Origin of Covid-19

[FartingMonk 3606]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

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.  

That's why our vaccine was damned near 95 percent effective and everyone else's was shit.  We got lucky right

 

America we're just so fucking smart.

[Anastasis 23454]

10 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

It would be ignorant not to research it.  Put that research in the wrong hands and bad stuff happens

And funding the labs where that work (and all the related work that you can carve out of the GOF definition via semantics) is done, both domestically and off-shore, without the appropriate level of oversight and inspection is gross incompetence. WIV had known issues.  EcoHealth was not implementing the required oversight, and the government agencies were not holding them to the appropriate level of accountability. I think that a good portion of the work was off-shored specifically to avoid the oversight and accountability.   

[Chuckie Finster 22692]

"Gain of function" has become one of those terms, much like "Benghazi" and "dossier", where my brain just shuts off when I hear it.

Some of you might be making decent points, but the loud morons have forever tainted the discourse and made it impossible for me to assume anyone discussing the issue is doing so in good faith.

[Laxtonto 12078]

The issue here isn’t whether it came from a lab or not at this point. The lab leak theory is probably the only one they actually makes real since from both a scientific and spread/proliferation standpoint. 
 

The issue is why did we (and the rest of the world) decide to allow the alternative scenario flourish as long as it did. And before we get all political, just remember what this type of allegation means, both economically and militarily. 
 

So, this thing came from a Chinese lab and killed millions of people globally and wrecked the world economy. Who is liable and how do you get restitution? Is this a scenario where we go to the world court and demand China makes this right? When they don’t do we bomb them into the Stone Age? Do we embargo China and further tank the global economy? Does everyone globally follow along? What happens is other nations do or do not side with us over this?

The problem with the lab leak theory isn’t that it is plausible or likely, but once proven as true then humans are now liable. It is no longer an act of god but instead negligence by people working at the behest of a foreign government. 
 

Once this Pandora’s box is opened, the world is going to change forever. There is no way for this not to have global repercussions. 
 

So we talk about cause, but we need to accept that this is purposely being obfuscated because once the direct claim is proven, then it is no longer the virus as the bad guy, but instead a country.

[Anastasis 23454]

9 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

America we're just so fucking smart.

What starts here changes the world. 

https://cid.utexas.edu/mclellan-lab

Proline-Proline stabilization of the spike protein conformation was the breakthrough (as well as the mRNA tech). Neither really relied on GOF research as a basis, AFAIK. 

Edited December 29, 2022 by Anastasis

[Celery Man 20929]

34 minutes ago, statsman said:

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

Ah, I don’t have access to the WSJ editorial pages, maybe I’ll look for some reporting.

Edited December 29, 2022 by Celery Man

[elguapo 4586]

50 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

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.

[Dahobbs 17521]

15 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

That's why our vaccine was damned near 95 percent effective and everyone else's was shit.  We got lucky right

 

Our pharmaceutical industry has the big money to research novel methods, such as the mRNA vaccines, which are very effective. As is J&J's vaccine. As is AstraZeneca's, although slightly less so based on the clinical trials. Chinese and Russian vaccines are largely less effective where deployed due to manufacturing variances as opposed to a fundamental differences in the understanding of how vaccines work. But, again, there isn't anything about the development of mRNA vaccines that required gain of function research as far as I understand. I'm not saying our military research programs don't provide it insight or helpful information on virus behavior. I'm sure they do and have. I'm just saying this specific niche area of research isn't one that you'd expect to contribute to vaccine development. 

Now, if you wanted to understand and/or predict how viruses might evolve to better infect humans, gain of function research is helpful. But that doesn't really tell you anything that is going to help you build a better vaccine to a particular virus. 

Edited December 29, 2022 by Dahobbs

[FartingMonk 3606]

4 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

What starts here changes the world. 

https://cid.utexas.edu/mclellan-lab

Proline-Proline stabilization of the spike protein conformation was the breakthrough (as well as the mRNA tech). Neither really relied on GOF research as a basis, AFAIK. 

It's a cart horse thing.  How does someone get funding to be ahead on research on something.  You gotta say hey this might be a problem.  How do you get the problem. 

