COVID may have taken 'convoluted path' to Wuhan, WHO team leader says

[rabas]

9 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Genetic sequencing has been done and it's been proven it wasn't from a lab.

No. You can't prove it didn't escape from a lab without knowing what was in the lab.  What you may mean it is not a chimera virus manufactured by a widely used process that joins parts of two viruses.

 

This process was used by Bat Woman at the Wuhan Virological Institute to create new corona viruses capable of infecting human lung tissue. She published this work with Western co-authors. see here.  Many scientists opine such gain of function experiments are too dangerous.

 

All that was shown is that SARS2 was not made this way.

Edited February 10, 2021 by rabas

[Jeffr2]

1 hour ago, rabas said:

No. You can't prove it didn't escape from a lab without knowing what was in the lab.  What you may mean it is not a chimera virus manufactured by a widely used process that joins parts of two viruses.

 

This process was used by Bat Woman at the Wuhan Virological Institute to create new corona viruses capable of infecting human lung tissue. She published this work with Western co-authors. see here.  Many scientists opine such gain of function experiments are too dangerous.

 

All that was shown is that SARS2 was not made this way.

Yes, we can say it didn't escape from a lab. No credible source says otherwise.

[placnx]

6 hours ago, John Drake said:

This man started his career with WHO in their China office. A total coincidence that he is giving the Chinese a free pass.  

 

Does anyone know what happened to the two people on the WHO team who were not allowed in with the rest of the group. Oddly, at the time their names were not disclosed. I'm still wondering whether they rejoined the group later.

[Elkski]

A big takeaway is that frezzer temps don't not harm the virus.   China thought this to be possible vector.  Thailand is testing seafood trying to maintain exports.  I'm looking at the recent bag of frozen shrimp I bought.  Could be on the outside or inside.   Some more diligence in our future lifestyles maybe needed.   Like ice for drinking in separate freezer compartment.  Wash hands or wear gloves after handling ng frozen products and packages.  Cook foods.  But what about frozen fruits or ice cream?   We are all screwed.  

[DBath]

This whole thing smells worse than a Chinese fish market. What is up with WHO? This seems to me a lot more smoke and mirrors than they put out there in the beginning and has a strong odor of BS. China delayed WHO entry and access for weeks before this recent investigation, yet WHO continues to defend them? I wonder how much of this latest round is in collaboration with China? IMO, China and WHO crafted this story together and WHO is getting big bucks under the table for it. 

[placnx]

22 hours ago, AgMech Cowboy said:

You're right. It was written by a reporter at Reuters who only write the current narrative, which is what they want you to think is true.

 

21 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Yeah. Proves it's not man made. Thanks!

 

Based on its genome sequence, 2019-nCoV belongs to lineage b of Betacoronavirus (Fig. 1A), which also includes the SARS-CoV and bat CoV ZXC21, the latter and CoV ZC45 being the closest to 2019-nCoV. 2019-nCoV shares ~76% amino acid sequence identity in the Spike (S)-protein sequence with SARS-CoV and 80% with CoV ZXC21 (Chan et al., 2020). I

"Man-made" is a confusing term, in that the real issue is whether a natural virus was altered in the lab. This article is comparing the SARS-Cov (2003) and various other Coronaviruses with the 2019 nCoV to try to fix the new virus on the genetic tree. This is a work in progress, made extremely difficult because access is denied to the Wuhan lab's extensive virus collection and experimental results!!

[Jeffr2]

5 hours ago, placnx said:

 

"Man-made" is a confusing term, in that the real issue is whether a natural virus was altered in the lab. This article is comparing the SARS-Cov (2003) and various other Coronaviruses with the 2019 nCoV to try to fix the new virus on the genetic tree. This is a work in progress, made extremely difficult because access is denied to the Wuhan lab's extensive virus collection and experimental results!!

Agreed. But I've yet to see a credible article say the virus came from a lab.

 

In the end. China is 100% to blame. Again.

[Scott]

The WHO investigation will provide leads.  The people doing the intense looking are scientists.  They don't care where it came from; they want to know about the virus and it's origins. 

