"The origin of COVID: Did people or nature open Pandora’s box at Wuhan?"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Dick Stallion

Ex Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2021
Messages
190
Reaction score
213
Points
86
Location
Boat
Nicholas Wade lays out the cases for both a lab escape from gain of function experiments vs a natural origin.


Short excerpt:

"3) The furin cleavage site. The furin cleavage site is a minute part of the virus’s anatomy but one that exerts great influence on its infectivity. It sits in the middle of the SARS2 spike protein. It also lies at the heart of the puzzle of where the virus came from.

The spike protein has two sub-units with different roles. The first, called S1, recognizes the virus’s target, a protein called angiotensin converting enzyme-2 (or ACE2) which studs the surface of cells lining the human airways. The second, S2, helps the virus, once anchored to the cell, to fuse with the cell’s membrane. After the virus’s outer membrane has coalesced with that of the stricken cell, the viral genome is injected into the cell, hijacks its protein-making machinery and forces it to generate new viruses.

But this invasion cannot begin until the S1 and S2 subunits have been cut apart. And there, right at the S1/S2 junction, is the furin cleavage site that ensures the spike protein will be cleaved in exactly the right place.

The virus, a model of economic design, does not carry its own cleaver. It relies on the cell to do the cleaving for it. Human cells have a protein cutting tool on their surface known as furin. Furin will cut any protein chain that carries its signature target cutting site. This is the sequence of amino acid units proline-arginine-arginine-alanine, or PRRA in the code that refers to each amino acid by a letter of the alphabet. PRRA is the amino acid sequence at the core of SARS2’s furin cleavage site.

Viruses have all kinds of clever tricks, so why does the furin cleavage site stand out? Because of all known SARS-related beta-coronaviruses, only SARS2 possesses a furin cleavage site. All the other viruses have their S2 unit cleaved at a different site and by a different mechanism.

How then did SARS2 acquire its furin cleavage site? Either the site evolved naturally, or it was inserted by researchers at the S1/S2 junction in a gain-of-function experiment.

Consider natural origin first. Two ways viruses evolve are by mutation and by recombination. Mutation is the process of random change in DNA (or RNA for coronaviruses) that usually results in one amino acid in a protein chain being switched for another. Many of these changes harm the virus but natural selection retains the few that do something useful. Mutation is the process by which the SARS1 spike protein gradually switched its preferred target cells from those of bats to civets, and then to humans.

Mutation seems a less likely way for SARS2’s furin cleavage site to be generated, even though it can’t completely be ruled out. The site’s four amino acid units are all together, and all at just the right place in the S1/S2 junction. Mutation is a random process triggered by copying errors (when new viral genomes are being generated) or by chemical decay of genomic units. So it typically affects single amino acids at different spots in a protein chain. A string of amino acids like that of the furin cleavage site is much more likely to be acquired all together through a quite different process known as recombination.

Recombination is an inadvertent swapping of genomic material that occurs when two viruses happen to invade the same cell, and their progeny are assembled with bits and pieces of RNA belonging to the other. Beta-coronaviruses will only combine with other beta-coronaviruses but can acquire, by recombination, almost any genetic element present in the collective genomic pool. What they cannot acquire is an element the pool does not possess. And no known SARS-related beta-coronavirus, the class to which SARS2 belongs, possesses a furin cleavage site.

Proponents of natural emergence say SARS2 could have picked up the site from some as yet unknown beta-coronavirus. But bat SARS-related beta-coronaviruses evidently don’t need a furin cleavage site to infect bat cells, so there’s no great likelihood that any in fact possesses one, and indeed none has been found so far.

The proponents’ next argument is that SARS2 acquired its furin cleavage site from people. A predecessor of SARS2 could have been circulating in the human population for months or years until at some point it acquired a furin cleavage site from human cells. It would then have been ready to break out as a pandemic.

If this is what happened, there should be traces in hospital surveillance records of the people infected by the slowly evolving virus. But none has so far come to light. According to the WHO report on the origins of the virus, the sentinel hospitals in Hubei province, home of Wuhan, routinely monitor influenza-like illnesses and “no evidence to suggest substantial SARSCoV-2 transmission in the months preceding the outbreak in December was observed.”

So it’s hard to explain how the SARS2 virus picked up its furin cleavage site naturally, whether by mutation or recombination.

That leaves a gain-of-function experiment. For those who think SARS2 may have escaped from a lab, explaining the furin cleavage site is no problem at all. “Since 1992 the virology community has known that the one sure way to make a virus deadlier is to give it a furin cleavage site at the S1/S2 junction in the laboratory,” writes Steven Quay, a biotech entrepreneur interested in the origins of SARS2. “At least 11 gain-of-function experiments, adding a furin site to make a virus more infective, are published in the open literature, including [by] Dr. Zhengli Shi, head of coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”"
 
I tend to agree with this writer, who states we need a lot more information to determine the causes. The Chinese are not known for their ‘openness’ However, WHO did not find any evidence when Wuhan was they did the initial investigations. Moreover, I am certain all the government Bio-labs will be investigating the origins also. Meanwhile, other theories that it developed in wild wet markets and jumped from a bat to a pangolin to humans need further investigation IMO….

