That's interesting. And sort of an indirect way of making a bioweapon.
And there is this....
https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backe ... ch-1500741
And there is this....
https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backe ... ch-1500741
So instead of investigating the facts of what happened we get these opinions from researchers that do not bother to try and explain the facts but just give their conclusions.
"All evidence so far points to the fact the COVID-19 virus is naturally derived and not man-made," explains immunologist Nigel McMillan from the Menzies Health Institute Queensland.
"If you were going to design it in a lab the sequence changes make no sense as all previous evidence would tell you it would make the virus worse. No system exists in the lab to make some of the changes found."
Back in late March, we covered a study published in Nature Medicine, in which the researchers investigated the genomic data of SARS-CoV-2 - particularly the receptor-binding domain (RBD) sections of the virus - to try and discover how it mutated into the virulent and deadly version we're currently struggling to contain.
As a by-product of their research, they were able to determine that SARS-CoV-2 was not genetically manipulated.
As for this repush that it came from the market, there have been no additional facts adduced that would counter-act the evidence that the first case was not linked to the market and there were other early cases that were not linked to it as well. And there was the common-sense fact that bats were not sold at the market.
My understanding of the experiments in the Wuhan lab is that they give viruses to Ferrets, who seem to have some similarities to humans. They then allow the virus to mutate in the Ferret, and pass it along to the next Ferret. In this way, the virus isn't "man-made", but it does come from the lab.
"The closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2 is a bat virus named RaTG13, which was kept at the WIV. There is some unfounded speculation that this virus was the origin of SARS-CoV-2," explains University of Sydney evolutionary virologist, Edward Holmes.
"However, RaTG13 was sampled from a different province of China (Yunnan) to where COVID-19 first appeared and the level of genome sequence divergence between SARS-CoV-2 and RaTG13 is equivalent to an average of 50 years (and at least 20 years) of evolutionary change.
(By the way, you can tell by the way Fauci gave his answer he has not carefully looked at this issue, but is just relaying opinions from other researchers.)
Investigate the facts, don't exclude possible theories without a sufficient basis to do so
You ignored the peer-reviewed study of the genetics of the virus that showed that the jump of the virus to humans occurred late last year.
Anyway, it looks to be clear now that when the virus jumped to humans it was already ready-made to infect humans
What experts do agree on is that a pandemic like this is no surprise. Scientists have been warning governments for years that a new disease was on the horizon, and that many countries were woefully under-prepared.
For example, the director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Anthony Fauci, told the incoming US government administration in January 2017 about the inevitability of a "surprise outbreak", urging them to make preparations.
"We've been aware for some time that another coronavirus, like SARS and MERS before it, could cause a pandemic, and so in many ways, the emergence of a new coronavirus with pandemic potential is not a surprise," explains La Trobe University epidemiologist Hassan Vally
. I wonder how that could have happened?
Maybe if there were a lab around that was getting money to do just that..
All evidence so far points to the fact the COVID-19 virus is naturally derived and not man-made," explains immunologist Nigel McMillan from the Menzies Health Institute Queensland.
"If you were going to design it in a lab the sequence changes make no sense as all previous evidence would tell you it would make the virus worse. No system exists in the lab to make some of the changes found."
Back in late March, we covered a study published in Nature Medicine, in which the researchers investigated the genomic data of SARS-CoV-2 - particularly the receptor-binding domain (RBD) sections of the virus - to try and discover how it mutated into the virulent and deadly version we're currently struggling to contain.
As a by-product of their research, they were able to determine that SARS-CoV-2 was not genetically manipulated.
The project proposal states: "We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential."
In layman's terms, "spillover potential" refers to the ability of a virus to jump from animals to humans, which requires that the virus be able to attach to receptors in the cells of humans. SARS-CoV-2, for instance, is adept at binding to the ACE2 receptor in human lungs and other organ
rayjayMy understanding of the experiments in the Wuhan lab is that they give viruses to Ferrets, who seem to have some similarities to humans. They then allow the virus to mutate in the Ferret, and pass it along to the next Ferret. In this way, the virus isn't "man-made", but it does come from the lab.
Your source?
There is no published record of animal-passage work on coronaviruses in the Wuhan Institute. The lab got its first BSL-4 lab in 2018, which is now considered a requirement for this kind of work (though some work proceeds in BSL-3-enhanced labs). It's possible that researchers started animal passage work in the BSL-4 lab but didn't finish it in time to publish before the current pandemic, when China tightened up on publications. It's possible that the work was done in secret. It's possible that it never happened at all. But some scientists think it's unlikely that an expensive BSL-4 lab would not be doing animal-passage research, which by 2018 was not unusual.
Just as I suspected. Ferrets ACE2 receptor interacts well with the SARs virus, making it a good candidate if you wanted to come up with ways to try and make a coronoavirus more infectious to humans...
Influenza is a human pathogen that continues to pose a public health threat. The use of small mammalian models has become indispensable for understanding the virulence of influenza viruses. Among numerous species used in the laboratory setting, only the ferret model is equally well suited for studying both the pathogenicity and transmissibility of human and avian influenza viruses.
Great. But what's pertinent here is that they had a grant to do gain-in-function research on coronaviruses..
From what I have read, there is no proof this has even happened once. Or that the research has been beneficial at all. Except for employing researchers...
EcoHealth Alliance says the terminated research “aimed to analyze the risk of coronavirus emergence and help in designing vaccines and drugs to protect us from COVID-19 and other coronavirus threats,” and that it addresses “all four strategic research priorities of the NIH/NIAID Strategic Plan for COVID-19 Research, released just this week.” The organization will, it says, “continue our fight against this and other emerging diseases.”