Origins of Covid

[Planigale]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

It already is being dismissed on Twitter by the DRASTIC members and people like Richard Ebright who says "No serious person will take it seriously." He is on record calling essentially every scientist that favours a natural spillover as a "bought and paid for" "stooge".

He also says the same of the editor of Science and one of their writers Jon Cohen, who wrote this piece:



Link

I think we will have to wait and see when the researchers write up their results and to see how it does in peer review.

This is also a nice review - makes quite clear that the Chinese are trying to cover up the association with the market as the source of the animal to human jump.

https://www.science.org/content/arti...-animal-market

[Tero]

"New data links pandemic’s origins to raccoon dogs at Wuhan market
Genetic samples from the market were recently uploaded to an international database and then removed after scientists asked China about them."
NYT
(paywall)

[angrysoba]

It will be difficult to come to any conclusions until there is some kind of paper, such as pre-print, with the relevant data being available to those who want to evaluate this independently.

I've seen that it is not just those who argue for lab leak who are being a bit critical of the way this story has been handled.

But.... it seems it might be an attempt by some Chinese scientists to get data out that conflicts with the CCP official line of a virus that came from abroad, as well as demonstrating that wildlife was indeed in the market even if it wasn't the cause of the spillover despite Chinese authorities claims to the contrary.

So, we definitely do have evidence that China are covering up a possible wet market origin.

Link

[Dr.Sid]

What ? Racoon dogs ? Come on, bats are way cooler. On the other hand, racoon dogs are cute. Nobody would hate a racoon dog.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

So, we definitely do have evidence that China are covering up a possible wet market origin.

Link

I don’t think anyone doubts this.

[Planigale]

Just as an example the Chinese do not necessarily cover up laboratory leaks.

Quote:

An inadequacy in sanitizing processes in a biopharmaceutical plant in Lanzhou, China, during July and August 2019, led to the aerosolization of Brucella that was subsequently spread through wind to nearby settlements and academic institutes, resulting in >10 000 human brucellosis cases, as of November 2020. The leak, possibly the largest laboratory accident in the history of infectious diseases, underlines the particular characteristics of Brucella that have made the pathogen a historical entity in biodefense research and a major cause of laboratory-associated infections. It further underlines the need for enhanced vigilance and strict regulatory interventions in similar facilities.

https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/75/10/1845/6604450

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Tero

"New data links pandemic’s origins to raccoon dogs at Wuhan market
Genetic samples from the market were recently uploaded to an international database and then removed after scientists asked China about them."
NYT
(paywall)

I think this is probably the same story: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bc-as...b00c3e6073850f

Of course, scientists from the Wuhan Lab probably ate racoon dogs from the wet market and introduced it to them. (You'll hear that shortly)

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

I think this is probably the same story: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/bc-as...b00c3e6073850f

Of course, scientists from the Wuhan Lab probably ate racoon dogs from the wet market and introduced it to them. (You'll hear that shortly)

Leaked email:
“Hooray everyone! We have successfully created a pandemic-potential virus by inserting a furin cleavage site into top secret acquisition BANAL-52 and we’re going to nip down the Huanan Market for raccoon dog to celebrate! We heard there is only one left so we’ve not got time to remove our Hazmat suits. It’ll be fine!”

[Planigale]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Leaked email:
“Hooray everyone! We have successfully created a pandemic-potential virus by inserting a furin cleavage site into top secret acquisition BANAL-52 and we’re going to nip down the Huanan Market for raccoon dog to celebrate! We heard there is only one left so we’ve not got time to remove our Hazmat suits. It’ll be fine!”

Thank God! We finally have the explanation for the last two years.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by jt512

As usual, when someone starts a reply, "Are you suggesting...," you know that what's coming next is straw man. What I said is that you do not know that the intelligence services do not have people who are qualified to assess the published science.

You don't seem to understand what a strawman is. For it to be a strawman, you'd have to have a stronger version of the argument that what I presented. "you don't know that they don't" is NOT a stronger version of any argument.

Originally Posted by jt512

Even if they do not have such scientists among their employees, they have access to every scientist in the world, including the scientists who published the work on the origin of the pandemic, with whom they can formally or informally consult.

Fat lot of good it does them if they ignore the conclusions these researchers have reached.

Originally Posted by jt512

Well, different scientists with your "implicit knowledge and experience" have evaluated the research and arrived at different conclusions. So much for "implicit knowledge and experience." Furthermore, whatever conclusions they have come to, they have come to without the information that the intelligence services have. So they do not have the full picture.

Without the background to fully understand the science the intelligence services are missing out on far more information that the research scientists are. Unless the intelligence services accept their limitations and take the published research at face value they are missing out on far more information than the actual scientists. In such a case they can't possibly have "the full picture".