[SizzleChest 8283]

2 minutes ago, elguapo said:

No, I think a pangolin licked a bat's butthole (guano is good eatin'!), and then Dr. Wu fucked the pangolin.  A real-time, inter-species train-running would have been more efficient.

[Dahobbs 17521]

2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

It's a cart horse thing.  How does someone get funding to be ahead on research on something.  You gotta say hey this might be a problem.  How do you get the problem. 

Are you suggesting viruses weren't problems before gain of function research? What is the horse in your analogy? 

[DaggerHorns 3082]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

Our pharmaceutical industry has the big money to research novel methods, such as the mRNA vaccines, which are very effective. As is J&J's vaccine. As is AstraZeneca's, although slightly less so based on the clinical trials. Chinese and Russian vaccines are largely less effective where deployed due to manufacturing variances as opposed to a fundamental differences in the understanding of how vaccines work. But, again, there isn't anything about the development of mRNA vaccines that required gain of function research as far as I understand. I'm not saying our military research programs don't provide it insight or helpful information on virus behavior. I'm sure they do and have. I'm just saying this specific niche area of research isn't one that you'd expect to contribute to vaccine development. 

Ding ding ding, winner!

Yoy can’t underestimate the power of American capitalism. Whether you like it or not the private industry provides the funding and management for some of the most efficient processes in the world. Whether it’s Space X, a Covid vaccine, a rideshare company, or a search engine, this can outperform bureaucratic governmental engines when it comes to cost effective solutions for the worlds most complex problems.

[FartingMonk 3606]

2 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Our pharmaceutical industry has the big money to research novel methods, such as the mRNA vaccines, which are very effective. As is J&J's vaccine. As is AstraZeneca's, although slightly less so based on the clinical trials. Chinese and Russian vaccines are largely less effective where deployed due to manufacturing variances as opposed to a fundamental differences in the understanding of how vaccines work. But, again, there isn't anything about the development of mRNA vaccines that required gain of function research as far as I understand. I'm not saying our military research programs don't provide it insight or helpful information on virus behavior. I'm sure they do and have. I'm just saying this specific niche area of research isn't one that you'd expect to contribute to vaccine development. 

And I won't disagree with that but our pharma industry is looking for a hair growth for men or a miracle fat burner.  They aren't concentrating money on some pandemic research that is going to cost them billions of dollars without specific information from the military on where to dig first.  

[Brisketexan 105043]

2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

You gotta say hey this might be a problem.  How do you get the problem. 

Ummm....we already HAD the problem: a coronavirus that leaped to people and was deadly.  Two of them, actually -- SARS and MERS.  And it's the research into those existing deadly viruses that gave us the leg up.  There was no need for "gain of function" research on SARS or MERS, because they already had the "function" (human transmissibility and mortality).

You're really hung up on this.  And I really don't understand why.  Again, most virology doesn't have anything to do with "gain of function."  The key elements of virology that played a big role in moving the MRNA vaccines forward didn't have anything to do with "gain of function."

Connecting "gain of function" research with development of the COVID 19 MRNA vaccine doesn't work.

[Horn of Gabriel 1614]

Fauci/not Fauci, China lab/not China lab IDGAF.  The better question is EVEN IF the China lab didn't accidentally/intentionally release this, and EVEN IF Fauci/CDC/Whoever didn't realize what they were financing, why in the FUCK would we or anyone do gain-of-function research?  That research is literally trying to create killer viruses that don't exist today, specifically the kind that can infect humans!  Like, WTF! WHY?!?!?!  I've seen Fauci and that British fucktard spinning bullshit about how GAF "helps us understand how viruses evolve in the wild so that we can better respond to them when they occur."  Sorry, but that's bullshit.  I have yet to see how 30 years of GOF research Pfizer and Moderna create their vaccine.  Or any other evidence that the bullshit benefit outweighs the absolutely 100% certain and currently demonstrable risks of an outbreak like COVID.  Or worse!  COVID is actually mild compared some of the other shit they've cooked up that hasn't escaped.  What if they created an airborne transmissible version of something like Ebola...imagination runs wild.  