'Where did the current coronavirus come from?

'If you ask that question, you get all sorts of answers from all sorts of people. Let me downgrade some of those right up front. To start at the far end of the fever scale, I do not think that this virus is some sort of deliberately engineered (and/or deliberately released) bioweapon, and I am simply not going to give that theory more time here today. But that still leaves a lot of possibilities open, and I don’t think we have enough evidence yet to sort those others out'

'As scientists with relevant expertise, we agree with the WHO director-general (5), the United States and 13 other countries (6), and the European Union (7) that greater clarity about the origins of this pandemic is necessary and feasible to achieve. We must take hypotheses about both natural and laboratory spillovers seriously until we have sufficient data. A proper investigation should be transparent, objective, data-driven, inclusive of broad expertise, subject to independent oversight, and responsibly managed to minimize the impact of conflicts of interest. Public health agencies and research laboratories alike need to open their records to the public. Investigators should document the veracity and provenance of data from which analyses are conducted and conclusions drawn, so that analyses are reproducible by independent experts'


 
This is a turn up! The WSJ has discovered that there’s a previously undisclosed US intelligence report that says that some people got very ill at the Wuhan research lab in November 2019 adding fuel to the escaped lab theory. Did Trump know about the report? Tweet is available but WSJ site is paywall.

 
Didn't quite a lot of people in Wuhan get sick in the latter part of 2019? Or are they claiming the have picked up the very first index cases?
 
Well that's disturbing.

Lots of sleuthing going on lol


Although some don't believe in conspiracy theories.

From REUTERS now

The Independent

CNN
 
Didn't quite a lot of people in Wuhan get sick in the latter part of 2019? Or are they claiming the have picked up the very first index cases?

The first official case was discovered in November 2019.



It's interesting that the CDC director at the time, Robert Redfield, said on camera that he was pretty certain the virus came from the lab. People thought that he was just towing the Trump administration line but now we can surmise that he'd probably seen this intelligence.
 
Well that's disturbing.

Lots of sleuthing going on lol


Although some don't believe in conspiracy theories.

From REUTERS now

The Independent

CNN

I bet the international intelligence partner was Taiwan. I remember one of their health officials saying that after SARS 2003, they have medical staff located across China on the lookout for any virus outbreaks. They don't trust China to be open about new epidemics.
 
Does it really matter if it came from a lab or a wet market ? I only ask as China ain't gonna tell and the international community ain't gonna do nowt either way .
 
WHO had limited access to the lab, but couldn't find anything. China has had at least a year to remove any evidence from the lab if it originated from there.
 
Does it really matter if it came from a lab or a wet market ? I only ask as China ain't gonna tell and the international community ain't gonna do nowt either way .

Probably not to us but virologists would like to know how easy it is for animal viruses in nature to spill over into the human population.

The last I heard before this news was a scientist saying that not enough testing had taken place in China's mink and other fur farms, especially as we now know how easily the virus can spread to mink. Unlike Denmark, China doesn't seem to want to wipe out its animals.

Personally, I think it came from the wild and it's Chinese reluctance to push hard to find the truth that is making things difficult. I don't think that Chinese scientists would have been allowed to upload the coronavirus genome if it had all been their own screw up.
 
Probably not to us but virologists would like to know how easy it is for animal viruses in nature to spill over into the human population.

The last I heard before this news was a scientist saying that not enough testing had taken place in China's mink and other fur farms, especially as we now know how easily the virus can spread to mink. Unlike Denmark, China doesn't seem to want to wipe out its animals.

Personally, I think it came from the wild and it's Chinese reluctance to push hard to find the truth that is making things difficult. I don't think that Chinese scientists would have been allowed to upload the coronavirus genome if it had all been their own screw up.

From a purely scientific stance I can agree as such information is invaluable.

But inevitably this is only food for the mob to validate their own belief structure .

The only lesson to be learnt here is that this world is fragmented when faced with a global crisis .
 
My take on this is it doesn't matter where it came from, as far as combating it is concerned.
For the next one, knowing whether this one was a construct or natural would be hugely useful from a scientific, health and political point of view.
 
The fact that there is a highly plausible possibility that SarsCov2 was lab created highlights a different set of risks. The fact that gain of function experiments are taking place and that lab escapes do happen means that the risks posed by these places needs to be reassessed, and that what we might otherwise have thought to be a once in a lifetime event could be repeated next year or next week.
 
Late CNN report that Biden shut down an investigation began by the Trump administration looking to prove the coronavirus came from a lab.
 