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by lionking

I don’t think anyone doubts this.

Lots of people have doubted it. In the thread it is sometimes assumed that the Chinese authorities would prefer it to be from a wet market than a lab, because….”face” apparently and if you disagree then “you just don’t know Chinese culture” apparently.

But beyond this thread, when papers had been written showing photographs from Holmes’s trip to the Huanan wet market and other findings about wildlife trade being in operation there, it was laughed off by the lab leak theorists who questioned the believability of the pictures or tried to suggest the pictures were from other markets or that there may have been animals there once but no evidence they were still on sale during the beginning stages of the pandemic.

In addition, we repeatedly hear about how many animals were tested and yet no trace showed up of SARS-CoV2, BUT none of the animals from the wet markets appear to have been tested. We’re raccoon dogs from Huanan tested? If not and we now might have evidence that the raccoon dogs were there, why weren’t they tested? We know, for example, that elephants at the Wuhan zoo were tested, but if you don’t look in the likely places you can’t be surprised if the evidence is missed.

[jt512]

Originally Posted by lomiller

Without the background to fully understand the science the intelligence services are missing out on far more information that the research scientists are. Unless the intelligence services accept their limitations and take the published research at face value they are missing out on far more information than the actual scientists. In such a case they can't possibly have "the full picture".

While you were preoccupied with straw-man denial, you failed to understand my point that you are just assuming they don't have the expertise to evaluate the scientific data. You don't know what expertise they have.

You're entitled to your opinion of their incompetence, even you have no competence yourself to judge it.

[angrysoba]

Oops. This is from a year or two ago when evidence from the wet market about live animals, particularly raccoon dogs, were being sold.

A prominent lab leaker was very busy pooh-poohing the idea that such animals could be a possible cause of a spillover event....

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by jt512

While you were preoccupied with straw-man denial, you failed to understand my point that you are just assuming they don't have the expertise to evaluate the scientific data. You don't know what expertise they have.

You're entitled to your opinion of their incompetence, even you have no competence yourself to judge it.

Now there is an example of a strawman.

What they lack is the ability to generate meaningful original counterarguments to published research. If they stick to counterarguments makes by other researchers in the peer reviewed literature they may be fine.

The problem in this case is that there is no meaningful support for a lab leak in the published literature and there is broad support for zoonotic crossover in the published literature. There is simply no justification for the intelligence community, or anyone else, rejecting the published science.

[Planigale]

It was not wrong to consider the option of a laboratory leak, but to persist when all the evidence favours the more likely option of a zoonotic source and to substitute an ever more complex conspiracy involving scientists from many countries seems foolish.

[jt512]

Originally Posted by lomiller

Now there is an example of a strawman.

What they lack is the ability to generate meaningful original counterarguments to published research.

No. That's not a strawman, and you are repeating the exact same mistake that apparently you are blind to. You have no ******* idea what their capabilities are, yet you repeatedly proclaim their limitations.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Amanpour and Company interview with Jaimie Metzl, it's time to listen to him again.

Why the COVID-19 Lab-Leak Theory Has New Credibility and Why It Matters | Amanpour and Company -- 18 minutes

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Interesting that Jamie Metzl went on CNN and Newsmax etc... to promote the lab leak theory in response to the Department of Energy announcing that they had low confidence in the theory using data not publicly available.

Of course, the same Jamie Metzl, responds to the news about the raccoon dog DNA like this....

[QUOTE_"Jamie Metzl"]Although I believe #COVID19 most likely stems from an accidental research-related incident in Wuhan, I have an open mind on the pandemic origins issue. The recent media manipulation campaign focused around inaccessible new data has not moved the needle for me.[/quote]

Link

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Roger Ramjets

Therefore there is only one possible conclusion - lab leak!...

I did not say that. What's not supportable is that a vendor at the market was patient zero. Someone at the market was a super-spreader.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Link


The researchers caution that it is not conclusive evidence, but it is suggestive, that animals passed on the virus. However, it is not clear that the raccoon dogs are the intermediary species. Anyway, it could be an important finding. Could be...

I'm surprised you aren't running to the bank with this latest news headline.

For the record those pics of the raccoon dogs being for sale at the market (in the past but likely also in late 2019) is not a new revelation. Also it's not new that the Chinese claimed to have 5 or so positive cultures from that one vendor stall at the market. I'm not sure how long ago I read that but it was more than a week ago.

The problem still remains, where was that COVID or COVID-similar virus circulating in raccoon dogs before they reached the market? All of the positive findings are explained by one super-spreader vendor in that stall getting infected by a customer.

It has already been determined live bats were not for sale at the market and those particular coronavirus carrying bats are not commonly eaten by the residents of Wuhan.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by lionking

I just found the report. It will be dismissed out of hand by some here, but this looks promising.

