Chinese Virologist post report claiming virus made in Wuhan lab

Thanks for posting and it's a good piece. It's not definitive though and Anderson acknowledges the possibility that the virus could've been a gain of function experiment and could've escaped. One thing this piece does address is the idea that somehow because the lab is in the PRC it is technologically inferior than other labs. The PRC can and does have technology as good as the US.

This piece does go to another issue that the PRC's own penchant for secrecy and lack of transparency has actually strengthened the belief that the virus was released from the lab either deliberately or accidentally. That they didn't open and fully cooperate with outside investigators has made it harder to argue that they have state of the art facilities and procedures that could contain such things.

Finally it is sad but not surprising that Anderson is getting death threats. This is how polarizing and political the situation is and again why we might never actually get to the true origins of the disease.

 

Not just technically inferior but less safe - both are likely very bad assumptions by the common man and the media.

China should be under coordinated international pressure about lack of access and transparency on covid as it impacts everyone and the world economy.

I thought there was a lack of leadership that stood up to China.

The initial pro-China message that later turns into a political anti-China message from the Trump admin publicly, while privately not pushing them was a huge mistake. I thought they should give China wiggle room to save face publicly but push them privately and economically along with other nations on allowing access and being transparent.

On matters of huge global economic impact, we should have access to each other data not just for early 2019, but all future events as a norm - make it a requirement for all global trade partners. We need this to help slow or stop future pandemics (I think very possible with technological advancement with real-time data). And knowing the origin isn't to punish but to help prevent future pandemics and global economic collapse.

I wished we had good global leader that could help coordinate a global response to China's lack of access and transparency in 2019. As it stands, the opportunity out of this crisis is probably lost forever - business as usual until the next global crisis.

 

A lot of this was due to how poor Trump was at international relations particularly when it came to multilateral institutions like the WHO. Trump early on started touting "The China Virus" and had already gone after the WHO. Many in other countries felt like that taking a hard line meant siding with Trump and felt that would've done more damage to their reputations and an international response to fighting the disease.

 

True, the well was poisoned. Traditionally in the last century, the US would take the lead role. Trump doesn't have the respect, reputation or capability to lead a coordinated multi-nations response.

 

I didn't believe the labs were less inferior, more like they cut corners and flaunted rules their Western counterparts tried to instill into them during training. The same rules their prominent researchers started brushing off in interviews as if they were masters who evolved past those protocols.

Also, the discussion about transparency is moot since China got away with their stonewalling and will not face any form of official reprimand. WHO, who desperately needed their access and funding, pretty much let China write their official response three or four months into the pandemic.

Even our researchers were mostly mum on criticism because China dangled first hand data and research (completely complied genome) to the point where if they did talk publicly, they took the stance of "unity to solve the problem rather than pointing blame" or some boilerplate response like "science shouldn't be political". Well the ****ing idiots who were responsible had their nationalism get in front of their work, which was presumably science...

It's absolutely sick and ridiculous the **** we have to tolerate because they're hellbent on saving any form of face even if it means sinking everyone else.

 

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/07/gaining-depth-on-gain-of-function.php

POSTED ON JULY 22, 2021 BY SCOTT JOHNSON IN CORONAVIRUS
GAINING DEPTH ON GAIN OF FUNCTION
Yesterday I posted “The fallacious Fauci strikes again.” My comments elicited a message from Michael S. Rogers, Assistant Professor of Surgery at Harvard Medical School and Research Associate in the Vascular Biology Program at Boston Children’s Hospital. I thought some readers might find it of interest. With his permission I am posting his message below the break.

* * * * *

The question of whether the 2017 PLoS Pathogens paper contains gain of function experiments has recently been in the news. Since I have significant experience (30 years) in the recombinant DNA techniques in question, I thought I might lay out what was done in the experiments and let you decide.