 

Much of the journey of discovery will be made by graduate students who will look at the chemicals and biological components of the virus and similar viruses from other animals, etc..   Overtime, they will come up with some pretty reasonable feasible ideas.  

 

[tonbridgebrit]

On 2/10/2021 at 3:46 AM, robblok said:

Are we blaming the Brits and Southafricans for the strain that is worse too. If not (and I dont) then stop blaming the Chinese. That is my opinion seems a lot like yours.

 

Its unlikely it came from a lab, if there was a cover up then for sure the US or other countries could prove it. Besides one can see if a virus is made in a lab or not.

 

Unless anyone can prove this was done on purpose then its an accident. We are not blaming Japan for the reactor breach either. I think only die hard anti Chinese people think this is done on purpose. 

And there's a fair number of people in America and Britain who have die hard anti Chinese attitudes. This Corona Virus thing is allowing such people to display their anger and bitterness towards China and Chinese people.

And then there are those who are simply saying that because the bug came from China, well, they want to condemn China for this. There was, off-course, a lot of anti-China sentiment long before this Corona Virus came out.

[placnx]

19 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

Agreed. But I've yet to see a credible article say the virus came from a lab.

 

In the end. China is 100% to blame. Again.

The article which I cited with link does not state unequivocally that the virus came from the Wuhan lab. I just shows that it is possible. Without a whistleblower it would be difficult to prove, since the Chinese are not allowing a real investigation of the activities in that lab.

[Jeffr2]

3 minutes ago, placnx said:

The article which I cited with link does not state unequivocally that the virus came from the Wuhan lab. I just shows that it is possible. Without a whistleblower it would be difficult to prove, since the Chinese are not allowing a real investigation of the activities in that lab.

It's pretty much been proven it didn't come from a lab. Possible. But highly unlikely.

[placnx]

1 minute ago, Jeffr2 said:

It's pretty much been proven it didn't come from a lab. Possible. But highly unlikely.

How do you know that it is "highly unlikely"? If you read that somewhere, it's important to note who said it. To be frank, lab origin is the most plausible explanation.

[Jeffr2]

6 minutes ago, placnx said:

How do you know that it is "highly unlikely"? If you read that somewhere, it's important to note who said it. To be frank, lab origin is the most plausible explanation.

BS. That's a terrible conspiracy theory. No credible source is saying that.

[law ling]

Surely, just because "there's no credible evidence showing it came from the lab" doesn't mean it didn't come from the lab - it just means there's no credible evidence either way?

What is certainly known is that Chinese authorities did hound, proscute and silence doctors who were trying to raise a warning.

[Jeffr2]

15 minutes ago, law ling said:

Surely, just because "there's no credible evidence showing it came from the lab" doesn't mean it didn't come from the lab - it just means there's no credible evidence either way?

What is certainly known is that Chinese authorities did hound, proscute and silence doctors who were trying to raise a warning.

There's very credible evidence it came from human contact with a wild animal. Which one, where and how are up for debate.

[tonbridgebrit]

2 hours ago, placnx said:

How do you know that it is "highly unlikely"? If you read that somewhere, it's important to note who said it. To be frank, lab origin is the most plausible explanation.

 

1 hour ago, law ling said:

Surely, just because "there's no credible evidence showing it came from the lab" doesn't mean it didn't come from the lab - it just means there's no credible evidence either way?

Okay.   https://www.itv.com/news/2021-02-09/covid-extremely-unlikely-coronavirus-came-from-wuhan-lab-in-china-says-world-health-organisation

A whole load of other news channels and newspapers have repeated the same story as above.
From the article.   "Covid-19 is “extremely unlikely” to have first spread to humans in a lab-related leak or incident, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). " 
And “The findings suggest lab incident hypothesis is extremely unlikely to explain the introduction of the virus into the human population,” Dr Peter Ben Embarek, leader of the WHO’s investigating team said.

So, who is saying that it is extremely unlikely that it came from a lab-related leak or incident ?  It's the WHO team who are saying this. A number of people are trying to say that, China bribed the WHO team, in order to get them to say this. This is basically a very dangerous accusation. If it is the case that the accusation is true, well, yes, planet earth must scrap the WHO. And also, Trump was correct to pull America out of the WHO. Now, most of us accept that Trump was wrong to undermine the WHO with his comments and actions ? Surely.