No one is dismissing it out of hand. The question is no different, where is the evidence said animal got infected before arriving at the market? Why is there no trail or source of that animal infection except the vendor themself being the source of the positive cultures in the stall?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Oops. This is from a year or two ago when evidence from the wet market about live animals, particularly raccoon dogs, were being sold.

A prominent lab leaker was very busy pooh-poohing the idea that such animals could be a possible cause of a spillover event....

What Chan says is actually true that the images of the live raccoon dogs at the market are a couple of years old. This is not new information.

I hadn't seen the reference to the seasonality of those particular animal sales. That's interesting. I have yet to find any references online to where the vendors get those animals. Already a search within China for a SARS-like virus circulating in raccoon dogs has failed to find one.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Planigale

It was not wrong to consider the option of a laboratory leak, but to persist when all the evidence favours the more likely option of a zoonotic source and to substitute an ever more complex conspiracy involving scientists from many countries seems foolish.

There is no conspiracy needed here. It's not uncommon among research/medical professionals to be reluctant to accept certain findings.

Surely you are aware it took a decade for the medical community to accept Dr John Snow's meticulous epidemiological research on the source of cholera in the 1800s. Much more recently it took many years for the medical community to accept H-pylori was the cause of gastric ulcers, not excess stomach acid production. When topical acyclovir failed to treat HSV infections there was a resulting delay recognizing oral acyclovir was effective.

It's not a conspiracy, it's a reluctance to accept a lab source for a pandemic when past pandemics have been caused by spillover events. That is where to bias lies, not in a conspiracy and not in some reluctance by some of us to continue taking a critical look at the confirmation biases leading so many people to latch on to the spillover hypothesis.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Interesting that Jamie Metzl went on CNN and Newsmax etc... to promote the lab leak theory in response to the Department of Energy announcing that they had low confidence in the theory using data not publicly available.

Of course, the same Jamie Metzl, responds to the news about the raccoon dog DNA like this....

Originally Posted by Jamie Metzl

Although I believe #COVID19 most likely stems from an accidental research-related incident in Wuhan, I have an open mind on the pandemic origins issue. The recent media manipulation campaign focused around inaccessible new data has not moved the needle for me.

Link

Are you saying China is not making certain information inaccessible?

Keep in mind China is pushing the narrative the source was outside of China. That doesn't mean they wouldn't prefer a natural spillover over a lab-leak.

As for media manipulation, yeah, there is a lot of that.

Guardian: Chinese bots flood Twitter in attempt to obscure Covid protests

Quote:

Twitter has been flooded with nuisance posts designed to obscure news of the coronavirus lockdown protests in China, in an apparent state-directed attempt to suppress footage of the demonstrations.

Chinese bot accounts – not operated by humans – are being used to flood the social networking service with adverts for sex workers, pornography and gambling when users search for a major city in the country, such as Shanghai or Beijing, using Chinese script.

An interesting approach.

More specifically to the topic:
Politico: China continues to block efforts to determine Covid’s origins, lawmakers say

Quote:

Lawmakers said on Sunday that it remained impossible to determine with any certainty the origins of Covid-19 because of continued obstruction by China’s government.

“We have so few facts because the Chinese regime has obfuscated,” Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.) said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

And not that current House committee investigations are reliable without supporting evidence, there is supporting evidence with this:
House committee says Fauci 'prompted' drafting of medical paper to 'disprove' COVID lab leak theory

Quote:

GOP leadership on a House committee said Sunday it uncovered new email evidence suggesting Dr. Anthony Fauci "prompted" the drafting of "proximal origin" publication meant to "disprove" the COVID-19 lab leak theory....

... the authors of this paper skewed available evidence to achieve that goal, and Dr. Jeremy Farrar went uncredited despite significant involvement," the memo says.

On Feb. 1, 2020, Dr. Anthony Fauci, Dr. Francis Collins, and at least eleven other scientists convened a conference call to discuss COVID-19. On the call, Fauci and Collins were first warned that COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China, and, further, may have been intentionally genetically manipulated, the memo says. ...

Three days later, four participants of the conference call authored a paper entitled "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2" (Proximal Origin) and sent a draft to Fauci and Collins. Prior to final publication in Nature Medicine, the paper was sent to Fauci for editing and approval.

"On April 16, 2020, slightly more than two months after the original conference call, Dr. Collins emailed Dr. Fauci expressing dismay that Proximal Origin—which they saw prior to publication and were given the opportunity to edit—did not squash the lab leak hypothesis and asks if the NIH can do more to ‘put down’ the lab leak hypothesis," the memo says. "The next day—after Dr. Collins explicitly asked for more public pressure—Dr. Fauci cited Proximal Origin from the White House podium when asked if COVID-19 leaked from a lab."

