Origin of Covid-19

[statsman 5470]

I recently heard a podcast where Matt Ridley (used to be science editor for The Economist) discuss his book “Viral”, about searching for the origins of the pandemic virus that has killed 6-20 million, globally (and had multiple other impacts). He argues that it’s important to know how it started, so guards can be placed against it happening again. Theories:

1. Wet market. This is how SARS originated. That’s the argument for. Arguments against- can’t find an infected animal from market (unlike SARS). Even though the market is a center of the outbreak, vegetable vendors seem as affected as meat vendors. Also (and I didn’t realize this), PRC strongly rejects this idea, and refuses to close or regulate the open markets of this type (Jinping believes they are an integral part of Chinese culture). 
2. Lab escape. Arguments for- this has happened before, so is plausible. Wuhan lab was researching this type of virus. The virus has markers indicating good capability of attaching to humans (gain of function). PRC refuses to share lab records or cooperate at all with investigators. Arguments against- you have the PRC word that this didn’t happen. 
3. US soldiers in Wuhan for athletic competition brought the virus. (PRC theory/suggestion)

4. Virus came in frozen foods shipped from the west (alternate PRC theory/suggestion). 
 
Ridley makes a great case that this is too big of an issue to reject with a wave of hands and a “what difference does it make?” I agree. I know the NSA issued a report a year or so ago that they couldn’t align with any of the suggestions (really, only the first two are serious). Do they still feel that way? Should the US invest more efforts (the WHO will not)?

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

What do you say @ChickenSandwich, one last wuhan flu update for old time’s sake?

[956 Worldwide 34715]

16 minutes ago, statsman said:

I recently heard a podcast where Matt Ridley (used to be science editor for The Economist) discuss his book “Viral”, about searching for the origins of the pandemic virus that has killed 6-20 million, globally (and had multiple other impacts). He argues that it’s important to know how it started, so guards can be placed against it happening again. Theories:

1. Wet market. This is how SARS originated. That’s the argument for. Arguments against- can’t find an infected animal from market (unlike SARS). Even though the market is a center of the outbreak, vegetable vendors seem as affected as meat vendors. Also (and I didn’t realize this), PRC strongly rejects this idea, and refuses to close or regulate the open markets of this type (Jinping believes they are an integral part of Chinese culture). 
2. Lab escape. Arguments for- this has happened before, so is plausible. Wuhan lab was researching this type of virus. The virus has markers indicating good capability of attaching to humans (gain of function). PRC refuses to share lab records or cooperate at all with investigators. Arguments against- you have the PRC word that this didn’t happen. 
3. US soldiers in Wuhan for athletic competition brought the virus. (PRC theory/suggestion)

4. Virus came in frozen foods shipped from the west (alternate PRC theory/suggestion). 
 
Ridley makes a great case that this is too big of an issue to reject with a wave of hands and a “what difference does it make?” I agree. I know the NSA issued a report a year or so ago that they couldn’t align with any of the suggestions (really, only the first two are serious). Do they still feel that way? Should the US invest more efforts (the WHO will not)?

I think we need to be very realistic about how much we can functionally investigate at all, given the reality of the PRC and its government. Ridley is absolutely correct that this is so important that we shouldn’t say “what does it matter” but the people who we need to convince are the leadership of the CCP, for whom the truth is going to most likely be damaging.  

[TwiceHorn 31471]

5 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I think we need to be very realistic about how much we can functionally investigate at all, given the reality of the PRC and its government. Ridley is absolutely correct that this is so important that we shouldn’t say “what does it matter” but the people who we need to convince are the leadership of the CCP, for whom the truth is going to most likely be damaging.  

And, additionally, even if we could functionally investigate events in PRC and learn something from them for our own purposes, there isn't much likelihood that the PRC would "learn" anything.  The "vivisection morality" of PRC (h/t Arthur Koestler) probably means that if PRC thinks it is in its interest to conduct gain of function or any other potentially dangerous research, it will continue to do so and to hell with the rest of us.

[deadshank 24653]

aggy done goofed is what happened. 

