Origins of Covid

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Sherkeu

For China to push origin theories that reduce culpability is a given- plenty of evidence that they are about as transparent as a tar pit- but the motives of the global scientists, ie the "experts", is interesting. There seems to be some "greater good" reason for it in not hampering future virus research by focusing on what is still the next big risk (negligent animal trade across regions) and not what might actually have happened.

IMO protecting that negligent animal trade would be the top priority for any Chinese officials trying to hide something "for the greater good". Such trade cuts deep into traditional Chinese culture and would reflect badly on the culture and Chinese sense of identity as a whole. It'd have been far easier to scapegoat a local scientist or two than to revaluate traditional food and medicine practices for an entire culture.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Link

Repeating this part:

Quote:

clear evidence of coinfection and evolution in bats without involvement of other species.

It means the pangolin wasn't needed. And earlier stuff was posted about coronaviruses being transmitted back and forth between bats and the pangolin.

This was interesting and makes perfect sense.

Quote:

However, identifying mutations under positive selection from frequency data alone can be misleading, as allele frequencies in viral pandemics are significantly driven by biased sampling, founder effects, and superspreading events [22].

I'm not sure how common it is for researchers to address this but it's encouraging to read here that at least some do.

Quote:

These results suggest that the majority of adaptive changes which generated SARS-CoV-2 took place prior to its emergence in the human population....

That we fail to find evidence of diversifying selection on the terminal branch leading up to the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 in humans (Fig 2B), indicates that the adaptations that created a generalist capable of efficient replication in humans and other mammals, probably did not occur in the unsampled SARS-CoV-2 lineage.

I think this is consistent with what Quay discussed. I have to go review that.

ETA: Yep, this is a paragraph from Quay's work in post #182.

Quote:

Furthermore, when one of us (Chan, in collaboration with Zhan) scrutinized the evolution of SARS-CoV-1 and SARS-CoV-2 in the early months of their respective epidemics, the former was observed to have mutated rapidly in early human cases as the virus adapted to its new host, while the latter had not. "The virus was well adapted to human transmission from the moment it was first detected," the World Health Organization's global study on the origins of the virus commented in November.

He supported that with his genetic analysis of the first cases.

Quote:

... a future spillover, potentially coupled with a recombination event with SARS-CoV-2, is possible, and such a “SARS-CoV-3” emergence could be sufficiently divergent to evade either natural or vaccine-acquired immunity, as demonstrated for SARS-CoV-1 versus SARS-CoV-2 [68]. We must therefore dramatically ramp up surveillance for Sarbecoviruses at the human–animal interface [15] and monitor carefully for future SARS-CoV emergence in the human population.

I wonder if this monitoring will occur given it is in China. But also given this is what the WIV was studying and now being suspected of being the source of COVID 19, that might set some of this research back.

[Skeptic Ginger]

You might have some catching up to do since some of this has been addressed.

Originally Posted by lomiller

Corona viruses in bats in that region have been recognised as dangerous and a risk for making the jump from bats to humans even before the SARS outbreak 20 years ago. OF COURSE the Wuhan lab is studying this issue. China only has 2 BSL-4 labs where live viruses can be studied and this one is located in a known high risk area. In fact studying this known risk is likely a major reason why the lab was built in the first place.

You were doing good until you got to this. The bats are in the Yunnan caves some distance from Wuhan.

Distance from Yunnan to Wuhan is 1,292 kilometers. This air travel distance is equal to 803 miles.

Originally Posted by lomiller

The fact that a virology lab is studying viruses tells us absolutely nothing about whether this is where the viruses came from because this is what BSL-4 labs do and they would be doing it REGARDLESS of where the outbreak occurred.

As to why the outbreak and lab are in exactly the same city, there is a little coincidence there but you also need to take into account that:
- Since SARS, another bat virus jumping to humans has been considered highly probabaly and possibly inevitable.
- the region is a high risk for this type of event so it makes sense for this lab to be doing the work.
- not only is the city in an area where bat viruses could jump to humans, there are cultural practices like live animal markets where infected animals are brought into close contact with a large number of people.

This is factually wrong.

Originally Posted by lomiller

If we narrow down where this "inevitable" crossover is likely to occur to a large city, in that region of China where live animal markets are still the norm and Wuhan looks like a probable epicenter for any such event. It's no coincidence e at all that is where China would center it's research.

Again, factually wrong. Wuhan is a modern city and the seafood market initially suspected was not where the first cases occurred.

Originally Posted by lomiller

Identifying bat viruses in China has been an ongoing research topic since SARS, because a virus like Covid has emerging there been a known risk for at least that long.

What is actually most telling is that for all the samples collected in that time Covid-19 was NOT one of them.

China destroyed some of the work at the WIV and blocked access to the genome work that had been pubic previously

Originally Posted by lomiller

For it to get into a lab in the first place someone needed to have collected it, so finding either in the wild or in the previously collected samples should be relatively straightforward. The fact that no really close ancestor has yet been identified suggests Covid was never collected and never in a lab and therefor could not have escaped from one.

I'll find the relevant posts addressing this and get back to you.

Originally Posted by lomiller

IMO protecting that negligent animal trade would be the top priority for any Chinese officials trying to hide something "for the greater good". Such trade cuts deep into traditional Chinese culture and would reflect badly on the culture and Chinese sense of identity as a whole. It'd have been far easier to scapegoat a local scientist or two than to revaluate traditional food and medicine practices for an entire culture.