Late CNN report that Biden shut down an investigation began by the Trump administration looking to prove the coronavirus came from a lab.
Part of the problem is that the the media have deliberately lumped in the lab-created hypothesis with Trump's various lunacies. Most of the media are essentially stenographers and not fit for purpose.
 
Part of the problem is that the the media have deliberately lumped in the lab-created hypothesis with Trump's various lunacies. Most of the media are essentially stenographers and not fit for purpose.

I think the way Trump, Pompeo and assorted Trump cronies presented it didn't help. If they'd let the CDC lead on it carefully, it might have had more credibility in those early days. It didn't help that the WHO were trashing the idea as well but then no-one outside the Trump administration appeared to know about the intelligence. Dominic Cummings has made it clear that these recent reports are the first he'd heard about it.
 
Last edited:
The fact that there is a highly plausible possibility that SarsCov2 was lab created highlights a different set of risks. The fact that gain of function experiments are taking place and that lab escapes do happen means that the risks posed by these places needs to be reassessed, and that what we might otherwise have thought to be a once in a lifetime event could be repeated next year or next week.

Highly plausible how? Beyond someone saying it could be possible.

But possible <> highly plausible. It's possible i could get to date Scarlett Johansson, but not highly plausible.
 
I think the way Trump, Pompeo and assorted rump cronies presented it didn't help. If they'd let the CDC lead on it carefully, it might have had more credibility in those early days. It didn't help that the WHO were trashing the idea as well but then no-one outside the Trump administration appeared to know about the intelligence. Dominic Cummings has made it clear that these recent reports are the first he'd heard about it.
There was a fair amount of stuff about it a year ago. The former MI6 boss spoke out about it and there were various papers that pointed out tell-tale evidence of insertions. But it was dropped by the media like a stone and associated with crazy conspiracies. I do agree though that Trump doesn't help any case by supporting it..

 
There was a fair amount of stuff about it a year ago. The former MI6 boss spoke out about it and there were various papers that pointed out tell-tale evidence of insertions. But it was dropped by the media like a stone and associated with crazy conspiracies. I do agree though that Trump doesn't help any case by supporting it..


Ah yes. I remember that now. Ah well, we may learn more.
 
Does it really matter if it came from a lab or a wet market ? I only ask as China ain't gonna tell and the international community ain't gonna do nowt either way .
Yes, once is bad enough but this is the third virus that has come from China in recent years.

The country needs to be put in quarantine until it sorts out its health and hygiene.
 
Yes, once is bad enough but this is the third virus that has come from China in recent years.

The country needs to be put in quarantine until it sorts out its health and hygiene.

Fact of the matter still remains ( even in this short thread ) that people actually want to believe that this virus was lab created .

The starting point is for that one purpose and it will not change anything , well apart from validating ones own belief .
 
Last edited:
Fact of the matter still remains ( even in this short thread ) that people actually want to believe that this virus was lab created .

The starting point is for that one purpose and it will not change anything , well apart from validating ones own belief .
It's important to determine the origin of Covid, and it beggars belief that you think it's just a matter of 'being right' or whatever your point is.

It matters for reasons of accountability (multiple elements), science, lab safety and security, lab practices (should gain of function experiments be legal) etc. These points are important for preventing future lab escapes whether covid was a lab escape or not.
 
It's important to determine the origin of Covid, and it beggars belief that you think it's just a matter of 'being right' or whatever your point is.

It matters for reasons of accountability (multiple elements), science, lab safety and security, lab practices (should gain of function experiments be legal) etc. These points are important for preventing future lab escapes whether covid was a lab escape or not.
You state in this post that future lab escapes as in the origin of this virus is already known to yourself . In fact the science has not proven this claim, yet you are pushing this narrative in the second paragraph of your post .
 
You state in this post that future lab escapes as in the origin of this virus is already known to yourself . In fact the science has not proven this claim, yet you are pushing this narrative in the second paragraph of your post .
No, maybe English isn't your first language but 'future' does not mean or imply what you think it does; if I had said 'further' then you could possibly draw this implication.

In fact, had you read on, in the same sentence I said 'whether covid was a lab escape or not'. The 'pushing of a narrative' is something that you have either misunderstood or made up in your head.
 
No, maybe English isn't your first language but 'future' does not mean or imply what you think it does; if I had said 'further' then you could possibly draw this implication.

In fact, had you read on, in the same sentence I said 'whether covid was a lab escape or not'. The 'pushing of a narrative' is something that you have either misunderstood or made up in your head.
And I would respond that either scenario is mute as science across the globe has been taking this virus apart to base level, hence why we now have vaccines .

If it helps you to question the the origin of this virus that scientists have taken apart to actually be beneficial then so be it .

If you want to go down the rabbit hole on something that as yet has no grounds in the scientific community. Hell yeah go for it.

The whole escaped from the lab is here nor there as lab = lab created for the mob.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

The latest video from AVForums

Is 4K Blu-ray Worth It?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom