zlacker

[return to "The origin of Covid: Did people or nature open Pandora’s box?"]
1. Bayesi+M41[view] [source] 2021-05-07 13:24:25
>>datafl+(OP)
The origin of COVID-19 is going to be one of the biggest news stories in 2021-22 IMO. China's global reputation is going to take a hit. I don't think they did this intentionally. I think everyone had the best of intentions and either they found something deep in a bat cave or there was a lab mishap. I've gone down the rabbit hole on this issue. Here are some interesting links https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=R01AI110964&hl=en&as_sd... is the papers done by a NIH grant to Eco Health Alliance. This shows they were looking for new variants of Coronavirus at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7089274/pdf/114... This shows they were artificially synthesizing Coronaviruses and incubating them in monkey cells. Dr. Peter Daszak seems to be in the center of a lot of this and IMO had a conflict of interest being on the WHO COVID-19 origins report.
◧◩
2. zby+g81[view] [source] 2021-05-07 13:46:49
>>Bayesi+M41
I thought you misrepresented the linked paper - as it was clearly about checking some cross-immunity and not recombining genes - but then I found out deeper in the abstract:

""" Since SHC014 could not be success fully isolated, a recombinant virus (rWIV1-SHC014S) was constructed based on the WIV1 backbone with the replacement of SHC014S gene, as described previously (Zengetal.,2016). The S sequence of SHC014 was amplified with primer pair (F-SHC014-Bsa I, 5′-AGTGGTCTCAACGAA-CATGAAATTGTTAGTTTTAGTTTTTGCTAC-3′ and R-SHC014-Bsa I, 5′-TCAGGTCTCAGTTCGTTTATGTG-TAATGTAATTTGACACCCTTG-3′), digested with BsaI, and inserted into an artificial bacterial chromosome along with the other viral cDNA fragments."""

◧◩◪
3. xjlin0+Pf1[view] [source] 2021-05-07 14:28:19
>>zby+g81
Recombination virus is commonly made everywhere, including US or China. Researchers made it mostly for getting genes for later use, antibody/antigen analysis in this case. Using virus/BAC is a very common lab technique and is very different from "intentionally making virus as a weapon to kill human". You can reconfirm with any of your wet-lab biotech majored friends. Please run an sequence analysis between rWIV1-SHC014S and the current COVID-19 virus before drawing misleading conclusion.

One analogy for developers: Bad persons are using git to develop ransomware, and company X is also using git, therefore company X is developing ransomware.

◧◩◪◨
4. flaviu+Ep1[view] [source] 2021-05-07 15:19:50
>>xjlin0+Pf1
you are right, except sars-cov-2 happened to appear 500 meters away from said lab...
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. searin+Gg2[view] [source] 2021-05-07 19:50:27
>>flaviu+Ep1
Maybe the reason the lab exists there is because wild coronaviruses appear in that region.

Which ever way you frame it, it is correlation, not causation. Poor evidence at best.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. flaviu+Ej4[view] [source] 2021-05-08 15:31:29
>>searin+Gg2
SARS1 appeared in China, 2 provinces over, so quite far. And I was not talking necessarily about the Hubei region, but about the proximity of the first case to the lab: half a mile. City of Wuhan has a population of 11 million. The Hubei province has a population of 58 million.

Out of all the wet markets that serve that much population, the coronavirus just happened to appear at the market nearest to the lab studying coronaviruses. To have such a coincidence is like winning the lottery.

It's not evidence, sure, it's correlation at best. But this alone should make you investigate that lab much much better, it should be the first possible cause you research.

But looking at the lab first might be hard if you have a severe conflict of interest https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4119101

I am not saying this to "make China pay". After all, the US itself was sponsoring coronavirus research at that lab. But we should establish a worldwide safety standard in dealing with such research, and establish periodical inspections. Just like we do with Nuclear power plants, only better.

[go to top]