Covid-19 likely to be man made

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120311730#Comment_120311730

You are trying to argue against a known truth, I have shown studies on multiple virus emerging in that area. Wuhan is known to be an area where virus emerge, hence the location of the virology institute, hence the high probability of COVID being of zoonotic and COVID being one of many new strains of virus discovered near Wuhan (among thousands discovered worldwide) every year. This is similar to Markus arguing that users who haven't seen the IIS with their own eyes means it doesn't exist.

This truth is backed up by experts in virology around the world (not all of them).

Now, and this is where you'll struggle.

For your claim to be true, you need the experts who linked COVID to zoonotic origin and low probability of a lab leak to be either stupid or in a conspiracy. You then need to detail why the experts are stupid or detail why they are covering up for a virology institute that has been established since 1956 and what they have to gain from it. My guess is that you are trying to make the lab leak seem true in order to push a man-made theory (after all, even if it did leak from a lab, it's zoonotic origin was outside the lab, either near Wuhan or from samples taken to Wuhan). But then you have to explain why the dozens of other new strains (and bats when studied typically register hundreds of new virus variants as a quirk of their immune system) did or didn't leak from the institute and the chances that one of them would cause a worldwide pandemic with a virus of relatively low CFR but high ability to cripple health systems.

My guess is that this is as far as your journey will go and you will want to sit in and argue known truths about Wuhan.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120312721#Comment_120312721

My guess is you are trying to distract from your inability to provide evidence for your statement

What I do know is that there are many novel virus discovered in Wuhan every year due to the combination of local fauna, local environment

You linked to a virus that emerged hundreds of kilometres away in a different province that had nothing to do with the combination of local fauna or local environment of Wuhan.

You are clutching at straws instead of admitting you are wrong, just like your mistake about when the Cultural Revolution occurred.

You are dogmatic, I guess it’s the Dunning Kruger effect, when even Dr. Tony Fauci says he isn’t convinced that Covid 19 developed naturally but you are.

https://edition.cnn.com/videos/health/2021/05/24/fauci-not-convinced-covid-19-coronavirus-developed-naturally-sot-vpx-newday.cnn

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120316989#Comment_120316989

Evidence was provided, that you predictably decide to rathole is on you, that you are deathly frightened of giving your own detailed explanation of what happened and whether there is a conspiracy or not (man-made or not, proof that the expert virologists are stupid or conspiring) is also on you.

That you are following the same pattern as every other conspiracy theorist who fails to make a point is also on you.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120317449#Comment_120317449

You provided a link to an outbreak of a disease hundreds of kilometres away in a different province.

You said you know there are many novel viruses discovered in Wuhan every year and the reason the WIV was located in Wuhan was because that’s where viruses emerge.

You have completely failed to provide evidence for this.

Do you have evidence or did you make it up and then double and triple down.

It is pretty clear you just made things up!

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120317563#Comment_120317563

Eh?

Here is (already posted) multiple new virus variants found in Hubei:

Prevalence and Genetic Diversity of Coronaviruses in Bats from China | Journal of Virology (asm.org)

As said, you can follow the papers produced annually from the institute if you want to find many (many) more.

Your theory is demonstrably false.

For what other reason was a virology institute established in Wuhan in 1956 do you think?

Why are all the virologists who claim that multiple new virus variants emerge from wet markets, such as in Wuhan, wrong?

You are still shying away from putting forward your own theories.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120317622#Comment_120317622

Are you actually serious?

Do you think this provides any evidence for your claim that

What I do know is that there are many novel virus discovered in Wuhan every year due to the combination of local fauna, local environment

Or that the reason for the location of the WIV is because of local flora and fauna as you say.

You know that the WIV didn’t start studying bat viruses until 2004, 48 years after it was founded. Right?

astrofool

More new virus found in Hubei:

Two reassortant types of highly pathogenic H5N8 avian influenza virus from wild birds in Central China in 2016 - PMC (nih.gov)

Bat origin Coronavirus including Hubei (2015):

Bat origin of human coronaviruses | Virology Journal | Full Text (biomedcentral.com)

Diversity of CoronaVirus from bats, including Hubei (2017):

Extensive diversity of coronaviruses in bats from China - ScienceDirectv

Rich gene pool of CoronaVirus in Bats, including Hubei (2017):

Discovery of a rich gene pool of bat SARS-related coronaviruses provides new insights into the origin of SARS coronavirus | PLOS Pathogens

325 new virus strains catalogued from Hubei:

Virus Index (genome.jp)

That above is called an orgy of evidence, which means it must be a conspiracy ;)

You know that the WIV didn’t start studying bat viruses until 2004, 48 years after it was founded. Right?