Is that supposed to be good science?

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I'm surprised you aren't running to the bank with this latest news headline.

Why would I?

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

For the record those pics of the raccoon dogs being for sale at the market (in the past but likely also in late 2019) is not a new revelation. Also it's not new that the Chinese claimed to have 5 or so positive cultures from that one vendor stall at the market. I'm not sure how long ago I read that but it was more than a week ago.

No one is making those claims. This is an environmental swab which suggests that raccoon dogs were present at the time when Covid-19 samples were taken. That's what the news is. Your mentioning of photographs etc... suggests you don't understand the significance.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

The problem still remains, where was that COVID or COVID-similar virus circulating in raccoon dogs before they reached the market? All of the positive findings are explained by one super-spreader vendor in that stall getting infected by a customer.

It has already been determined live bats were not for sale at the market and those particular coronavirus carrying bats are not commonly eaten by the residents of Wuhan.

Literally nobody has seriously argued that since about March 2020. The spillover suggestions are that the animals sold in the markets are from the wildlife trade. This means wildlife bred outside of Wuhan, maybe far outside Wuhan.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

What Chan says is actually true that the images of the live raccoon dogs at the market are a couple of years old. This is not new information.

I hadn't seen the reference to the seasonality of those particular animal sales. That's interesting. I have yet to find any references online to where the vendors get those animals. Already a search within China for a SARS-like virus circulating in raccoon dogs has failed to find one.

What Chan was arguing was that there was no reason to believe raccoon dogs were on sale at the market at the time of Covid's emergence. These swabs heavily suggest otherwise if they pan out.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Are you saying China is not making certain information inaccessible?

No, I am saying the DoE and the FBI are not making certain information available, but Jamie Metzl seems to have no problem with that as he has been trumpeting the claims of the DoE and FBI without apparently seeing the evidence. It seems odd that he would do that and yet dismiss these new findings despite having exactly the same access to this data.

But anyway, it seems that SAGO-WHO team may have the same data and they contacted the Chinese CDC demanding to know why this data wasn't available before.

You can claim that we always knew about it, but it seems to be news to the WHO, so nah! This is new, and the WHO is treating it very seriously indeed....

Quote:

On 12 March 2023, WHO was made aware of new SARS-CoV-2 sequences and metagenomics data associated with samples collected in the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market, Wuhan, China, from January 2020, that became available on GISAID for a short period of time. The data had subsequently been downloaded by a number of researchers from several countries. Access was restricted shortly after, apparently to allow further data updates by China CDC. WHO then immediately reached out to China CDC and to the Chair and Vice-Chair of SAGO. Upon discussions between WHO and Chinese colleagues, it was explained that the genomic data are the basis for an expected update to the existing Liu et al. 2022 preprint (1), which is in the process of being re-submitted for publication to Nature by China CDC.

After discussions with the WHO secretariat and the SAGO Chair and Vice-Chair, a call was arranged on 12 March with the scientists involved from China CDC, and some of those who had accessed the data from GISAID, to gauge the significance of this data and the analyses of this data. WHO subsequently organized a meeting on 14 March 2023 with all SAGO members, and invited researchers from China CDC to present the updated analysis of their data. WHO and SAGO also invited the researchers who had informed WHO that they had accessed data from GISAID, to present their analysis of the temporarily released sequences.

The presentations from China CDC and invited international researchers indicated that there were newly available data from the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. This included metagenomic data of environmental samples from various stalls and wastewater collection sites collected as early as January 2020. Analyses of these data suggest that apart from SARS-CoV-2 sequences, some samples also contained human DNA, as well as mitochondrial DNA of several animal species, including some that are known to be susceptible to SARS-CoV-2. This included DNA from wild raccoon dogs, Malaysian porcupine, and bamboo rats among others, in SARS-CoV-2 positive environmental samples.

Link

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Keep in mind China is pushing the narrative the source was outside of China. That doesn't mean they wouldn't prefer a natural spillover over a lab-leak.

As for media manipulation, yeah, there is a lot of that.

Not relevant.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

And not that current House committee investigations are reliable without supporting evidence, there is supporting evidence with this:
House committee says Fauci 'prompted' drafting of medical paper to 'disprove' COVID lab leak theoryIs that supposed to be good science?

Indeed. Dismissed.

[jt512]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

No, I am saying the DoE and the FBI are not making certain information available, but Jamie Metzl seems to have no problem with that as he has been trumpeting the claims of the DoE and FBI without apparently seeing the evidence.

Not as perverse as dismissing the findings of the DOE and FBI without knowledge of their evidence.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by jt512

Not as perverse as dismissing the findings of the DOE and FBI without knowledge of their evidence.