[Celery Man 20950]

It is certainly of interest. Part of the “what does it matter” dynamic came at a time when the people who were most interested in xenophobic origin stories were the least interested in slowing the spread of the virus. When the bodies were stacking in the largest mass death event in American history and there was no vaccine available, it was correctly of secondary concern except where it would help us mitigate the damage happening all around us.

[bernorange 8361]

2a. Lab escape

2b. Lab release

The implications of 2b are really dark.  

I remember reading a couple of different analysis done on the structure of the virus that led viroligists/analysts to conclude that it was near impossible for c19 to be a naturally evolved/mutated virus.  Wet market theory isn't likely.

[Js1 85337]

We definitely needed to talk about this again. 

[Kennythetiger 9383]

“Before Covid” and “After Covid” are probably measuring sticks for time for our generation. They sure are for me. 

[statsman 5470]

35 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

It is certainly of interest. Part of the “what does it matter” dynamic came at a time when the people who were most interested in xenophobic origin stories were the least interested in slowing the spread of the virus. When the bodies were stacking in the largest mass death event in American history and there was no vaccine available, it was correctly of secondary concern except where it would help us mitigate the damage happening all around us.

That’s fair. Early on, a little help from China would have gone a long way towards advancing a cure, so that’s the case for “hey, stuff happens, we’re all in this together, so let’s join hands and get out of this”. 
 
That’s proven to be a false hope. 

[statsman 5470]

36 minutes ago, bernorange said:

2a. Lab escape

2b. Lab release

The implications of 2b are really dark.  

I remember reading a couple of different analysis done on the structure of the virus that led viroligists/analysts to conclude that it was near impossible for c19 to be a naturally evolved/mutated virus.  Wet market theory isn't likely.

Ridley argues there is really no evidence for an intentional release (and evidence against- recently translated communication intercepts from the Wuhan lab, dated November 2019, basically saying, “Oh, shit! What do we do?”

[atomheartbevo 89668]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

I think we need to be very realistic about how much we can functionally investigate at all, given the reality of the PRC and its government. Ridley is absolutely correct that this is so important that we shouldn’t say “what does it matter” but the people who we need to convince are the leadership of the CCP, for whom the truth is going to most likely be damaging.  

And both options are extremely embarrassing to the government - people really gave them shit over the exotic animals in the wet market, and acted like the Chinese were a bunch of medieval hicks for that, and the idea that it escaped from their lab made them look incompetent (and also made everybody wonder about their research).

I was really surprised that they were still doing the draconian shit 

And surprised they didn’t just steal some of our vaccines.

[Anastasis 23469]

Unintentional lab leak still makes the most sense and fits the data points best, imo. It seems likely that it was in circulation far earlier than the market, but that was a super spreader event. 
 

A little blast from the past. 
 

 

Edited December 29, 2022 by Anastasis

[Stunns38 3460]

[statsman 5470]

In a sane world, if we determined it was a lab escape, we could confront the PRC and tell them that stricter inspections are required for their further participants international research groups. 
 
This is not a sane world. Jinping doesn’t believe that other nations should ever be allowed to question China. Any attempt to force cooperation might be more likely to drive them into shoring up their own axis of cooperation. The last thing we want is for the PRC to be leading bio research with Russia and Iran. 
 
So, here we are. Russia is trying to kill people, and China’s mistake is 100 times more effective at it than Putin’s decision. 

[gsoda3 3261]

there were a lot of data points pointing at an unintentional lab release.  off the top of my head... missing lab personnel in the relevant group who disappeared in november.  their online records were scrubbed, and then their family members' online please to locate their relatives were scrubbed.  there were online job postings at that wuhan lab for infectious disease researchers posted in oct or nov which were then suddenly taken down.  leaked internal memos documenting a lapse in procedure after a scientist came down with symptoms.  then several more coworkers got sick.  and disappeared.  these were all documented as early as summer of 2020 but never got traction in the media.  the conspiracy theory nature of the accusations got caught up in the deniers and china haters narrative.  