Using a firearms analogy, here’s what they did. They had a bunch of new lower receivers (Spike genes) for AR-15s (SARS-like coronaviruses) and wanted to know whether they could fire full-auto (infect human cells). They knew that if they tried each of them on a semi-automatic AR-15, they might wind up with an automatic weapon and would thereby violate the National Firearms Act (perform gain of function research). However, they already had a full-auto M16 (a virus called WIV1). So instead, they took each of the lower receivers and put it into their M16 to see if it could still shoot full auto. In two cases it could and in 6 cases it couldn’t.

What is more interesting about this paper is that it debunks most of the “the virus couldn’t have been made in a lab” papers. To use the gun analogy, it’s as if outside “experts” are saying “they couldn’t have made a new gun, there are no tool marks” while in this paper the authors show that they know how to make a gun without leaving tool marks. Here’s how. The papers from outside experts assume that a new virus would be made by restriction enzyme technology that leaves “scars” (4-8 base pair palindromes) where two pieces were joined.

Those papers look for the scars and, finding none, declare that the virus couldn’t be man-made. However, there are newer “scarless” cloning techniques (Gateway cloning, Gibson assembly, etc.) that don’t leave such marks. In this paper, the authors use one of these techniques (Gateway cloning) to put the new Spike genes into WIV1. Of course, the fact that it could have been done doesn’t mean that it was done.

Now, for more details on what was done with the potential gain of function experiments. Here’s the paper. In figure S7, the authors take the Spike gene (the part of the virus that attaches to cells and injects the viral RNA) from 8 newly-discovered bat SARS-like coronaviruses and puts them into a BAC (bacterial artificial chromosome) that codes for WIV1.

These new BACs are then introduced into cells where they generate “live” virus. This virus is then tested on human (HeLa) and monkey (Vero) cells to see if they can be infected. Two of the 8 new viruses were able to infect human cells as evidence by the red color (indicating the presence of virus protein) in the relevant panels in figure S7B. Whether this is gain-of-function research depends critically on the characteristics of WIV1. As is evident from both the control experiment in the paper (figure 7A, top row, note the red in the cells) and the authors’ 2013 Nature paper (Figure 4, Nature 503:535–538 ) WIV1 can infect human, bat, and civet cells.

Hope this helps.
​

 

New Data Leads To Rethinking (Once More) Where The Pandemic Actually Began

Outbreak Expert Points To Huanan Market Origin For Pandemic, Citing New Data : Goats and Soda : NPR

Back in May, a group of scientists — many at the top of the virology field — shifted the debate about the origins of COVID-19. They published a letter in the journal Science saying the lab-leak theory needs to be taken more seriously by the scientific community.

Given the current evidence available, the scientists wrote, the outbreak is just as likely to have originated from a laboratory — specifically the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which studies coronaviruses — as from an infected animal. "We must take hypotheses about both natural and laboratory spillovers seriously until we have sufficient data," they concluded.

Now one of the scientists who signed that letter says new data has come to light. And that information, summarized in an online review, has changed his thinking.

...

And so, given the data available right now, he believes the most likely scenario is that the pandemic started at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, not the lab. "It does seem a pretty weird coincidence that [a big outbreak occurs] at one of four places in Wuhan that sells things like civets and raccoon dogs, which are the likely suspects as intermediaries to SARS-CoV-2."

But if new data comes to light tomorrow, his thinking may shift again, Worobey says. That, in many ways, is the way science works.

 

Somebody quick post Brand's grade in his HS Intro to Bio.

You can tell when Brand speaks that he is a smart fellow. But what he saying now is just dumb. One can not help but think he is posting these anti-vax and anti-science and anti-government videos to build his youtube following.

 

So anyone still not accepting the lab origin is true? Or likely true? Curious. I feel like a lot of ppl got quiet in this thread. Hm...

 

Thank the Gods that they did not reproduce.

 

They got quiet because they all bashed Trump and called him a xenophobe when he had the balls to say he will hold China responsible for what they did.

 

All talk. No cattle.

 

is CNBC an approved source? need a ruling @T_Man

 

Somebody quick, post Bill Gate's (vax pusher/world depopulation advocate) grade in Bio! Also while you're at it, post his college and doctorate degrees (not his "honorary" ones)!