I think if you read some of the links in this thread you'll see this is true for rural China but not necessarily true in the more modernized areas of China. Of course they eat ethnic foods (like bat soup) and use traditional medicines. But there is no evidence that is how the virus jumped species.

In fact if you look at angrysoba's post above it provides evidence the virus jumps species from bats and back on a regular basis.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

You were doing good until you got to this. The bats are in the Yunnan caves some distance from Wuhan.

Distance from Yunnan to Wuhan is 1,292 kilometers. This air travel distance is equal to 803 miles.

Hence me using the term region. In fact post Covid research is saying that the region where similar viruses may be found is much larger still and may extend all the way from SE Asia to eastern Europe.

Nonetheless my point stands. Wuhan is centrally located in the region of concern following SARS and the lab there is China's only BSL-4 lab working with human infection. Corona virus work was guaranteed to be going on there so is military and potentially industrial work is guaranteed to be going on there as well.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

This is factually wrong.

No, it isn't

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Again, factually wrong. Wuhan is a modern city and the seafood market initially suspected was not where the first cases occurred.

Sure it's a modern city, but it's still a more recently developed city in a more remote region where these practices are more common. I never said these practices are non-existent elsewhere. but they are more common in places like Wuhan.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I think if you read some of the links in this thread you'll see this is true for rural China but not necessarily true in the more modernized areas of China. Of course they eat ethnic foods (like bat soup) and use traditional medicines. But there is no evidence that is how the virus jumped species.

Yes there is. Covid-19 has RNA from a Sabrecorona virus that infects Pangolins as part of it's spike structure. Since this specific spike structure doesn't infect bats efficiently but does infect both Pangolins and Humans efficiently it must have been acquired while infecting a Pangolin.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

In fact if you look at angrysoba's post above it provides evidence the virus jumps species from bats and back on a regular basis.

Ok, and?

It's no surprise that related corona viruses can readily infect other bats as their spike structure already attaches efficiently to bat ACE2 receptors.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by lomiller

Hence me using the term region. In fact post Covid research is saying that the region where similar viruses may be found is much larger still and may extend all the way from SE Asia to eastern Europe.

Nonetheless my point stands. Wuhan is centrally located in the region of concern following SARS and the lab there is China's only BSL-4 lab working with human infection. Corona virus work was guaranteed to be going on there so is military and potentially industrial work is guaranteed to be going on there as well.

This has all been addressed yet here you are repeating a falsehood without addressing the evidence that has been posted that you are wrong. Wuhan is not the same region, not even close.

Originally Posted by lomiller

No, it isn't

Yes it is and the evidence it is has been posted. Please address the evidence if you want to keep repeating these falsehoods.

Originally Posted by lomiller

Sure it's a modern city, but it's still a more recently developed city in a more remote region where these practices are more common. I never said these practices are non-existent elsewhere. but they are more common in places like Wuhan.

No they are not.

Originally Posted by lomiller

Yes there is. Covid-19 has RNA from a Sabrecorona virus that infects Pangolins as part of it's spike structure. Since this specific spike structure doesn't infect bats efficiently but does infect both Pangolins and Humans efficiently it must have been acquired while infecting a Pangolin.

You are not keeping up with the discussion. That has been addressed. It's an early assumption that was wrong.

Originally Posted by lomiller

Ok, and?

It's no surprise that related corona viruses can readily infect other bats as their spike structure already attaches efficiently to bat ACE2 receptors.

Again, moving on.

I just went back through the posts from ~page 6 and I see you were involved in the discussion at that time. Yet here you are posting while you either ignored everything in between or you are simply plugging back in where you left off.

I'm not sure how to address this without just saying go catch up.


Here are evidence supported facts that have been discussed with citations in the thread.

The bat caves are nowhere near Wuhan.

The fact Wuhan is a large transportation hub is not evidence a bat virus from Yunnan should just show up there. Why there, where the viruses were being studied? Why not in Beijing or Hong Kong? And not just that, but Quay showed the cases clustered around a mass transit line that included the WIV.

Despite the denial, there is evidence the WIV was working with live viral cultures in Vero cells (monkey cells}, and there is evidence they had live bats at the Institute.

No one here thinks the lab 'created' COVID-19. But there is evidence they were working with closely related viruses.

post #229
They were studying live cultures at the WIV It’s from a paper before the COVID 19 pandemic they were looking at coronaviruses related to SARS.

Quote:

... particularly in the receptor binding domain of the spike protein. Most importantly, we report the first recorded isolation of a live SL-CoV (bat SL-CoV-WIV1) from bat faecal samples in Vero E6 cells, which has typical coronavirus morphology, 99.9% sequence identity to Rs3367 and uses ACE2 from humans, civets and Chinese horseshoe bats for cell entry.*…

Re the seafood market: There is no evidence live pangolins and live bats were in close proximity with each other in the seafood market.

But more importantly, THE SEAFOOD (AKA WET) MARKET WAS NOT THE PLACE THE FIRST INFECTIONS OCCURRED. It is suspected that maybe a superspreader event took place there. And I believe that only included 4 cases.

There is evidence the WHO and China produced a limited investigation. Since the report the director of the WHO walked back his claim the lab was ruled out.

China removed related research from public view.

For the best summary of what we know to date and why the lab cannot be ruled out, listen to the podcast (2 parts) in post #271.

It should be required material for this thread. I have a post before that which summarized much of what was said, but honestly the podcast is all about critically thinking the origin discussion.