I am saying that Metzl is doing that with the new market data.

He is doing exactly that!

Quote:

Although I believe #COVID19 most likely stems from an accidental research-related incident in Wuhan, I have an open mind on the pandemic origins issue. The recent media manipulation campaign focused around inaccessible new data has not moved the needle for me.

He doesn't know what it is, so he puts the significance at zero.

He doesn't know what the evidence is for DoE and FBI, but puts it high.

He doesn't seem to care what it is for four other agencies, and sets it at zero.

It seems inconsistent to me to call the recent data a "media manipulation" on the grounds he doesn't know the data, but have no qualms about trumpeting the DoE and FBI reports without knowing that data.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by jt512

No. That's not a strawman, and you are repeating the exact same mistake that apparently you are blind to. You have no ******* idea what their capabilities are, yet you repeatedly proclaim their limitations.

Don't be ridiculous. We KNOW intelligence agencies don't have capabilities for original scintific research, because they don't do original scientific research. They are not virologists, it's not part of their job.

You suggestion that maybe they could secretly the best scintific researchers in the world holds about as much weight as the suggestion they could secretly be the flying spaghetti monster. "you don't know that that aren't" isn't a valid argument for either.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

The problem still remains, where was that COVID or COVID-similar virus circulating in raccoon dogs before they reached the market?

Why is that a "problem"? Viruses circulate in animal populations all the time, what makes this situation different?

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

All of the positive findings are explained by one super-spreader vendor in that stall getting infected by a customer.

First of all there is no actual evidence for this "just being a super-spreader event". Second, there is also significant evidence that rules that hypothesis out. Multiple lineages circulating in the same location are at odds with it being "just a super-spreader event".

We have both infected humans and infected raccoon dogs in the same location at the same time with the same virus. This is all but impossible without some form of zoonotic crossover.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by lomiller

Why is that a "problem"? Viruses circulate in animal populations all the time, what makes this situation different?



First of all there is no actual evidence for this "just being a super-spreader event". Second, there is also significant evidence that rules that hypothesis out. Multiple lineages circulating in the same location are at odds with it being "just a super-spreader event".

We have both infected humans and infected raccoon dogs in the same location at the same time with the same virus. This is all but impossible without some form of zoonotic crossover.

We need to hold fire on that one. As far as I know, I think do not hav proof or infected raccoon dogs. As yet all we have is evidence that raccoon dogs were in the places being swabbed.

We still need to wait until we can see a paper that other virologists can look at and independently verify. Ultimately it would be helpful if it allows the WHO to put more pressure on China to release more data publicly.

At this point it seems to me that everyone, whether lab leak or spillover proponent is in some confirmation bias mode.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

... No one is making those claims. This is an environmental swab which suggests that raccoon dogs were present at the time when Covid-19 samples were taken. That's what the news is. Your mentioning of photographs etc... suggests you don't understand the significance.

Snark is not helping you.

Of course I understand the significance. People favoring the spillover hypothesis are acting like it's the smoking gun/source animal found when it is not.

Let's get a few things straight. One of reports says the positive cultures were from a surface used to remove hair and feathers. That is not the same as "suggests raccoon dogs were present at the time when Covid-19 samples were taken".

NPR Mar 17, 2023: WHO calls on China to share data on raccoon dog link to pandemic. Here's what we know

Quote:

We found out that one stall actually had five positive samples — five surfaces in that stall had virus on them. And even better, in that particular stall, the samples were very animal-y. For example, scientists found virus on a feather/hair remover, a cart of the sort that we see in photographs that are used for transporting cages and, best of all, a metal cage in a back room.

Hair/feather remover, a cart does not say raccoon dog DNA.

Quote:

... one of the co-authors of the study, Eddie Holmes, had been taken to the Huanan market several years before the pandemic and shown raccoon dogs in one of the stalls.

He didn't say which stall specifically in the article.

Now here's where the article's information conflicts with itself:

Quote:

And at the end of our sleuth work, we checked the GPS coordinates on his camera, and we find that he took the photo at the same stall, where five samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2.

But the caption under the images of the raccon dogs says this:

Quote:

These two photos, taken in 2014 by scientist Eddie Holmes, show raccoon dogs and unknown birds caged in the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. GPS coordinates of these images confirm that the animals were housed in the southwest corner of the market, where researchers found evidence of the coronavirus in January 2020.

So which is it, the raccoon dogs in the images were in that specific stall or the general area of the stall?

If you've ever done geocaching you'd know the best GPS can do is the general area, close but you still have to look around for the cache.


Not that it's all that relevant. In 2014 there were live raccoon dogs sold in or near the stall where 5 positive COVID cultures were detected.