The arrogance of the Fauci's and the Peter Daszak's of the world playing word games with "gain of function" to try to say the research Wuhan was doing wasn't actually GOF in his political fight w/ Rand Paul is astounding.  Then basically saying "Well you normal people just aren't smart enough to understand what we're doing here" smacks of narcissists playing God in a lab.  Yeah, we're not PhD virologists but we don't have to be to understand that gain of function "...aim to increase the ability of infectious agents to cause disease by enhancing its pathogenicity or by increasing its transmissibility."  If someone can make the argument that GOF benefits outweigh the risks, I'd love to hear it.  

[Brisketexan 105043]

2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

They aren't concentrating money on some pandemic research that is going to cost them billions of dollars without specific information from the military on where to dig first.  

"The military?"  Pretty sure we knew all about SARS and MERS as deadly, potentially pandemic-causing viruses, without needing someone at the Army telling us about them.

[statsman 5449]

The funding from CDC to Wuhan was really small (from memory- low six figures). Not enough to be a go/no-go factor on Wuhan research. Enough to be able to get a copy of the report when they’re done. FWIW. 

[FartingMonk 3606]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Ummm....we already HAD the problem: a coronavirus that leaped to people and was deadly.  Two of them, actually -- SARS and MERS.  And it's the research into those existing deadly viruses that gave us the leg up.  There was no need for "gain of function" research on SARS or MERS, because they already had the "function" (human transmissibility and mortality).

You're really hung up on this.  And I really don't understand why.  Again, most virology doesn't have anything to do with "gain of function."  The key elements of virology that played a big role in moving the MRNA vaccines forward didn't have anything to do with "gain of function."

Connecting "gain of function" research with development of the COVID 19 MRNA vaccine doesn't work.

Like I said I'm not hung up on it.  I'm saying that people are denying that we use gain of function research is weird.  I'm not trying to be political I'm saying we use it.  We create bad shit in labs because that's one of the beliefs we say is how we "protect" America.  We weaponized anthrax.  We've weaponized a lot of stuff that we say well we better do it before someone else does.  

[SizzleChest 8283]

3 minutes ago, statsman said:

The funding from CDC to Wuhan was really small (from memory- low six figures). Not enough to be a go/no-go factor on Wuhan research. Enough to be able to get a copy of the report when they’re done. FWIW. 

[FartingMonk 3606]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC539539/

 

This article talks about our gain of function research to weaponize influenza before a terrorist does.  NIH.  Our government so why wouldn't they do the same with a coronavirus.  

 

[Brisketexan 105043]

1 minute ago, FartingMonk said:

Like I said I'm not hung up on it.  I'm saying that people are denying that we use gain of function research is weird.  I'm not trying to be political I'm saying we use it.  We create bad shit in labs because that's one of the beliefs we say is how we "protect" America.  We weaponized anthrax.  We've weaponized a lot of stuff that we say well we better do it before someone else does.  

you just moved the shit out of your goalposts.

I don't think anyone here is denying that the US uses GOF research.  It is a thing.  It exists.  The US has used it, and almost certainly continues to do so.  And there can and should be discussion and consideration of its wisdom, usefulness, and safety protocols.

But what you SAID, and what Dahobbs and I have responded to, is that the rapid development of the MRNA vaccines is a product of GOF research.  And that is not the case.  Both things can be true: we have conducted GOF research, but that research did not have any material connection to the development of MRNA vaccines.  Your argument implies that 1) because we invented a brand new kind of "fire," we 2) had a head start on knowing how to put that "fire" out.

The reality is that between continued virology research, INCLUDING research into two already-existing viruses that were quite similar to COVID, AND advances in genetic technology, we were poised to move forward quickly on an MRNA vaccine.  That's all.  And that in no way steals any "thunder" from any conversation about GOF research in general.

[Brisketexan 105043]

2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

Our government so why wouldn't they do the same with a coronavirus.  

Maybe they did, somehow somewhere.  But now we're just wildly speculating.  In the case of developing the vaccine, they didn't have to "weaponize" a SARS-type virus - there were already two existing variants that were proven pandemic-risk viruses, SARS and MERS.  "Releasing" one of those back into the environment would have been plenty terrorist-y, and wouldn't require any additional work on the viruses themselves.

[Anastasis 23454]

13 minutes ago, statsman said:

The funding from CDC to Wuhan was really small (from memory- low six figures). Not enough to be a go/no-go factor on Wuhan research. Enough to be able to get a copy of the report when they’re done. FWIW. 

How much DOD money was flowing through EcoHealth?

[FartingMonk 3606]

3 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

you just moved the shit out of your goalposts.

I don't think anyone here is denying that the US uses GOF research.  It is a thing.  It exists.  The US has used it, and almost certainly continues to do so.  And there can and should be discussion and consideration of its wisdom, usefulness, and safety protocols.

But what you SAID, and what Dahobbs and I have responded to, is that the rapid development of the MRNA vaccines is a product of GOF research.  And that is not the case.  Both things can be true: we have conducted GOF research, but that research did not have any material connection to the development of MRNA vaccines.  Your argument implies that 1) because we invented a brand new kind of "fire," we 2) had a head start on knowing how to put that "fire" out.

The reality is that between continued virology research, INCLUDING research into two already-existing viruses that were quite similar to COVID, AND advances in genetic technology, we were poised to move forward quickly on an MRNA vaccine.  That's all.  And that in no way steals any "thunder" from any conversation about GOF research in general.

How is a goalpost moved. I'm saying because we used gain of function research we have a step up on how to combat stuff.

 

 

[Parliament 14227]

1.5 pages in and the CR'ing starts to warm up...

[Brisketexan 105043]

1 minute ago, FartingMonk said:

I'm saying because we used gain of function research we have a step up on how to combat stuff.

1 -- nobody is debating that we have used GOF research in general.

2 -- how we "combatted" COVID 19 was with specific MRNA vaccines.

3 -- your "because" does not connect GOF to the MRNA vaccines, because there was indeed no material connection.  

In general, might GOF research give us a "step up" on how to combat certain viruses?  Maybe.  But the research that gave us a step up here was our understanding of the life cycle of similar viruses, their utilization of a spike protein, etc. -- none of that knowledge is derived from GOF research.  It's simply the product of advanced virology research, which has come a long, long way in the past decade or so.

[elfenix 34221]

1 minute ago, Parliament said:

1.5 pages in and the DT'ing starts to warm up...

own your own shitshow threads, we have enough of them in CR. 

[Dahobbs 17521]

2 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

How is a goalpost moved. I'm saying because we used gain of function research we have a step up on how to combat stuff.

 

 

You keep making that leap that because we know more about changing one virus to become more effective at infecting people, that we also know more about how to create vaccines for those viruses. It is sort of like saying that developing a better car engine helps us make airbags. Yeah, both of those things go in cars. But research into one doesn't directly the affect the other. 

[Earl Haffler 590]

George Santos told me that the Kung Flu came from Jewish space lasers spraying it into the atmosphere.

[Dahobbs 17521]

Just now, Earl Haffler said:

George Santos told me that the Kung Flu came from Jewish space lasers spraying it into the atmosphere.

No no no, they were jew-ish space lasers. They were Jew like, but did not actually follow Judaism. 

[FartingMonk 3606]

4 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

You keep making that leap that because we know more about changing one virus to become more effective at infecting people, that we also know more about how to create vaccines for those viruses. It is sort of like saying that developing a better car engine helps us make airbags. Yeah, both of those things go in cars. But research into one doesn't directly the affect the other. 

Yeah because all spike proteins act alike 

[Brisketexan 105043]

1 minute ago, Dahobbs said:

No no no, they were jew-ish space lasers. They were Jew like, but did not actually follow Judaism. 

Sounds like an excuse to eat bacon.

I'll allow it.

[Dahobbs 17521]

6 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

Yeah because all spike proteins act alike 

Other viruses have spike proteins. Creating a vaccine that allows the body to recognize one doesn't mean the body will recognize and respond to all of them. Otherwise, we'd all also be vaccinated against HIV now. 

[Brisketexan 105043]

12 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

Yeah because all spike proteins act alike 

Alike as in "identically?"  Surely not.

Alike as in "very fucking similarly?"  Yep.  Particularly when the specific examples are similar coronaviruses.