And there is this: Call for a Full and Unrestricted International Forensic Investigation into the Origins of COVID-19 published in the WSJ. More than 25 scientists signed it (see the last 2 pages for their names and credentials.

If you do nothing else, listen to the podcast. It will catch you up to where this discussion is.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Well let's address this latest headline because obviously it will be posted here:

NPR: WHO Points To Wildlife Farms In Southern China As Likely Source Of Pandemic

I'm keeping an open mind to a point.

Convenient:

Quote:

China shut down those wildlife farms in February 2020,

And then we get to this:

Quote:

says Peter Daszak, a disease ecologist with EcoHealth Alliance and a member of the WHO delegation that traveled to China this year. During that trip, Daszak says, the WHO team found new evidence that these wildlife farms were supplying vendors at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan with animals.

So why are they trying to pass this off as a valid conclusion? We know the seafood market wasn't the origin. Are they hoping people would have forgotten that by now?

And the evidence?

Quote:

"China closes that pathway down for a reason," Daszak says. "The reason was, back in February 2020, they believed this was the most likely pathway [for the coronavirus to spread to Wuhan]. And when the WHO report comes out ... we believe it's the most likely pathway too."

China shut down a whole industry of farming wild animals so they must have thought it was where the jump occurred.

There is this claim which I'd love to see corroborating evidence for but we already have it and they are playing fast and loose with their definition of "many positive samples". I'll go search the earlier pages of the thread:

Quote:

Wang says that after the outbreak at the Huanan market, Chinese scientists went there and looked for the virus.

"In the live animal section, they had many positive samples," Wang says. "They even have two samples from which they could isolate live virus."

Funny, a year later as we are just now hearing this? And conveniently it's after the WHO report (now they have a new report?), and after that report was seriously questioned? (See link above to the open letter.)

But most importantly of all, WTF is this when we know the first cases were not connected to the market.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Well let's address this latest headline because obviously it will be posted here:

NPR: WHO Points To Wildlife Farms In Southern China As Likely Source Of Pandemic

I'm keeping an open mind to a point.

Convenient:

And then we get to this:

So why are they trying to pass this off as a valid conclusion? We know the seafood market wasn't the origin. Are they hoping people would have forgotten that by now?

Who are "they" and why are "they" hoping people have forgotten?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Who are "they" and why are "they" hoping people have forgotten?

Did you even read my post or the source link?

They are the Chinese government and the members of the WHO team that are going along with this coverup.

And before you start screaming CT that way>, this is all documented here in the thread, well documented.

And in addition, didn't you post the link to the podcast where this was laid out? Yes, you did. Maybe you need to listen to it again.

From your post:

Quote:

Jamie Metzl, who I think organized that recent letter, has appeared on the Joe Rogan podcast.

He explains why he thinks a lab leak is a strong possibility... ...and also about the pushback against the lab leak hypothesis. He talks quite a bit about Peter Daszak as well:

BTW, it involves the nature of the working relationship between the WHO and the Chinese government. It doesn't involve some back-room conspiracy.

[Skeptic Ginger]

An earlier statement from the WHO investigator Jamie Metzl, who he is and the investigative team's response to Metzl.

Quote:

In response to the WHO-China joint study press conference, held in Wuhan on February 9, 2021, I today issued the following statement:

Although I remain a steadfast supporter of the World Health Organization and its Director General, Dr. Tedros Adhanom, I am appalled by the WHO expert committee’s announcement in its ill-advised February 9 Wuhan press event that the possibility of an accidental lab leak does not merit further investigation. While no evidence has yet been found indicating that COVID-19 stems from a transmission between animal hosts in the wild or from frozen foods, as the committee entertains, significant evidence points to an accidental leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology as being a possible origin of the pandemic.

That the Chinese government had veto power over who from the international community could participate in the investigation and stage managed the investigation process itself, as well as the clear conflict of interest of WHO investigator Peter Daszak, raise fundamental questions about the credibility of the investigation as currently construed.

It continues until we get to this:

Quote:

I therefore call on WHO Director General Dr. Tedros Adhanom, whom I greatly respect and admire, to remove Peter Daszak from the investigation team, announce that all hypotheses will be fully examined, including the possibility of an accidental lab leak, and renegotiate the terms of reference for the investigation to ensure that a full and unrestricted examination of the pandemic’s origins will be possible.

Note: The day after I released this statement, on February 11, 2021, WHO Director General Adhanom wisely stated in a briefing event for member states: “I want to clarify that all hypotheses remain open and require further study.” It is certainly my hope that this statement makes clear that all hypotheses, including the possibility of an accidental lab leak, be fully explored by the WHO expert committee and others.

About Metzl

Quote:

Jamie Metzl is a technology and healthcare futurist, geopolitical expert, novelist, social entrepreneur, media commentator, Senior Fellow of the Atlantic Council, Singularity University faculty member, and the Founder and Chair of the global social movement OneShared.World. In 2019, he was appointed to the World Health Organization expert advisory committee on human genome editing. Jamie previously served in the U.S. National Security Council, State Department, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and as a Human Rights Officer for the United Nations in Cambodia. He serves on the Advisory Council to Walmart’s Future of Retail Policy Lab and has been an election monitor in Afghanistan and the Philippines and advised the government of North Korea on the establishment of Special Economic Zones....

The podcast is well worth people's time.