That still leaves 2 possible scenarios, one, the source was a raccoon dog in that stall, or, two, the vendor in that stall was the super spreader who contaminated all the surfaces. Yet people are running with this as if it is a smoking gun when it isn't.

Tests in ICUs where COVID patients were cared for found positive cultures all over the place.

Originally Posted by angrysoba

... Literally nobody has seriously argued that since about March 2020. The spillover suggestions are that the animals sold in the markets are from the wildlife trade. This means wildlife bred outside of Wuhan, maybe far outside Wuhan.

My point was that the raccoon dogs could not have been infected by bats also for sale at the market. It wasn't a comment about the bats infecting people.

However, the rest is all well and good but how does that provide evidence as opposed to just speculating it could explain the lack of other infected raccoon dogs? How much of a coincidence would it be if the virus was only in one animal and that animal ended up in a Wuhan market within miles of the WIV and the other nearby labs? That's waay more of a stretch than the virus coincidentally turned up near the labs where they were studying similar viruses.

If a SARS-like coronavirus was circulating in a population of raccoon dogs why wouldn't one or more have ended up at other markets? Or ended up infecting one or more of the animal trappers? Or the transporters?

And now the data is getting misstated like a game of telephone. One source says the positive COVID cultures were combined with raccoon dog DNA. So I hunted down information closer to the source:

Science, Mar 2023: Unearthed genetic sequences from China market may point to animal origin of COVID-19

Quote:

Gao’s team used swabs to collect environmental samples from many of the stalls of the Huanan market between 1 January 2020, the day it was shut down, and 2 March 2020. The group reported last year that some of the samples that tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 also had human genetic material, but no DNA from other animals. The team concluded in a preprint posted on Research Square on 25 February 2022 that this “highly suggests” humans brought the virus to the market; Gao and his co-authors said this meant the marketplace was not the origin of the pandemic but simply amplified early spread of SARS-CoV-2.

But Gao is promoting the hypothesis that the virus originated outside of China. So there is this:

Quote:

The study has not yet been published in a peer-reviewed journal, and Science first reported last year that some scientists questioned why a graph in the preprint seemed to show animal sequences had been found in the market’s virus-positive environment samples, but offered no data of their identity. The analysis presented to the WHO panel this week now suggests some coronavirus-positive samples collected contained DNA or RNA from raccoon dogs, civets, and other mammals now known to be highly susceptible to SARS-CoV-2.

Which samples, which stalls, which animals specifically, what do they mean by "suggests? The graph is in the Science link with this statement:

Quote:

Missing data?
Chinese researchers in February 2022 posted a preprint that presented this graph to show several environmental samples from the market containing SARS-CoV-2 also had human genetic material, but offered no data about viral samples that were mixed with other animal species.

And keep in mind these were environmental samples, not direct human or animal samples.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

What Chan was arguing was that there was no reason to believe raccoon dogs were on sale at the market at the time of Covid's emergence. These swabs heavily suggest otherwise if they pan out.

Except the swabs don't show raccoon dogs were at the market at the time COVID broke out. At best they might or might not show that. A clarification is needed.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Snark is not helping you.

Of course I understand the significance. People favoring the spillover hypothesis are acting like it's the smoking gun/source animal found when it is not.

Let's get a few things straight. One of reports says the positive cultures were from a surface used to remove hair and feathers. That is not the same as "suggests raccoon dogs were present at the time when Covid-19 samples were taken".

NPR Mar 17, 2023: WHO calls on China to share data on raccoon dog link to pandemic. Here's what we knowHair/feather remover, a cart does not say raccoon dog DNA.

He didn't say which stall specifically in the article.

Now here's where the article's information conflicts with itself:
But the caption under the images of the raccon dogs says this:So which is it, the raccoon dogs in the images were in that specific stall or the general area of the stall?

If you've ever done geocaching you'd know the best GPS can do is the general area, close but you still have to look around for the cache.


Not that it's all that relevant. In 2014 there were live raccoon dogs sold in or near the stall where 5 positive COVID cultures were detected.

That still leaves 2 possible scenarios, one, the source was a raccoon dog in that stall, or, two, the vendor in that stall was the super spreader who contaminated all the surfaces. Yet people are running with this as if it is a smoking gun when it isn't.

Tests in ICUs where COVID patients were cared for found positive cultures all over the place.


My point was that the raccoon dogs could not have been infected by bats also for sale at the market. It wasn't a comment about the bats infecting people.

However, the rest is all well and good but how does that provide evidence as opposed to just speculating it could explain the lack of other infected raccoon dogs? How much of a coincidence would it be if the virus was only in one animal and that animal ended up in a Wuhan market within miles of the WIV and the other nearby labs? That's waay more of a stretch than the virus coincidentally turned up near the labs where they were studying similar viruses.