Edited February 12, 2021 by tonbridgebrit

[teacherclaire]

China has pushed the idea that the virus can be transmitted by frozen food and has repeatedly announced findings of coronavirus traces on imported food packaging.

 

If my aunt would have what I have, it would be my uncle. 

[rabas]

1 hour ago, Jeffr2 said:

There's very credible evidence it came from human contact with a wild animal. Which one, where and how are up for debate.

Can you provide very credible evidence showing this virus came from a human-animal contact not related to the Wuhan lab?

What if the contact was between a Wuhan lab worker and and experimental bat in the lab?

What if Wuhan researchers contracted the virus during their recent July-October 2019 field trip to gather more viruses? They claimed to find 277 new ones, one even closer to SARS2 than earlier ones. 97.2% they said.

 

I'll provide some counter evidence. Chinese researchers claimed that humans living near those caves are able to directly contract CoV  from bats without an intermediate host.

 

https://www.virosin.org/en/article/doi/10.1007/s12250-018-0012-7

Edited February 12, 2021 by rabas

[Jeffr2]

1 hour ago, rabas said:

Can you provide very credible evidence showing this virus came from a human-animal contact not related to the Wuhan lab?

What if the contact was between a Wuhan lab worker and and experimental bat in the lab?

What if Wuhan researchers contracted the virus during their recent July-October 2019 field trip to gather more viruses? They claimed to find 277 new ones, one even closer to SARS2 than earlier ones. 97.2% they said.

 

I'll provide some counter evidence. Chinese researchers claimed that humans living near those caves are able to directly contract CoV  from bats without an intermediate host.

 

https://www.virosin.org/en/article/doi/10.1007/s12250-018-0012-7

It's entirely possible a human got it directly from a bat. Could have been from a worker from that lab. But it wasn't manufactured there.

[placnx]

20 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

 

Okay.   https://www.itv.com/news/2021-02-09/covid-extremely-unlikely-coronavirus-came-from-wuhan-lab-in-china-says-world-health-organisation

A whole load of other news channels and newspapers have repeated the same story as above.
From the article.   "Covid-19 is “extremely unlikely” to have first spread to humans in a lab-related leak or incident, according to the World Health Organization (WHO). " 
And “The findings suggest lab incident hypothesis is extremely unlikely to explain the introduction of the virus into the human population,” Dr Peter Ben Embarek, leader of the WHO’s investigating team said.

So, who is saying that it is extremely unlikely that it came from a lab-related leak or incident ?  It's the WHO team who are saying this. A number of people are trying to say that, China bribed the WHO team, in order to get them to say this. This is basically a very dangerous accusation. If it is the case that the accusation is true, well, yes, planet earth must scrap the WHO. And also, Trump was correct to pull America out of the WHO. Now, most of us accept that Trump was wrong to undermine the WHO with his comments and actions ? Surely.

I don't remember anyone on this site claiming that WHO team members were bribed. You might not be aware that several members have conflicts due to their activities with Batwoman or long-standing relationships in China which could affect their objectivity.

 

Is it even clear who all was on the foreign team? It's reported that there were 14 people, but in the end did they all get past immigration? If we knew who was on the team, then we could discuss the likelihood of their objectivity.

 

Ben Embarek has a PhD in food safety from the Royal Agricultural and Veterinary University of Copenhagen.

 

Regrettably, since the beginning WHO does not have a good record on responding to the many challenges presented by this pandemic.

[placnx]

19 hours ago, Jeffr2 said:

It's entirely possible a human got it directly from a bat. Could have been from a worker from that lab. But it wasn't manufactured there.

Is anyone claiming that the virus was "manufactured"? The hypotheses concern natural viruses that were modified for Gain of Function (GoF) research, which is to create experimental viruses that could pose a threat to humanity, to know something of their potential, perhaps develop ways to counteract. The idea is to anticipate possible natural mutations, to be proactive. Research of this kind was stopped in the US because it was considered too dangerous.