[tx 3 putt 76958]

I think I’m patient zero …. I was with three friends before Christmas, all three have Covid 

 

[bschoolprof 6254]

Lab leak seems to be the most likely possibility.  It's become so toxically political at this point, but if true that also means the head of the NIAID - and the face of our response to the virus - was in part responsible for the research that led to this fuckup in the first place.  That's just bonkers to me.  If you wrote that into a movie script 10 years ago, the producers would make you take it out for being too on the nose.

[FartingMonk 3606]

Designed by the world leaders to kill of old people because they can't sustain an aging population.  How do you save social security?  Kill off the olds.

 

[Rip76 4928]

 

[Telegraph_it 3357]

Well it’s a country wide release now. 

[Captain Ron 12876]

3 hours ago, Celery Man said:

It is certainly of interest. Part of the “what does it matter” dynamic came at a time when the people who were most interested in xenophobic origin stories were the least interested in slowing the spread of the virus. When the bodies were stacking in the largest mass death event in American history and there was no vaccine available, it was correctly of secondary concern except where it would help us mitigate the damage happening all around us.

This. I know for a fact that with me, my "what does it matter" came at a time when we were all hunkered down and worried for our health and lives. Now that we are on the back side of the pandemic (though clearly not 100% past it), most everyone would agree knowing the real origins would be important.

I am like many others though - given that it was originated in China, I don't see them being open to us (or anyone else) doing a real investigation into finding these origins. And I am not sure I would trust their investigations right now either.

[MoJames 8244]

Isn't there some fun connection between the Wuhan Lab and Dr. Faucci? Or is this just some of my right leaning friends having fun...

[Celery Man 20950]

[SizzleChest 8284]

8 minutes ago, MoJames said:

Isn't there some fun connection between the Wuhan Lab and Dr. Faucci? Or is this just some of my right leaning friends having fun...

It depends on how far you want to skedaddle down a purely political clap-trap.  

If you don't want to skedaddle, the answer is powerful science governed by an authoritarian regime whose only goal is more power and authority over its people is going to cause events like this.

If you do want to skedaddle, the answer is Fauci is a death merchant who only cares about Fauci.  All hail Rand Paul!

Perhaps we shouldn't skedaddle. In fact, let's not.

Edited December 29, 2022 by SizzleChest

[FartingMonk 3606]

10 minutes ago, MoJames said:

Isn't there some fun connection between the Wuhan Lab and Dr. Faucci? Or is this just some of my right leaning friends having fun...

It's not really Fauci's involvement but CDC involvement.  The Wuhan lab was known to be very shitty in controls when it came to research of deadly diseases.  The CDC sent scientists and funded some of the Wuhan research hoping they could provide some oversight.  

[Pato del Muerto 52498]

22 minutes ago, SizzleChest said:

Perhaps we shouldn't skedaddle. In fact, let's not

I’m open to meandering. 

[Dahobbs 17534]

1 hour ago, bschoolprof said:

Lab leak seems to be the most likely possibility.  It's become so toxically political at this point, but if true that also means the head of the NIAID - and the face of our response to the virus - was in part responsible for the research that led to this fuckup in the first place.  That's just bonkers to me.  If you wrote that into a movie script 10 years ago, the producers would make you take it out for being too on the nose.

That is not at all what that means unless you're intentionally being toxically political. 

[statsman 5470]

President Obama banned US federal research into “gain of function” (research into making diseases able to infect humans, to support research to fight disease). When Trump became president, Fauci either (knowing Trump wasn’t paying attention) directed some US funds to Wuhan lab research that (among other things) was doing “gain of function” research, or he didn’t know that the Wuhan lab was doing “gain of function” research when he directed some funds there. 
 
When questioned by Rand Paul, Fauci said that the US was not funding “gain of function” in Wuhan and questioned whether Paul really knew what that was. 

 
 

[Celery Man 20950]

Can you cite all that information so people interested can understand it contextually?

[bernorange 8361]

1 hour ago, bschoolprof said:

 If you wrote that into a movie script 10 years ago, the producers would make you take it out for being too on the nose.

V for Vendetta

[Dahobbs 17534]

13 minutes ago, statsman said:

President Obama banned US federal research into “gain of function” (research into making diseases able to infect humans, to support research to fight disease). When Trump became president, Fauci either (knowing Trump wasn’t paying attention) directed some US funds to Wuhan lab research that (among other things) was doing “gain of function” research, or he didn’t know that the Wuhan lab was doing “gain of function” research when he directed some funds there. 
 
When questioned by Rand Paul, Fauci said that the US was not funding “gain of function” in Wuhan and questioned whether Paul really knew what that was. 

 
 

Yes, I remember that testimony. The answer was that Paul didn't know what he was talking about. Even the recent GOP report concluding lab release didn't implicate Fauci or government funding. 

[FartingMonk 3606]

19 minutes ago, statsman said:

President Obama banned US federal research into “gain of function” (research into making diseases able to infect humans, to support research to fight disease). When Trump became president, Fauci either (knowing Trump wasn’t paying attention) directed some US funds to Wuhan lab research that (among other things) was doing “gain of function” research, or he didn’t know that the Wuhan lab was doing “gain of function” research when he directed some funds there. 
 
When questioned by Rand Paul, Fauci said that the US was not funding “gain of function” in Wuhan and questioned whether Paul really knew what that was. 

 
 

Yeah.  We "ban" all kinds of stuff but that defense slush fund keeps all kinds of programs going.  We will research that shit forever.

[DaggerHorns 3085]

I remember early videos on Reddit where they were doing complete lockdowns before the rest of the world was concerned.

It had to be a lab release.

Its the same as their space junk: they fuck up, they don’t care to admit it, and damn sure don’t want to help or take any responsibility for it. 

[Brisketexan 105139]

Blah blah blah.  One of you boned a pangolin.  We just have to figure out which one of you it was.

Yeah, I'm looking at you.

[FartingMonk 3606]

And before any one says we as America weren't doing this again of function research.  How the hell do you think we got a working vaccine so fast

[Brisketexan 105139]

Just now, FartingMonk said:

And before any one says we as America weren't doing this again of function research.  How the hell do you think we got a working vaccine so fast

Actually, as I understand it, those two things have nothing to do with each other.  With the MRNA vaccines, what you need is the genetic sequence of the virus, and the basic vaccine formulation comes very quickly (like, days).  The dissemination of the genetic sequence of the COVID 19 virus, once it was quickly completed, was a story covered in detail back when it happened.  Once we got that, then we were off to the races.  That required no prior involvement with the virus at all.

[jimmyjazz 45954]

As I recall, Fauci said neither he nor the consensus within CDC felt the research we funded in Wuhan was gain of function.  Others disagreed.  

[FartingMonk 3606]

1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

Actually, as I understand it, those two things have nothing to do with each other.  With the MRNA vaccines, what you need is the genetic sequence of the virus, and the basic vaccine formulation comes very quickly (like, days).  The dissemination of the genetic sequence of the COVID 19 virus, once it was quickly completed, was a story covered in detail back when it happened.  Once we got that, then we were off to the races.  That required no prior involvement with the virus at all.

It has everything to do with it though.  The "coronavirus" is still just another strain of the common cold.  The mRNA and how to fight it is because of years of research.  It's the same way we fight the flu.  We know enough about it because we're developed enough strains of it that we say oh shit.  Here's a way to defend against it.

[Dahobbs 17534]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

As I recall, Fauci said neither he nor the consensus within CDC felt the research we funded in Wuhan was gain of function.  Others disagreed.  

Yup. And ultimately none of that research had any relevance to Covid-19. There was some pretty exhaustive discussion of this. 

[Dahobbs 17534]

1 minute ago, FartingMonk said:

It has everything to do with it though.  The "coronavirus" is still just another strain of the common cold.  The mRNA and how to fight it is because of years of research.  It's the same way we fight the flu.  We know enough about it because we're developed enough strains of it that we say oh shit.  Here's a way to defend against it.

Knowing shit about viruses doesn't require gain of function research. That's the disconnect here. 

[FartingMonk 3606]

That's like telling me that North Korea researching how to launch satellites into space doesn't have shit to do with their ability to launch ICBMs

[FartingMonk 3606]

Or the NOAA research we do to map the ocean doesn't have shit to do with the capability of us to detect enemy submarines 

[statsman 5470]

37 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

Can you cite all that information so people interested can understand it contextually?

https://www.wsj.com/articles/anthony-fauci-and-the-wuhan-lab-11622759752

[Brisketexan 105139]

1 minute ago, FartingMonk said:

That's like telling me that North Korea researching how to launch satellites into space doesn't have shit to do with their ability to launch ICBMs

Ummmmm.....except.....no?  Launching a rocket is launching a rocket.  So, it's like, the exact same thing.

99% of virology research is NOT "gain of function" research.  See the short discussion below about how the COVID 19 vaccine was developed so quickly:

Quote

Dr. Eric J. Yager, an associate professor of microbiology at Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences in Albany, NY, told MNT that scientists have been studying coronaviruses for more than 50 years. This meant that scientists had existing data on the structure, genome, and life cycle of this type of virus.

Dr. Yager explained, “Research on these viruses established the importance of the viral spike (S) protein in viral attachment, fusion, and entry, and [it] identified the S proteins as a target for the development of antibody therapies and vaccines.” He continued:

“Early efforts by scientists at Oxford University to create an adenovirus-based vaccine against MERS provided the necessary experimental experience and groundwork to develop an adenovirus vaccine for COVID-19.”

. . . .

Dr. Yager said that thanks to advances in genomic sequencing, researchers successfully uncovered the viral sequence of SARS-CoV-2 in January 2020 — roughly 10 days after the first reported pneumonia cases in Wuhan, China. The ability to fast-track research and clinical trials was a direct result of this worldwide cooperation.

A shit-ton of viral research had gone on -- and as to coronaviruses, the need and interest was driven by the first SARS and MERS events -- that didn't involve or require any "gain of function" component.  

[Dahobbs 17534]

6 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

That's like telling me that North Korea researching how to launch satellites into space doesn't have shit to do with their ability to launch ICBMs

No it isn't. These are separate research pathways. Our understanding of how vaccine works is completely separate from gain of function research. One doesn't require the other. Further, your original post suggested that our specific  "gain of function" research in partnership with the Wuhan lab contributed to our ability to quickly create a vaccine for this specific virus. While I'm sure previous military research contributed to the base of knowledge we had on viruses generally, there is no evidence and no reason why gain of function research on coronaviruses in China would be necessary or even particularly helpful in creating the original COVID vaccines. 

[Homercles 10205]

I’m sure we will solve it here, this time 

[FartingMonk 3606]

Yikes.  I'm saying whatever our government said that they quit researching gain of function isn't true.  I'm not pointing directly at Wuhan.  I'm saying we research gain of function stuff to better understand how to fight it.  Although we research it as biological weapons we research it.  You don't think when we have an outbreak of swine flu or avian flu that we try to figure out well shit.  How does this become a human thing.  It would be ignorant not to research it.  Put that research in the wrong hands and bad stuff happens

[FartingMonk 3606]

We have enough gain of function shit locked inside labs in Fort Belvoir and the CDC lab in Atlanta to kill us 1000 times over if it was ever released 

[Dahobbs 17534]

2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

Yikes.  I'm saying whatever our government said that they quit researching gain of function isn't true.  I'm not pointing directly at Wuhan.  I'm saying we research gain of function stuff to better understand how to fight it.  Although we research it as biological weapons we research it.  You don't think when we have an outbreak of swine flu or avian flu that we try to figure out well shit.  How does this become a human thing.  It would be ignorant not to research it.  Put that research in the wrong hands and bad stuff happens

I'm not quibbling with this exactly. I'm just addressing the argument that gain of function research was necessary or even particularly helpful to developing the vaccines. There is just no reason to think it was.