data scientist Gilles Demaneuf, who helped organise the March and April open letters, said the Wuhan Institute of Virology shut down its online database holding thousands of genetic sequences for bat coronaviruses in September 2019 ? about three months before the city recorded its first Covid-19 cases.
...
Koblentz, the biosecurity specialist, said it was unusual for such a database to be taken offline and never restored, as cybersecurity breaches were usually fixed after companies or government agencies detected a hacking attack.

?Cutting off researchers from this database that had such high demand previously is not consistent with the way governments and labs usually run their operations,? he said.
...
Getting to the bottom of what happened in Wuhan before the Covid-19 pandemic began has so far proved elusive, but some of the most experienced scientists interviewed for this story suggested a fairly straightforward solution to exploring the lab-leak theory: laboratory notebooks.

Biochemist Milton Leitenberg, a senior research fellow at the Centre for International and Security Studies at Maryland since 1989, said such notebooks were a researcher?s first recourse ?if anyone challenges your data?.
...
Juergen Richt, director of the Centre of Excellence for Emerging and Zoonotic Animal Diseases at Kansas State University, echoed this point and added a suggestion of his own for the labs of Wuhan.

?Make all your experimental work performed in the past years as well as your laboratory notebooks available to the WHO inspectors and selected BSL-4, coronavirus experts around the world,? he said. ?It?s that simple.?

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/healt...ch-notes-could
 
Translation Google

Exclusive | Joint Expert on New Coronavirus Traceability: Tan Desai's remarks are extremely irresponsible

2021-04-20 16:30:48?

Recently, the World Health Organization officially released the China-WHO Joint Research Report on the Traceability of the New Coronavirus, announcing the main findings, research conclusions, and next work recommendations of the China-WHO joint expert group's investigation in Wuhan. That night, at the briefing for member states held by WHO, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that the report?s assessment of ?laboratory leakage is extremely unlikely? was not sufficient, and further research was needed to prepare a dispatch to cover relevant areas. When experts go to China, WHO believes that all assumptions are still open. Tan Desai also said that the expert group also complained to him about difficulties in obtaining raw data.

In response to Tan Desai?s remarks, an expert from the joint expert group who asked not to be named expressed surprise and dissatisfaction. The expert said that it is not clear how Director General Tedros studied and understood this report, and that he would make such a statement in the face of a large number of scientific facts and expert consensus. Experts explained that the argument of "laboratory leaks" was originally an argument without scientific basis. This is almost the consensus of international scientists, "it is common sense." However, in the spirit of the supremacy of science and a highly responsible attitude towards the traceability work, the joint expert group conducted serious research on the relevant hypotheses of the laboratory. There are no more than two speculations about the laboratory, one is artificial synthesis, and the second is leakage. The problem of artificial synthesis has long been confirmed by scientists around the world that it is impossible with existing technical conditions. The basic premise of the leakage is that the laboratory in China has stored the virus before. "Since the laboratory cannot synthesize the virus, how can it be leaked?" This time the joint expert team visited the Wuhan Virus Institute, Hubei Province and Wuhan City Disease Institute. Control centers and other places have learned about laboratory management and operating procedures in detail, held discussions with relevant experts, and even tested the serum antibodies of relevant laboratory staff, and the relevant samples were all negative. These evidences are enough to show once again that the relevant speculation is unfounded. Regarding the issue of raw data, the expert said that the argument about "difficulty in obtaining data" is completely unfounded. Experts from both sides have been studying and analyzing data together in Wuhan, and there is no difference between Chinese and foreign experts in obtaining data. The international expert group fully understands this, and the two sides have also conducted candid exchanges. There is no difficulty as the Director General said on this issue.

The expert also stated that this traceability study is entirely the work of scientists, and the final report is always negotiated and written by a joint expert group. As an authority in the field of global public health, WHO should have more respect for science, awe in science, and take the lead in maintaining the authority of the report. However, Director General Tedros has disregarded the difficult research results and scientific consensus of the experts. This should not be the position of the WHO. The expert revealed that from the exchanges with foreign colleagues, it is obvious that they are under high-level pressure from the United States and the WHO.

?At present, forces with ulterior motives have grabbed the Director General?s statement and questioned the authority and scientific nature of the report,? the expert added, ?the joint experts are very worried about this, and are very dissatisfied. If the global traceability work in the next stage falls into this Deadlock, then the WHO should also be responsible for this."

(Hubei Radio and Television Rong Media News Center reporter Xie Wei, responsible editor Li Xiaohan)


http://news.hbtv.com.cn/p/1965184.html
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coronavirus: Chinese expert rails against WHO chief and Wuhan lab leak theory

Zhuang Pinghui in Beijing
Published: 6:18pm, 21 Apr, 2021

A Chinese scientist on the joint international team investigating the origins of Covid-19 has accused WHO director general Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus of being ?extremely irresponsible? for pursuing the ?lab leak? theory.

The rare public display of discontent ? voiced by an anonymous expert and reported in local state media ? showed how Beijing subtly protested against the World Health Organization?s pursuit of a hypothesis that China preferred to abandon while leaving room not to bruise ties with the UN agency...
...
?There are already forces with ulterior motives seizing on the director general?s statement to question the authority and scientific validity of the report. The joint experts are very worried about it, and even discontent,? the expert said. ?If the next phase of global virus origin tracing is thus stalled because of this, then the WHO should also be held responsible.?
...
Yanzhong Huang, a senior fellow for global health at the Council on Foreign Relations, a New York-based think tank, said that even though it was unclear whether the expert?s view represented the official stance of the Chinese government, publication by a state media outlet showed it had received official approval.
...
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/dipl...-and-wuhan-lab
 
This gentleman should change his tone. If his country has been put in a squeeze position, given his statements, and these words do not help, we can also speak in general.

Origin of Covid-19: the trail of Chinese minks is strengthening
https://reporterre.net/Origine-du-Covid-19-la-piste-des-visons-chinois-se-renforce

His country spends its time making arrangements omissions and worse. However, we need shared rules on many subjects.

But what can be done other than with reinforced and systematic protocols, when this country accumulates lies?
 
EXCLUSIVE: Classified study found COVID-19 could have originated in Chinese lab

by JAMES ROSEN, The National DeskMonday, May 3rd 2021

WASHINGTON (SBG) - A classified study of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 conducted a year ago by scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the Department of Energy?s premier biodefense research institution, concluded the novel coronavirus at the heart of the current pandemic may have originated in a laboratory in China, Sinclair has learned.

Researchers at Livermore?s ?Z Division,? the lab?s intelligence unit, issued the report May 27, 2020, classified ?Top Secret.? Its existence is previously undisclosed. The Z Division report assessed that both the lab-origin theory and the zoonotic theory were plausible and warranted further investigation. Sinclair has not reviewed the report but confirmed its contents through interviews with multiple sources who read it or were briefed on its contents.

In an email to Sinclair, a Livermore spokesperson confirmed the existence of the report but declined to provide additional information. ?Because the report you are referring to is classified,? wrote Lynda Seaver, director of public affairs, ?it would be inappropriate for our lab to discuss this.?
...
Asked about the Z Division report, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-TX), ranking member on the House foreign affairs committee, declined to comment on classified material but emphasized the need for further study. ?From what I have seen and read, you absolutely cannot dismiss the notion that the WIV lab is a potential source of the virus,? McCaul said in a statement to Sinclair. ?And if you listen to the leaders in the previous and current administrations, they have said exactly the same thing.?
...
One individual said to have been intimately involved in the preparation of the Z Division report is Dr. David J. Rakestraw, a senior science adviser who formerly ran LLNL?s biodefense programs and has been coordinating the lab?s technical response to COVID-19.