If a SARS-like coronavirus was circulating in a population of raccoon dogs why wouldn't one or more have ended up at other markets? Or ended up infecting one or more of the animal trappers? Or the transporters?

And now the data is getting misstated like a game of telephone. One source says the positive COVID cultures were combined with raccoon dog DNA. So I hunted down information closer to the source:

Science, Mar 2023: Unearthed genetic sequences from China market may point to animal origin of COVID-19But Gao is promoting the hypothesis that the virus originated outside of China. So there is this:
Which samples, which stalls, which animals specifically, what do they mean by "suggests? The graph is in the Science link with this statement:

And keep in mind these were environmental samples, not direct human or animal samples.

I mean, I would just refer you to the answer I gave lomiller, which is that at the moment we don’t have anything concrete. I also said before that this should be treated with caution. It may turn out to be a nothingburger, and while you complain about my “snark” you also said you were surprised I wasn’t “taking this to the bank”. But I am not and I am not going to see this as a “smoking gun”. I have never talked about any pieces of evidence as smoking guns. Everything looks piecemeal and contingent on other sources that themselves are often of dubious reliability. What is interesting, though, is that SAGO and the WHO is getting impatient with China over this.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Except the swabs don't show raccoon dogs were at the market at the time COVID broke out. At best they might or might not show that. A clarification is needed.

This is why I used the word “suggest” and not “show”.

[jt512]

Originally Posted by lomiller

Don't be ridiculous. We KNOW intelligence agencies don't have capabilities for original scintific research, because they don't do original scientific research.

All the national labs, which are under the DOE, do original scientific research.

Quote:

They are not virologists, it's not part of their job.

You don't know that they don't have virologists on stall. And if they don't, the have access to every virologist in the free world, including the ones who did the very research you are talking about.

Quote:

You suggestion that maybe they could secretly the best scintific researchers in the world...

Strawman again. Strike three. You're out. Bye.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Except the swabs don't show raccoon dogs were at the market at the time COVID broke out. At best they might or might not show that. A clarification is needed.

From your link:
Not new:

Quote:

According to the Chinese’s authors pre-print (Liu et al 2022), of 1380, samples collected from the environment and animals within the market in early 2020, 73/923 environmental samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2-specific RT-qPCR, from various stalls and sewerage systems in and around the market, but no virus was detected in 457 animal samples tested. The animal samples included animal bodies, frozen animal carcases and animal products, as well as stray animals around the market, and covered 18 species. According to the preprint, raccoon dogs were not amongst the animals tested.

Why not?

The only thing new is this:

Quote:

However, the presence of high levels of raccoon dog mitochondrial DNA in the metagenomics data from environmental samples identified in the new analysis, suggest that raccoon dog and other animals may have been present before the market was cleaned as part of the public health intervention.

I'm not sure how long mitochondrial DNA survives on surfaces. We can recover it from ancient humans' teeth and bones.

Here is Gao's paper from 2022. I believe what's new was a further analysis of the genomes from this study that was online briefly then taken down.
Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 in the environment and animal samples of the Huanan Seafood Market

Quote:

Herein, we presented the SARS-CoV-2 detection results of 1380 samples collected from the environment and the animals within the market in early 2020. By SARS-CoV-2-specific RT-qPCR, 73 environmental samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 and three live viruses were successfully isolated. The viruses from the market shared nucleotide identity of 99.980% to 99.993% with the human isolate HCoV/Wuhan/IVDC-HB-01. In contrast, no virus was detected in the animal swabs covering 18 species of animals in the market. The SARS-COV-2 nucleic acids in the positive environmental samples showed significant correlation of abundance of Homo sapiens with SARS-CoV-2. In summary, this study provided convincing evidence of the prevalence of SARS-CoV-2 in the Huanan Seafood Market during the early stage of COVID-19 outbreak.

Gao is/was pursuing an origin outside of China. I posted about this earlier. Here's more from his paper:

Quote:

In addition, recent studies from different countries suggest that SARS-CoV-2 circulation preceded the initial detection of cases by weeks. Some of the suspected positive samples were detected even earlier than the first case in Wuhan, suggesting that potential circulation of the virus in other regions may have been missed(10-14)

I believe he is talking about cases in Italy. And we still don't have good data on if the Military Games in Wuhan spread the virus. That is some data we'll never get.


I doubt the WHO members didn't see this:

Quote:

Historical photographic evidence was provided that shows raccoon dogs and other animals were sold at these specific stalls in the past.

Bottom line is it appears what is new is that animal mitochondrial DNA was found in the environmental swabs taken in the stalls at the wet market. That's a no brainer, there were animals for sale in the market.

It may have or even probably did include raccoon dogs.

What no one seems to be noticing is the COVID specimens from the wet market closely matched human COVID samples. So the raccoon dogs if they were the source of the pandemic had to have been carrying a human adapted strain of COVID. That is unlikely if this represents the first jump.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

...while you complain about my “snark” you also said you were surprised I wasn’t “taking this to the bank”. But I am not and I am not going to see this as a “smoking gun”. I have never talked about any pieces of evidence as smoking guns. ...

You vacillate between implied confidence it was a spillover and this, "I have not ruled a lab leak out."

It's OK, I do the same. I do think the evidence is leaning more and more toward the lab but that's because I find fault with Worobey's paper. IMO he's trying to relive his glory days when he mapped out HIV cases to find the source. But so much differed there, in particular he had more cases to analyze and he had a wider geographical area to narrow the source down to.

He excuses the missing data on early cases and leaves the CCDC labs off his map. The cases he does include have some connection to the market. Did he ascertain if any of them had any connections to the WIV or the CCDC labs? Did any of the positive cases ride the subway, especially line 2 that goes to the WIV? Did he take into account there are no residential areas near the WIV which would bias where the infected persons lived. Did he take into account the suspicious claim made by Shi that no one in the lab was sick all winter long?

It's a pretty biased study and I don't see a lot of critical analysis of it.

[angrysoba]

Yes, but look again...

Quote:

According to the Chinese’s authors pre-print (Liu et al 2022), of 1380, samples collected from the environment and animals within the market in early 2020, 73/923 environmental samples tested positive for SARS-CoV-2-specific RT-qPCR, from various stalls and sewerage systems in and around the market, but no virus was detected in 457 animal samples tested. The animal samples included animal bodies, frozen animal carcases and animal products, as well as stray animals around the market, and covered 18 species. According to the preprint, raccoon dogs were not amongst the animals tested.

Indeed, why were raccoon dogs not tested? This is the problem I pointed out before. You won't find it if you don't look in likely sources.

When we kept hearing from LL proponents the meme "80,000 animals tested and no virus" they were testing animals that were unlikely to carry the virus such as stray dogs and zoo animals.

And...

Quote:

In addition, recent studies from different countries suggest that SARS-CoV-2 circulation preceded the initial detection of cases by weeks. Some of the suspected positive samples were detected even earlier than the first case in Wuhan, suggesting that potential circulation of the virus in other regions may have been missed(10-14)

Yes, the CCP wants to imply that the virus was imported. They don't state it directly because they want the paper to get through peer review and claiming that it came from outside China would be an unsupportable conclusion given that it requires some extreme gap-filling or conspiracy (i.e the Italians or Americans brought it in during the Wuhan Military Games).

Apparently the Gao paper was the reason why people like Florence Debarre were looking at GSAID waiting for the sequences to appear. It seems to have something to do with how sequences and reads are stored and embargoed (so that nobody else gets to see them before the pre-prints get published in journals), but because it has been about one year since Gao's preprint came out, other researchers were expecting the reads and the sequences to appear suddenly online.

According to one Twitter thread, this is how it happened...

Originally Posted by Jeremy Kamil

What really happened? Atlantic reporter got scoop about WHO’s SAGO briefing where researchers who were NOT ready for this to go public shared findings on 🦝 🧬 🦠 . China’s govt caught *everyone* off guard by demanding their scientists remove the data from GISAID. 360° **** show...

2/ Per
@GISAID
rules (data access agreement) users are not allowed to publish findings based on GISAID data unless they make a good faith attempt to forge a collaboration (include authorship for) the submitting lab that generated the data.


3/
@flodebarre

@edwardcholmes

@MichaelWorobey
would do this anyway because they’re honest and good researchers, but either way they *had to* contact the Chinese CDC group to try to collaborate on the raccoon dog DNA/RNA findings…

4/ at the same time, it was right for these researchers to brief
@WHO
SAGO about these important data & by the way, the China CDC group also attended and presented at the same SAGO meeting. So things were maybe looking good for this going public?

5/ But.. Either at or soon after the SAGO meeting, the data were suddenly “Un-released” at
@GISAID
per a request from the Chinese group that had originally shared it.. this shocked & upset everyone! No one expected this critical data “to go dark”

6/ the main reason the Chinese scientists shared the “raw reads” file sequencing data in the first place is because their pre-print has been stuck in peer review for >1 year already. They’re *obliged* to publicly share raw data before the work is published at
@Nature
!

Link

I think some LLers are saying, "Well, how convenient that this important data only appeared for a nanosecond and isn't available any more..." But it makes sense if the data was being looked for, and then disappeared after SAGO notified the Chinese CDC who were upset about it being there.