So, this was planned 15 years before it happened? Or was interest piqued and more grants and money invested in bat research after SARS?

astrofool

Coronavirus in bats from Hubei (2005):

Science Express Logo Report

Hantavirus originating in Hubei:

A Global Perspective on Hantavirus Ecology, Epidemiology, and Disease | Clinical Microbiology Reviews (asm.org)

Zoonotic spread of Clonarchiasis in Hubei (1997, studied in 1988):

[An epidemiological survey of Clonorchiasis sinensis of 17 counties/cities of Hubei Province Research Institute for Parasitic Diseases] - PubMed (nih.gov)

Studies into AstroVirus, Wuhan, a virus commonly passed between animals and humans (2007):

Genetic characterization of Human astrovirus infection in Wuhan, People’s Republic of China, 2007–2008 (cdnsciencepub.com)

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318208#Comment_120318208

Another links dump to drown out your lack of evidence.

This is a quote from your third link

A large number of SARS-related coronaviruses (SARSr-CoV) have been detected in horseshoe bats since 2005 in different areas of China. However, these bat SARSr-CoVs show sequence differences from SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in different genes (S, ORF8, ORF3, etc) and are considered unlikely to represent the direct progenitor of SARS-CoV. Herein, we report the findings of our 5-year surveillance of SARSr-CoVs in a cave inhabited by multiple species of horseshoe bats in Yunnan Province, China

Again you are linking to viruses in a different province, over 1500km away. Perhaps you have confused Yunnan Province with Yunnan Mountain in Hubei Province.

Your last link is unintelligible.

You call this “an orgy of evidence” 2 swans and a duck over 30 years is a pretty tame orgy.

In your second link dump are you claiming that detection of an astrovirus in Wuhan, bearing in mind that astroviruses are found and indeed are common all over the world.

Astrovirus infections are ubiquitous and ∼90% of the human population aged >9 years presents with anti-HAstV-1 antibodies (Mitchell et al., 1999)

Do you believe this is evidence that the the fauna and environment of the locality of Wuhan contributed to this astrovirus?

BoxcarWilliam99

Surely the world should be talking about this . It affected every person on the planet. Millions died

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-64806903

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318649#Comment_120318649

This is getting ridiculous, anyway, from the third link:

On the RdRp phylogeny (Fig. 2) all known SARSr-Rh-BatCoVs from China could be divided into four clusters, within which the newly-identified viruses fell into three clusters that reflect their geographic origins. Specifically: (i) the viruses identified in Rhinolophus bats sampled in Zhejiang province (denoted Rhinolophus bat Longquan-) were closely related to each other and clustered with Rhinolophus bat CoV HKU3 sampled from R. sinicus in Hong Kong (Lau et al., 2005); (ii) The viruses identified in R. ferrumequinum from Jiyuan in Henan province (Jiyuan-84 and Jiyuan-331) formed a cluster with those viruses identified in R. ferrumequinum from other regions of China. The viruses within the cluster were from central China (Henan, Hubei and Shaanxi provinces), with the exception of the lineage comprising JMC15 and BtRf-BetaCoV/JL2012 identified in R. ferrumequinum sampled in northeastern China (Jilin province); (iii) The viruses identified in R. sinicus sampled from Anlong in Guizhou province clustered with those identified in Rhinolophus bats from southwestern China including Guangxi, Guizhou and Yunnan provinces (Ge et al., 2013, Li et al., 2005). Strikingly, only the bat SARSr-Rh-BatCoVs from southwestern China exhibited a close evolutionary relationship with SARS-related human coronavirus (SARS-CoV) and SARS-related palm civet coronavirus (SARSr-CiCoV) (Tor2 and SZ3), suggesting that SARS-CoV may have originated in this region. Finally, within each of these three clusters the SARS-related coronaviruses clustered according to their geographic origins.

And again, the point was that the institute was located where new diseases emerged from local fauna, there is an orgy of evidence showing diseases from local fauna of various types that post 2004 (SARS) extensively looked into bat populations from around China including near Wuhan.

And what is unintelligible about the genomic mapping of 325 new virus strains from Hubei province?

And now you're just blatantly avoiding questions being put to you while ignoring the reality of the world, following the pattern of your theorist forebearers.

But look, even if some people accept your alternative reality that Wuhan wasn't a source for novel virus, you need to explain this:

For your claim to be true, you need the experts who linked COVID to zoonotic origin and low probability of a lab leak to be either stupid or in a conspiracy. You then need to detail why the experts are stupid or detail why they are covering up for a virology institute that has been established since 1956 and what they have to gain from it. My guess is that you are trying to make the lab leak seem true in order to push a man-made theory (after all, even if it did leak from a lab, it's zoonotic origin was outside the lab, either near Wuhan or from samples taken to Wuhan). But then you have to explain why the dozens of other new strains (and bats when studied typically register hundreds of new virus variants as a quirk of their immune system) did or didn't leak from the institute and the chances that one of them would cause a worldwide pandemic with a virus of relatively low CFR but high ability to cripple health systems.

My guess is that this is as far as your journey will go and you will want to sit in and argue known truths about Wuhan.

BoxcarWilliam99

I trust the WHO. They want the evidence

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/mar/04/who-calls-on-us-to-share-information-on-covid-19-origins-after-china-lab-claims

KIERAN1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120312511#Comment_120312511

Covid 19 is a gene of function research project. It's not likely the leak was on purpose. It might have been something that went wrong when they stored these samples in the Wuhan lab. It's not uncommon for lab accidents to occur, but the impact of this leak on the world has had everyone talking for years,. 

Dohnjoe

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318745#Comment_120318745

Do you believe Covid was man-made in a lab?

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318703#Comment_120318703

Fourth link I should have said. Did you confuse a province with a mountain?

You are the one claiming presence of a ubiquitous astrovirus as evidence of some unique fauna and environment (there are over 40,000 wet markets in China BTW) that was the the WIV is based in Wuhan.

You keep referring to my claim and what it requires to be true.

What claim of mine are you referring to?

mcsean2163

Very little talk about eco health alliance and Fauci anymore. Daszak seems to have slithered off into the sunset.

Mullaghteelin

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318709#Comment_120318709

Why?

The WHO are as corruptible or potentially biased as anyone else, and their reputation hasn't been squeaky clean regarding China.

Bodies like the UN and the WHO seem to seen through some sort of idealistic rose-tinted glasses by many in Ireland. It's unhealthy.

geospatial

Covid origins congressional hearings start this coming Wednesday.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120319249#Comment_120319249

They have been given more funding.

https://unherd.com/thepost/why-is-the-government-giving-more-money-to-peter-daszak/

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120318895#Comment_120318895

This is exhausting, from the 4th link:

R. sinicus collected in Guizhou and Yunnan Province, respectively. SARSr-CoV Rf1 and JL2012 were identified from R. ferrumequinum collected in Hubei and Jilin Province, respectively.

SARSr-CoVs detected in southeastern, central and northern provinces, such as Hong Kong, Hubei and Shaanxi, formed the other clade which was phylogenetically distant to human and civet SARS-CoVs 

You keep referring to my claim and what it requires to be true.

Your implication that COVID was man made, or have you dropped that entirely now?

You're playing the usual little theorist game of not admitting to anything and asking others to prove negatives while remaining brass-necked in the face of overwhelming evidence.

As said, let's assume the location of Wuhan is nothing to do with the emergence of virus, why was the lab built in Wuhan in 1956? Why do virologists think it has a low probability of a lab leak meaning the virus emerged from local fauna?

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120319318#Comment_120319318

Time for GQP to show how crazy and insane they are.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120320650#Comment_120320650

You made a claim that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was located in a Wuhan because it was the area that viruses emerge using the analogy that Weather stations are located where where tornadoes occur.

Surely the south west of China would be a more appropriate place, like I said placing a weather station to track tornadoes in Texas rather than New Jersey.

You then went on a rant demanding I provide evidence for claims I have not made.

You now asking

“why was the lab built in Wuhan in 1956?”

Despite previously claiming to know why it was built in Wuhan.

I never claimed to know why the lab was built in Wuhan, you did.

What I don’t find convincing is the reason you gave for “knowing” and the flawed analogy of placing weather stations where there are most tornadoes.

I think a more convincing case for why the the institute is located in Wuhan is because of the proximity of Wuhan University and Huazhong University, among the top ranked universities in microbiology or even the construction of the first Yangtze River bridge in the city, making it a gateway city around the time the institute was sited there.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120320897#Comment_120320897

My guess is that this is as far as your journey will go and you will want to sit in and argue known truths about Wuhan.

Utterly predictable, like all those that came before you.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120321313#Comment_120321313

No what is utterly predictable is you pretending to know that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was located in Wuhan because of the local fauna despite the other 40 odd similar virology labs worldwide having no such criteria for their location.

The two main virology labs in the US are The National Emerging Infectious Disease Laboratories, based in Boston and the Galveston National Laboratory based in Galveston. By your logic these locations are due to local wildlife not other factors such as universities

It’s the same with virology labs in London, Berlin, Switzerland. Are these all located in these cities because they are hotbeds of viruses?

How about the Institute of Tropical Medicine in Antwerp, clearly located there due to local fauna and environment.

Can you not see why the credibility of your statement is being questioned?

mcsean2163

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120319360#Comment_120319360

Yes but they're not in the firing squads sights this time. It seems convenient for the department of energy to have a go at china now that the USA perceives them as enemies again. Daszak, Fauci, Farar et al seem to be temporarily off the hook.

astrofool

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120321575#Comment_120321575

The Wuhan lab existed since 1956 in the middle of China due to it's environs, as I posted earlier, capital cities also have such labs (BSL-4), usually down to where the experts live and work.

Bat coronavirus are studied at BSL-2 which opens them up to a lot more lab locations, yet Wuhan was still used for this research due to it's proximity to samples and history of it's environs as I have extensively shown.

The original point remains extensively proven, Wuhan is where the lab is located because it is a location where lots of virus have emerged both in the past and present. If the virus had emerged from London or Antwerp, then you might have had a modicum of a point, but you didn't.

But, as said, assume that the lab wasn't there because viruses emerge in Wuhan, why would the majority of experts agree that SARS-COV2 had zoonotic origin likely from a Wuhan wet market? Why didn't they also think it weird that a new virus would emerge in Wuhan?

Given that you mention bat samples being taken from 1800km away, I assume you have abandoned the man-made aspect of this entirely, so it's either zoonotic origin somewhere near Wuhan (or brought to Wuhan from another location in China or around the world) or zoonotic origin, brought to the lab and then leaked.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120322979#Comment_120322979

The Wuhan lab existed since 1956 in the middle of China due to it's environs, as I posted earlier, capital cities also have such labs (BSL-4), usually down to where the experts live and work.

As I pointed out the two main Virology labs in the United States are in Galveston and Boston. Neither are capital cities, neither due to their environs.

Bat coronavirus are studied at BSL-2 which opens them up to a lot more lab locations, yet Wuhan was still used for this research due to it's proximity to samples and history of it's environs as I have extensively shown.

As I have already stated, the Wuhan Institute of Virology only started research on bat viruses in 2004, 48 years after its foundation. Making your point about the reason for its location in 1956 being the proximity to samples of bat coronaviruses moot.

The original point remains extensively proven, Wuhan is where the lab is located because it is a location where lots of virus have emerged both in the past and present. If the virus had emerged from London or Antwerp, then you might have had a modicum of a point, but you didn't.

You have not provided any convincing evidence that the lab was located in Wuhan in 1956 because virus have emerged there in the past and present. I don’t see how Covid 19 not emerging in London or Antwerp strengthens your case. The fact that pandemics don’t emerge from the locations of the other major virology labs around the world just undermines your point about the reason for the location of virology labs is proximity to viruses.

But, as said, assume that the lab wasn't there because viruses emerge in Wuhan, why would the majority of experts agree that SARS-COV2 had zoonotic origin likely from a Wuhan wet market? Why didn't they also think it weird that a new virus would emerge in Wuhan?

As I have already stated, The dangers of spillover in wet markets are known. The presence of a wet market in Wuhan cannot be claimed as the reason the Institute for virology was located there in 1956. There are some 44,000 wet markets in China. Experts would think it no less “weird” if a virus emerged in anyone of those.

Given that you mention bat samples being taken from 1800km away, I assume you have abandoned the man-made aspect of this entirely, so it's either zoonotic origin somewhere near Wuhan (or brought to Wuhan from another location in China or around the world) or zoonotic origin, brought to the lab and then leaked.

Most of the samples being researched in Wuhan were not local fauna, disproving your assertion that the location of the lab was due to researching local fauna.

I am not a virologist or scientist so I will bow to the superior knowledge of an expert with 50 years experience, who has access to specialist expertise and the best available data and information on the origins of Covid, Dr. Anthony Fauci, when he says he is not convinced that Covid 19 developed naturally.

SafeSurfer

@astrofool

You have previously stated that

“FYI, it's very possible SARS-COV2 leaked from a lab that was studying new virus, very unlikely it was man made (our tech isn't that advanced yet).”

Why do you believe that our tech isn’t advanced enough to manipulate a virus to make it more transmissible or more virulent when we know this has already occurred?

https://time.com/6225643/lab-made-covid-19-virus-controversy/

Also from the article below about local Wuhan fauna being the source of Covid

https://www.science.org/pb-assets/PDF/News%20PDFs/Shi%20Zhengli%20Q&A-1630433861.pdf

“We have done bat virus surveillance in Hubei Province for many years, but have not found that bats in Wuhan or even the wider Hubei Province carry any coronaviruses that are closely related to SARS-CoV-2. I don't think the spillover from bats to humans occurred in Wuhan or in Hubei Province”

odyssey06

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324315#Comment_120324315

Why does it have to be 'local' fauna? Isn't this supposed to be the primary research lab for all of China for viruses from such animals as bats etc?

The sample could have come from anywhere in China.

SafeSurfer

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120324332#Comment_120324332

I am not the one claiming the lab was located in Wuhan due to local fauna and environment. You should address your question to the poster making the claim.

“The facility was there because Wuhan is a place where new virus emerge due to bats and other local fauna.”