?We?ve been putting a large amount of focus for the last six years on using the computational resources at LLNL to try to accelerate the timescales for developing a response to an emerging biological threat,? Rakestraw said in a Livermore press release early in the pandemic. ?That effort has put us in a position where we have tools now that are applicable to helping with the current response.?
...
Its existence unknown to most Americans ? even to some inside the intelligence community ? Z Division was created in 1965 to study Soviet nuclear weapons programs. According to The U.S. Intelligence Community (2008 ed.), authored by the late Jeffrey T. Richelson, an intelligence historian and senior fellow at George Washington University?s National Security Archive, the division expanded its focus to include biological and chemical weapons programs. A 2006 job ad for the unit sought a biomedical scientist ?with a background in virology, microbiology, immunology, epidemiologyor other areas of science and medicine relevant to Biological Weapons issues.?
...
https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/...covid-19-could-have-originated-in-chinese-lab
 
On the Origin of SARS-CoV-2: Did Cell Culture Experiments Lead to Increased Virulence of the Progenitor Virus for Humans?

BERND KAINA
In Vivo May 2021, 35 (3) 1313-1326; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/invivo.12384
Abstract


We are currently in a rapidly expanding pandemic of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which originated in the city of Wuhan in central China. The disease COVID-19 is now spread worldwide and has tremendous socio-economic consequences. The origin of the virus can be reconstructed through epidemiological studies and, even more so, from genome comparisons. How the evolution of the virus and the transition to humans might have happened is the subject of much speculation. It is considered certain that the virus is of animal origin and very likely passed from bats to humans in a zoonotic eve..nt. An intermediate host was postulated, but many SARS-like bat viruses have the ability to infect human cells directly, which has been shown experimentally by scientists in the Wuhan Institute of Virology using collected specimens containing virus material from horseshoe bats. The propagation of SARS-like bat viruses in cell culture allowed experiments aimed at increasing the infectivity of the virus and adaptation to human cells. This article summarizes the unique properties of SARS-CoV-2 and focusses on a specific sequence encoding the spike protein. Possible scenarios of virus evolution are discussed, with particular emphasis on the hypothesis that the virus could have emerged unintentionally through routine culture or gain-of-function experiments in a laboratory, where it was optimally adapted to human cells and caused cryptic infections among workers who finally spread the virus causing the pandemic.

...
Summary and Conclusion


The current COVID-19 pandemic caused by the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus has already caused immeasurable suffering and economic damage, and its long-term socio-economic impact cannot yet be assessed. Never before has an event caused more death and long-term suffering, and the associated crisis management brought trade, traffic, travel, social activities and even family contacts to a standstill. Therefore, the question of how this pandemic came about and when the primary zoonotic event took place is important to answer in order to be able to prevent further zoonotic events of this kind.

Although it was initially believed that the virus could not be transmitted from person to person, the opposite soon turned out. The intensity of the wave of infection is favored by the high infectivity of the virus, by symptom-free carriers and, in symptomatic cases, by a symptom-free period lasting several days. It is considered as certain that SARS-CoV-2 is of bat origin and that there must have been gain of function events through insertions and point mutations by which adaptation of the predecessor virus occurred to human cells equipped with the ACE2 receptor, with neuropilin-1 and the proteases furin and TMPRSS2, all of which are ideally suited for an optimal virus entry into human cells.