[Sherkeu]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Well let's address this latest headline because obviously it will be posted here:

NPR: WHO Points To Wildlife Farms In Southern China As Likely Source Of Pandemic

I'm keeping an open mind to a point.

Convenient:

And then we get to this:

So why are they trying to pass this off as a valid conclusion? We know the seafood market wasn't the origin. Are they hoping people would have forgotten that by now?

And the evidence? China shut down a whole industry of farming wild animals so they must have thought it was where the jump occurred.

There is this claim which I'd love to see corroborating evidence for but we already have it and they are playing fast and loose with their definition of "many positive samples". I'll go search the earlier pages of the thread:Funny, a year later as we are just now hearing this? And conveniently it's after the WHO report (now they have a new report?), and after that report was seriously questioned? (See link above to the open letter.)

But most importantly of all, WTF is this when we know the first cases were not connected to the market.

China did sample the animals in the market: all negative
They also sampled 35 species in various wild and farm locations- all negative (though it was less than 2k samples which seems low! - see paper below)

I have yet to hear of any of the farm or market samples collected early on having a positive SARS-COV-2 result. None. Which is kind of amazing since humans have transmitted Sars-COV-2 to a variety of animals. (The pangolin and bat samples were taken long before the outbreak.)

Someone did a summary paper on animal testing here:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/tbed.13885

Quote:

Another study from China reported testing for SARS‐CoV‐2 on 1,914 serum samples, collected at varying times and obtained from varying sources, from 35 animal species (including pigs, cows, sheep, horses, chickens, ducks, geese, experimental mice, rats, guinea pigs, rabbits, monkeys, dogs, cats, wild camels, foxes, minx, alpacas, ferrets, bamboo rats, peacocks, eagles, tigers, rhinoceroses, pangolins, leopard cats, jackals, giant pandas, masked civets, porcupines, bears, yellow‐throated martens, weasels, red pandas and wild boar) using a double‐antigen sandwich ELISA, with no positive results (Deng et al., 2020). Of most note is the lack of positive ELISA results among 15 pet and 99 street dogs from Wuhan (Deng et al., 2020). Otherwise, there is very limited information presented regarding the animal populations from which the samples were derived.

*I think he mentions the negative dogs because cats early on were negative, but then later many were testing positive (14% or so...its in the above paper), but none of the dogs.

Where are the results of all the testing I am sure they have done?
e.g.:
Where are results from the Yunnan bat caves they took over a year ago? (and what became of scientists' confiscated samples?)
What about the villagers nearby? Did they have antibodies for SARS-COV-2?
Where are the results of the hundreds of bat samples the WIV had not processed yet before 2020?
What was the data from testing other wet markets around Wuhan?
Where are the retroactive flu sample results from Fall of 2019?

At every point in the supply chain of things coming into Wuhan, or things that could help narrow down a start date or area or origin, testing should have been done. And I bet China did do lots of testing. How could they not when it is also dangerous for them not to know? Either way, they aren't sharing.


These are not difficult things to do and China had plenty of resources to go collect and test. This is basic stuff. Where is all the data?

It's possible I missed it somewhere so anyone with good scientific googling abilities, please let me know if you find something!

[angrysoba]

Well, maybe you can tune in and ask some questions to Vincent Racaniello and Amy Rosenfeld when they do their live Q&A in about 45 hours (they do one every week).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydYwVis9zvE

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Well, maybe you can tune in and ask some questions to Vincent Racaniello and Amy Rosenfeld when they do their live Q&A in about 45 hours (they do one every week).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydYwVis9zvE

Is that a Q&A about the origin or just general COVID questions?

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Is that a Q&A about the origin or just general COVID questions?

It’s general but I have seen questions abiut the origins there. I am assuming the WHO report is coming out soon (this month?) so it may be even more relevant than usual.

I would like Racaniello to go on Rogan not just about Covid origins but also because Rogan seems to be spreading or allowing a lot of bad Covid-related information re: vaccines, vitamin D and lockdowns.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

This has all been addressed yet here you are repeating a falsehood without addressing the evidence that has been posted that you are wrong. Wuhan is not the same region, not even close.

This is both false and dishonest. I've posted the links to the peer reviewed science multiple times and you have responded with nothing but hand waving.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

You are not keeping up with the discussion. That has been addressed. It's an early assumption that was wrong.

False again. The paper in Nature that I linked to confirming the recombination event and Pangolin virus RNA in the Covid spike structure was published Feb 2021. The other one that found Covid reactive antibodies in bats in close proximity to Pangolins that are know to end up in markets like the one in Wuhan was published in Dec 2020.

Your media comment are all older than that. So is the only actual paper you have provided.

WRT to that paper. It argued that the similarities in spike structure could be accounted for by parallel evolution. While parallel evolution could be for physical similarities, it seems unlikely to explain the genetic similarities with Pangolin virus spike structure.

I pointed this out at the time, and you had no response. I linked to newer research that came to the same conclusion as the initial paper from last year and you STILL provided no response beyond your own assertions that the papers were wrong.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Sherkeu

China did sample the animals in the market: all negative

Even the "early" cases of Covid occurred up to 6 weeks after the initial jump to humans and testing of the animals in the market would have happened 3-4 months after the crossover. The infected animal would certainly be long gone at this point.

This is also why there were some early cases that had no direct link to the market. 6 weeks is plenty of time for community circulation to begin. Some of these early cases could easily have been 4 jumps from removed from anyone who was at the market personally.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I'm keeping an open mind to a point.

Yet in the very next post:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

... this coverup.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by lomiller

This is both false and dishonest. I've posted the links to the peer reviewed science multiple times and you have responded with nothing but hand waving.

Let's start with the specifics here.

Quote:

the region is a high risk for this type of event so it makes sense for this lab to be doing the work.

What region? The bat region is 800 miles from the WIV which is studying bat viruses.

Quote:

- not only is the city in an area where bat viruses could jump to humans, there are cultural practices like live animal markets where infected animals are brought into close contact with a large number of people.

China is not an homogenous country.

Do you believe there are bat caves in Wuhan? Think people from Wuhan are exposed to live horseshoe bats? Do you have any evidence of that?

You called it "a little coincidence". No, it is a huge smoking gun coincidence.

I remind you the outbreak didn't start at the market.

Originally Posted by lomiller

False again. The paper in Nature that I linked to confirming the recombination event and Pangolin virus RNA in the Covid spike structure was published Feb 2021. The other one that found Covid reactive antibodies in bats in close proximity to Pangolins that are know to end up in markets like the one in Wuhan was published in Dec 2020.

The outbreak did not start in the market.

Yes there are pangolin segments in the COVID 19 genome. No one, here anyway, is arguing that there isn't.

What the research has shown however, is that coronaviruses have crossed between pangolins and bats and back again multiple times. For a similar example COVID has crossed from humans to mink and back again.

There are no papers that have definitively said this virus went from bat to pangolin to humans. There are papers that said it didn't have to. It could have come directly from a bat virus.

Originally Posted by lomiller

WRT to that paper. It argued that the similarities in spike structure could be accounted for by parallel evolution. While parallel evolution could be for physical similarities, it seems unlikely to explain the genetic similarities with Pangolin virus spike structure.

No one attributed it to parallel evolution.

Originally Posted by lomiller

I pointed this out at the time, and you had no response. I linked to newer research that came to the same conclusion as the initial paper from last year and you STILL provided no response beyond your own assertions that the papers were wrong.

How far back do I need to go to find this paper which I didn't respond to? I recall posting a source saying it didn't come from a pangolin which some people in the thread (could have been you) said it wasn't convincing. At that point in this discussion I didn't know which paper was correct.

There have also been cites here of other lab accidents. They happen from time to time even in level 4 labs and they have happened in countries besides China including the US and the UK.

But I'm at a loss to you repeating the bat to pangolin to human when there has been since that research cited showing it wasn't necessary. It could have come directly from a bat virus. This is what I mean by not keeping up.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by lomiller

Even the "early" cases of Covid occurred up to 6 weeks after the initial jump to humans and testing of the animals in the market would have happened 3-4 months after the crossover. The infected animal would certainly be long gone at this point.

This is also why there were some early cases that had no direct link to the market. 6 weeks is plenty of time for community circulation to begin. Some of these early cases could easily have been 4 jumps from removed from anyone who was at the market personally.

There isn't a single citation here supporting that hypothesis.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Yet in the very next post:

Right. Because I started posting as I was reading the source I cited. By the time I got to the statement about animal trade with the market, the paper's premise was false. It did not start at the market.

[Skeptic Ginger]

To review:

NPR: Virologist: WHO Team Found No 'Credible Link' Between Wuhan Labs, COVID-19

Quote:

Dutch virologist Marion Koopmans was part of that team that "reconstructed every step in that initial outbreak" in two weeks of investigation.

The team said the pandemic did not start at the city's Huanan Seafood Market, which was a location of an early coronavirus outbreak, because the virus was already circulating beforehand.

Now Daszik is claiming they have new evidence. But it isn't evidence the first cases were linked to the market, it is evidence supposedly showing wild animals were shipped to the market. And as for the WHO ruling the lab out, many virologists questioned that conclusion because no evidence was provided that it did not start in the lab and I posted a citation where the leader of that team denied the lab had been ruled out.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

But I'm at a loss to you repeating the bat to pangolin to human when there has been since that research cited showing it wasn't necessary. It could have come directly from a bat virus. This is what I mean by not keeping up.

The only paper you linked on this subject simply hand waved the issue away by insisting that it's "only a model" in much the same way climate science deniers try to hand wave away the greenhouse effect as "only a model"


Even if there had been such a paper released in the last couple weeks (remember the paper in Nature was from last month) it would need extraordinary evidence to counter a years worth of publications showing that Covid doesn't bind efficiently to bat ACE2 receptors.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

There isn't a single citation here supporting that hypothesis.

This has been discussed extensively. The first confirmed hospitalization occurred in mid Dec, while the virus itself is believed to have infected it's first human in early Oct or Late Nov.

We also know how quickly Covid spreads, this is how the Reproduction number is defined.

Whether you look a the timeline for the first cases or just purely at the R value Covid can easily spread beyond the market weeks before there is any chance for health officials to spot it. It takes 5 generations and 6 weeks to get to ~100 cases and even more time is likely to elapse before these cases turn serious.

The cases showing up in early Dec were 7-10 generations removed from the initial infection back in early Oct. That is LOTS of time for people with no direct connection to the market to become infected.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

To review:

NPR: Virologist: WHO Team Found No 'Credible Link' Between Wuhan Labs, COVID-19

You are ignoring most of what that link contains. For example this exchange between Koopmans and the interviewer:

Quote:

You probably also are hinting at the laboratory hypothesis.

I'll just raise it because people raised it. Is there any evidence or can you rule it out?

So from everything that we've looked at and we've also visited three labs involved and also three labs that work on these viruses. From that, we have not been able to find any credible link there.

IMO you are also misrepresenting what she is saying wrt uncertainly about the market. She is NOT saying the crossover didn't occur there, she is saying that it's not impossible the crossover didn't occur elsewhere

Quote:

And you there also see the market is not the whole story. The market has been one of those spreading events. But there also was circulation outside of, aside from the market.

And this is a long way of saying we really don't know. So the market has amplified. But even if you then have a case that has not [been] linked to the market, because of this stealth mechanism of spread, it can still be linked somehow, because someone picked up an infection from another person that was at the market.

As to where else it could have occurred:

Quote:

So if there's a lot of evidence pointing to the market, but maybe not all the evidence necessarily pointing to the market, is there any other location that's a suspect in your mind?

Other markets that's clearly there. And what we have recommended is really to [trace] back from those markets, follow the supply chains, go to the farms, see where they are. And that's already done. That will be in the report. Those supply chains do lead to regions where there's also the hotspot for the bat coronavirus. So that's a line to follow.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by lomiller

You are ignoring most of what that link contains. For example this exchange between Koopmans and the interviewer:

IMO you are also misrepresenting what she is saying wrt uncertainly about the market. She is NOT saying the crossover didn't occur there, she is saying that it's not impossible the crossover didn't occur elsewhere

As to where else it could have occurred:

Re the bolded, I am, because the WHO investigation and Daszik have been discredited. Not a CT but rather the nature of politics working with China. Daszik, however, has a huge financial interest in the research at the WIV.

I've skimmed the thread from the beginning. You latched onto the bat to pangolin to human hypothesis and never let go of it despite citation after citation supporting direct link from bats to the lab to people.

Originally Posted by lomiller

You were the one arguing "more evolution was needed" earlier in the thread. I told you several pages back that because we now know the spike from the Pangolin virus is ALREADY efficient at attaching to human ACE2 bindings that the resulting virus would be very infectious to humans as soon as the recombination event occurred.

The argument that this is a natural event is that this spike stricture was unknown prior to research into Covid-19 so no one knew it could infect humans until mid 2020. No researcher could have been working with it in 2019, and even if they were they would have had zero reason to expect it would help create a more infectious version of a bat virus.

Multiple citations in this thread have refuted this.

Originally Posted by lomiller

No, it doesn’t. The recombination that put Pangolin virus genes into the bat virus almost certainly occurred in a Pangolin.

Why were they trying to hide it before it “escaped” and why has no one been able to find it since?

Exactly my point. In this case, neither virus was a known human pathogen. It’d be completely nonsensical for a researcher to use them as a starting point. There is no logical reason to say this was a lab experiment and not recombination.

Recombination is well understood and known to be a major source of novel RNA viruses. If you are going to hand wave such well understood science I don’t know where we can go from here.

There are 2 sources, 1 bat virus 1 Pangolin virus.

Covid-19 IS the product recombination between a bat virus and a Pangolin virus.

Evidence was posted that the coronaviruses pass from bat to pangolin and back to bats. The recombination event easily could have happened in this process. There is no evidence of a direct pangolin source.

Originally Posted by lomiller

I read it the other day and didn't find it compelling. they offer no explanation for why the spike protein so closely resembles the one found in the Pangolin virus and they handwave away the evidence for the what that spike protein can and can't attach to. Subsequent finding that the Pangolin virus can directly infect humans directly contradicts their claim that spike protein cannot.

This was your response to my posting of the innocent pangolin paper. AT THAT POINT I hadn't taken a stand the pangolin to human occurred.

Originally Posted by lomiller

This isn't true. The intermediary is almost certainly a Pangolin. The spike protean for Covid-19 has characteristic who's only known natural counterpart is found in several Coronaviruses that infect Pangolins. It's not out of the question it exists elsewhere and we just haven't found it yet, but Pangolins as the intermediary fits everything else as well.

You have stuck to this hypothesis from the beginning of the thread.

Originally Posted by lomiller

Maybe because scientific papers rarely contain the word “eureka”

And more recently, the papers I linked up-thread
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-78703-6

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-21240-1

Identifies a new Covid relative circulating in bats in Thailand. They suggest that Covid-19’s bat ancestor could come from a much wider area than is currently being looked at, and this includes places like Thailand where bats and Pangolins live in the same areas.

Furthermore, they report Covid-19 reactive antibodies not just in bats but in a Pangolin as well indicating Covid-19 or a very close relative may be circulating there.

Again, the virus has jumped back and forth between the bats and pangolins.


I also cannot find at any time that I ignored your responses.

[lomiller]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Re the bolded, I am, because the WHO investigation and Daszik have been discredited.

Nothing in the link says anything of the kind. In fact I'd go so far as to say there is no logical connection whatsoever between what you bolded and the wildly unsubstantiated claim you jumped.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

I've skimmed the thread from the beginning. You latched onto the bat to pangolin to human hypothesis and never let go of it despite citation after citation supporting direct link from bats to the lab to people.

A single citation for which I detailed a number of issues. I also went on to show newer, better, work which continues to find a distinct connection to Pangolins. You know what type of people attach themselves to a single questionable paper and ignore the larger body of published work...

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Evidence was posted that the coronaviruses pass from bat to pangolin and back to bats. The recombination event easily could have happened in this process. There is no evidence of a direct pangolin source.

You seem to be confusing recombination events with other bat viruses which is neither surprising nor relevant.

A direct covid ancestor being passed back to a bat after recombination with a Pangolin virus is extremely unlikely because the resulting spike structure doesn't bind efficiently to bat ACE2. It DOES bind efficiently to both human and Pangolin ACE2. There are plausible sequence of events, but none of them involve passing the virus back to a bat.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Again, the virus has jumped back and forth between the bats and pangolins.

You repeating something doesn't make it true.

The jump to Pangolins is a one way trip because after the recombination alters the viruses spike it looses it's ability to propagate in bats (due to the inefficient binding with bat ACE2).

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by lomiller

Nothing in the link says anything of the kind. In fact I'd go so far as to say there is no logical connection whatsoever between what you bolded and the wildly unsubstantiated claim you jumped.



A single citation for which I detailed a number of issues. I also went on to show newer, better, work which continues to find a distinct connection to Pangolins. You know what type of people attach themselves to a single questionable paper and ignore the larger body of published work...



You seem to be confusing recombination events with other bat viruses which is neither surprising nor relevant.

A direct covid ancestor being passed back to a bat after recombination with a Pangolin virus is extremely unlikely because the resulting spike structure doesn't bind efficiently to bat ACE2. It DOES bind efficiently to both human and Pangolin ACE2. There are plausible sequence of events, but none of them involve passing the virus back to a bat.

You repeating something doesn't make it true.

The jump to Pangolins is a one way trip because after the recombination alters the viruses spike it looses it's ability to propagate in bats (due to the inefficient binding with bat ACE2).

You ignoring evidence cited in this thread doesn't make your position true. I'm not saying [whatever you think], I am telling you what we have found sources refuting and ruling out your hypothesis.

It's really hard to address all these falsehoods.

Supporting evidence is in the thread. Pick one and I'll hunt some evidence citations refuting the conclusion you latched onto and can't seem to see the problems with that hypothesis.

[Skeptic Ginger]

One thing at a time (again). Was a pangolin to human transmission required?

Review of findings appear today (July 28, 2020) in Nature Microbiology.Evolutionary origins of SARS-CoV-2 identified

Quote:

"SARS-CoV-2's RBD sequence has so far only been found in a few pangolin viruses," said Robertson. "Furthermore, the other key feature thought to be instrumental to SARS-CoV-2's ability to infect humans -- a polybasic cleavage site insertion in the Spike protein -- has not yet been seen in another close bat relative of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Yet, while it is possible that pangolins may have acted as an intermediate host facilitating transmission of SARS-CoV-2 to humans, no evidence exists to suggest that pangolin infection is a requirement for bat viruses to cross into humans. Instead, our research suggests that SARS-CoV-2 likely evolved the ability to replicate in the upper respiratory tract of both humans and pangolins."

The NEXT coronavirus pandemic? Bats in China are carrying other viruses that may infect humans

Quote:

Dr Shi and other scientists had also discovered multiple species of horseshoe bats that were living in a single cave in China's Yunnan Province. They found that “genetic recombination between viral strains in bats” may have produced the "direct evolutionary ancestor" of the strain that caused a deadly outbreak of SARS in humans. Besides, the study also revealed that various SARS-related coronaviruses, capable of using human ACE2 (the receptor of SARS-CoV in humans), are still circulating among bats in this region. Accordingly, the risk of spillover into people and the emergence of a disease similar to SARS is possible, the team concluded

And that is from a WIV researcher who is downplaying the chance of a lab leak.


MattRidley blog: THE BATS BEHIND THE PANDEMIC

Quote:

In Shitou Cave, south of Kunming, the capital of Yunnan, they found viruses in the bats’ droppings and anal swabs that were more similar to human SARS than anything found in palm civets, the small mammals that until then were presumed to be the source of human infection. Back in the laboratory, they found that one of the viruses from bat droppings, called WIV1, could thrive in monkey and human cells specially engineered to activate the gene for ACE2 receptors, the lock to which a coronavirus’s spike protein can fit as a key. This suggested that people could catch SARS directly from a bat dropping....

Bats are sold in markets and supplied directly to restaurants throughout China and southeast Asia, but no direct evidence of their sale in Wuhan’s wet market has come to light. Also, horseshoe bats, which are much smaller than the tastier fruit bats, are generally not among the species eaten. The significance of the Yunnan cave sample is that it shows the bat virus didn’t need to recombine with viruses in other species in a market to be infectious to people.

So much for the bat soup myth.


Useful relevant science: the bats behind the Covid-19 pandemic

Quote:

The role of pangolins in the spread of Sars-CoV-2, the virus that causes Covid-19, remains unclear. A closer look at more of the Sars-CoV-2 genome, published last week by Maciej Boni at Penn State University and David Robertson at Glasgow University, together with Chinese and European colleagues, finds that human versions of the virus are more closely related to the RaTG13 horseshoe bat sample from the cave than they are to the known pangolin versions. It is not yet possible to tell whether the virus went from bat to pangolin to people, or from bat to pangolin and bat to people in parallel.

Is that enough yet for you to recognize bat to pangolin to human is only a possibility, not a certainty?


There's another citation in this thread discussing bat to pangolin to bat recombination events.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Re the bolded, I am, because the WHO investigation and Daszik have been discredited. Not a CT but rather the nature of politics working with China. Daszik, however, has a huge financial interest in the research at the WIV.

Daszak (note the spelling!) and the WHO investigation has been discredited?

Discredited by whom?

You can't just make such a sweeping generalization and assume that that is now an uncontroversial fact.

Sorry, but that's really like the way some CTers thought about NIST.

"Oh look, they didn't investigate the possibility of explosives! They didn't even look into Building 7! They all have conflicts of interest! They have been discredited by Isaac Newton...etc....!"

However, the people making these allegations tend to be amateurs talking way outside their fields apparently failing to understand that what most concerns them is not necessarily what most concerns actual virologists doing actual virology work.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

So much for the bat soup myth.

The bat soup myth? Who is making this claim?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

The bat soup myth? Who is making this claim?

Lomiller and it was a viral claim.

Did the new coronavirus originate with bat soup?

Quote:

One popular rumor is that the new coronavirus originated from people eating “bat soup” in China.

This is false. Bat soup consumption didn’t cause the COVID-19 pandemic. ...

In turn, many people believe that the new coronavirus came from bat meat or bat soup. But this is a rumor. There’s no evidence that the new coronavirus came from bat soup consumption. ...

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Lomiller.

Lolmiller claims Covid-19 comes from bat soup? Or is this a strawman?

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

Lomiller and it was a viral claim.

Did the new coronavirus originate with bat soup?

Lolmiller didn't make the claim, then.

The "viral claim" is just your way of dismissing it.

I suppose you think it was from a bioweapon?

No? Then don't distort other people's positions.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Daszak (note the spelling!) and the WHO investigation has been discredited?

Discredited by whom?

You can't just make such a sweeping generalization and assume that that is now an uncontroversial fact.

Sorry, but that's really like the way some CTers thought about NIST.

"Oh look, they didn't investigate the possibility of explosives! They didn't even look into Building 7! They all have conflicts of interest! They have been discredited by Isaac Newton...etc....!"

However, the people making these allegations tend to be amateurs talking way outside their fields apparently failing to understand that what most concerns them is not necessarily what most concerns actual virologists doing actual virology work.

Daszak has a serious conflict of interest and the director of the WHO delegation when pressed as to how the lab was ruled out said it wasn't.

Now Daszak has a new claim about live animals at the market. But the market has been ruled out as the initial source. People with no connection to the market had the virus before the market cluster was detected.

When are you guys either going to provide evidence the market was the initial source or stop chasing hypotheses as to how the animals got to the market?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Lolmiller didn't make the claim, then.

The "viral claim" is just your way of dismissing it.

I suppose you think it was from a bioweapon?

No? Then don't distort other people's positions.

This is one of your more ridiculous posts.

I have said from the start there is no evidence of a bioweapon, so why are you bringing that straw man up?

I cited a source dismissing the claim plus another one noting horseshoe bats are not on the Chinese menu. Lomiller has indeed claimed the Chinese consumption of bats is one of several of the potential problems.

[angrysoba]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

This is one of your more ridiculous posts.

I have said from the start there is no evidence of a bioweapon, so why are you bringing that straw man up?

I cited a source dismissing the claim plus another one noting horseshoe bats are not on the Chinese menu. Lomiller has indeed claimed the Chinese consumption of bats is one of several of the potential problems.

Indeed! And no one said "bat soup" so why do you bring that up?

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Indeed! And no one said "bat soup" so why do you bring that up?

Did I quote you in that post? Nope.

Was the post addressing lomiller? Yep.

Did you think I was addressing you?

Though I did address more than one person in this thread still falling back on the wet market origin to support their assertions.

[RecoveringYuppy]

Originally Posted by angrysoba

Lolmiller claims Covid-19 comes from bat soup? Or is this a strawman?

It was Skeptic Ginger who first mentioned bat soup.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy

It was Skeptic Ginger who first mentioned bat soup.

Yes I did, here:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

...I think if you read some of the links in this thread you'll see this is true for rural China but not necessarily true in the more modernized areas of China. Of course they eat ethnic foods (like bat soup) and use traditional medicines. But there is no evidence that is how the virus jumped species.

In response to these two posts:

Originally Posted by lomiller

Since Chinese cultural norms like live animal markets and “traditional medicine” are being called into question because of the Covid outbreak doesn’t it make sense that Chinese researches would try to downplay the role of the Wuhan market? As such I don’t think we can trust any claims that the market or Pangolins held therein were not the source of the virus.

And here:

Originally Posted by lomiller

IMO protecting that negligent animal trade would be the top priority for any Chinese officials trying to hide something "for the greater good". Such trade cuts deep into traditional Chinese culture and would reflect badly on the culture and Chinese sense of identity as a whole. It'd have been far easier to scapegoat a local scientist or two than to revaluate traditional food and medicine practices for an entire culture.

So I'm not sure how that ended up offending angrysoba.



As long as I'm here:

Originally Posted by lomiller

.... I have actual evidence, specifically the genetic connection to the Pangolin virus and Pangolin’s presence at the market. Granted there are other possibility’s but they all involve a more complex series of events. Occam’s razor applies and Pangolins at the Wuhan market is the simplest plausible explanation.

Haven't seen that evidence yet, have we? Because I looked for confirmation pangolins were even in the seafood market and couldn't find any. There were live animal species there but pangolins are not mentioned.

[RecoveringYuppy]

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger

So I'm not sure how that ended up offending angrysoba.

Probably because you tried to pin your strawman on lomiller.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy

Probably because you tried to pin your strawman on lomiller.

I guess our POVs are different here. I didn't try to pin anything on anyone.