SARS-CoV-2 has the greatest similarity in the nucleic acid and amino acid sequence to a virus (RaTG13) that has been isolated from swabs of bats, endemic in central China, at the Institute of Virology in Wuhan and propagated there in cell culture. Although critical sequences in the spike protein, in particular the insertion of a twelve-nucleotide section in the polybasic cleavage site, could have been acquired naturally, for example through recombination events with a SARS-like corona virus harboring the same sequence, it is highly unliklely that the selection occurred in bats or in an intermediate animal host. However, a scenario seems likely, according to which the selection for a highly infectious agent took place in human cells, notably in cell culture, as a byproduct of virus propagation and experimental work. Sequence comparison revealed that the insert creating the PCS/furine cleavage site is partially identical to an insert in the spike gene of MERS-CoV. Based on this, the hypothesis was proposed that during coinfection of human cells equipped with ACE2 and DPP4, RaTG13 (or a similar progenitor) gained the sequence from MERS-CoV (or a similar virus harboring the sequence) by recombination, through which it became better propagating in vitro, which is beneficial for the experimentation (selection for high virus titer). At the same time the infectivity of the virus was enhanced allowing unintentional, cryptic infections of employees, which was the starting point for the pandemic.

Furthermore, the possibility that the progenitor virus was propagated in human ACE2 transgenic animals, which would accelerate human adaptation, should also be considered. At this point it should be remembered that releases of pathogenic viruses from the laboratory have already happened, which was a matter of serious concern in China years ago. Back in 2003, in Kunming (province Yunnan), a hantavirus outbreak occurred, and it was attributed to laboratory rats in which two hantavirus strains multiplied and generated a new type of virus through recombination. Students who had worked with the animals became infected with this. The authors of the report (published in 2010) concluded prophetically that ?This study sends a timely warning that laboratory exposure remains an important source of hantavirus infection in China and that new strains continue to emerge via reassortment and recombination of the RNA genome segments? (47). There is no reason to believe that the same cannot happen with other virus strains. The coincidence of the outbreak of the disease COVID-19 in Wuhan and intensive ongoing work with SARS-like viruses at a research institute located there, housing the largest corona virus bank in Asia, has also sparked the public discussion whether gain-of-function experiments contributed to the pandemic. Even though evidence is lacking that the virus was intentionally genetically engineered, the possibility that the virus could have emerged unintentionally through laboratory experiments should lead to a rethinking of the need for gain-of-function experiments aimed at enhancing the pathogenicity of a disease-causing agent.

...
https://iv.iiarjournals.org/content/35/3/1313
 
A very beautiful text which must be very close to the truth.

It is a shame to know that the wrongdoers in the United States and China are still covered with honors when they have produced such a mass of suffering, because the presidents of these two super powers cover them.

This shame must be partly shared by all those scientists who knew and did not say anything for x or y reasons.

These practices were prohibited in the USA, which is why one of the culprits financed their realization in China.

But now, what can we do ?

If these two presidents have no honor, nothing will change.

Scientists must be protected, but they must have real ethics, which, in this case, is totally false ...

internet a de la m?moire ...

 
https://www.lbc.co.uk/news/coronavirus-escaped-from-lab-mi6-chief/
Exclusive
'Far more likely' coronavirus came from lab, ex-MI6 chief tells LBC

2 May 2021, 11:54 | Updated: 2 May 2021, 12:03
Coronavirus was more likely to have escaped from a lab than to have come from an animal, the former head of MI6 has told LBC.

Sir Richard Dearlove said aspects of the virus "point in the direction of it being somewhat tailored" though he warned this may never be proven.

The former "C" of the Secret Intelligence Service ? equivalent to "M" in James Bond ? also told LBC's Tom Swarbrick that more information on the coronavirus' origin will soon come out.

Some have theorised the coronavirus could have escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Work to establish the origin of the virus is ongoing.

Sir Richard, who headed up the spy agency between 1999 and 2004, told Tom the World Health Organisation's report, which said a lab leak was highly unlikely but further work was needed, was a "farcical investigation"...
 
I wrote the text thinking about this
"it is the one who says it who is"

This situation: 50%, 50%, due to intense work cancels out the possibilities of procedures, which is a plus.

But, that does not wash away honor, and above all, it sends "human rights" back to the abyss.

Is this the least worst of the solutions: I have doubts, because evoking human rights is a tool that is certainly boring a lot, we have known for a long time.

This will be the post crisis phase?
 
Back
Top Bottom