Quote

Within two decades, there have emerged three highly pathogenic and deadly human coronaviruses, namely SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2. The economic burden and health threats caused by these coronaviruses are extremely dreadful and getting more serious as the increasing number of global infections and attributed deaths of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. Unfortunately, specific medical countermeasures for these hCoVs remain absent. Moreover, the fast spread of misinformation about the ongoing SARS-CoV-2 pandemic uniquely places the virus alongside an annoying infodemic and causes unnecessary worldwide panic. SARS-CoV-2 shares many similarities with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, certainly, obvious differences exist as well. Lessons learnt from SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, timely updated information of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV, and summarized specific knowledge of these hCoVs are extremely invaluable for effectively and efficiently contain the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 and MERS-CoV. By gaining a deeper understanding of hCoVs and the illnesses caused by them, we can bridge knowledge gaps, provide cultural weapons for fighting and controling the spread of MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2, and prepare effective and robust defense lines against hCoVs that may emerge or reemerge in the future. To this end, the state-of-the-art knowledge and comparing the biological features of these lethal hCoVs and the clinical characteristics of illnesses caused by them are systematically summarized in the review.

[paper published 8/2020]

Spike protein-wise, we learned a lot from SARS and MERS that translated very well to COVID and how it functioned.  But in the end, the customization of MRNA vaccines to target that protein depended on the genetic sequencing of the specific COVID virus.  In short, SARS and MERS told us how COVID likely functioned.  Examination of COVID confirmed that.  The specific genome of COVID allowed us to create specific MRNA vaccines.

While the science is indeed amazing, the logical sequence isn't that shocking or scandalous.

Edited December 29, 2022 by Brisketexan

[FartingMonk 3606]

I just don't understand.  No one has a hard time when we GMO 80 different types of carrots.   But when someone says we GMO 80 different coronaviruses.  People have a hard time believing it. 

 

[Celery Man 20929]

6 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

Other viruses have spike proteins. Creating a vaccine that allows the body to recognize one doesn't mean the body will recognize and respond to all of them. Otherwise, we'd all also be vaccinated against HIV now. 

[Brisketexan 105043]

5 minutes ago, FartingMonk said:

I just don't understand.  No one has a hard time when we GMO 80 different types of carrots.   But when someone says we GMO 80 different coronaviruses.  People have a hard time believing it. 

 

Well.....1) we have evidence of GMO of 80 different types of carrots, we don't have evidence that we GMO 80 different coronaviruses.  And 2)....for the umpteenth time, even if we DID GMO some coronavirus somewhere, that process is entirely unnecessary in terms of the information, knowledge, and methods we needed and used to develop an MRNA vaccine for COVID.

You really, really, really seem to WANT to tie GOF research to our ability to create a COVID MRNA vaccine (I'm not sure why, but you've made your passion quite clear), but you're all over the map in arguing the point, and haven't made any actual connection between the two.  That's the issue here.

[tigol 2395]

Well.....1) we have evidence of GMO of 80 different types of carrots, we don't have evidence that we GMO 80 different coronaviruses.  And 2)....for the umpteenth time, even if we DID GMO some coronavirus somewhere, that process is entirely unnecessary in terms of the information, knowledge, and methods we needed and used to develop an MRNA vaccine for COVID.
You really, really, really seem to WANT to tie GOF research to our ability to create a COVID MRNA vaccine (I'm not sure why, but you've made your passion quite clear), but you're all over the map in arguing the point, and haven't made any actual connection between the two.  That's the issue here.

You’re thinking about it too hard.

He’s the Rand Paul of the thread.

[SizzleChest 8283]

47 minutes ago, Celery Man said:

Yes, I'd rather not visit Haiti.

[Deej 76750]

3 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

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.

Just one of us? I highly doubt that.

[Brisketexan 105043]

3 minutes ago, Deej said:

Just one of us? I highly doubt that.

[Neonmoon 38129]

I recently heard someone refer to the pandemic as the Troubles, which is hilarious, so I’m going to use that from now on

 

[Deej 76750]

2 hours ago, Laxtonto said:

The lab leak theory is probably the only one they actually makes real since

"cents"

[Brisketexan 105043]

1 minute ago, Deej said:

"cents"

[SizzleChest 8283]

5 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

I recently heard someone refer to the pandemic as the Troubles, which is hilarious, so I’m going to use that from now on

 

 

[Celery Man 20929]

9 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

I recently heard someone refer to the pandemic as the Troubles, which is hilarious, so I’m going to use that from now on

 

Somehow more contentious than the troubles.

[HamsterHookah 112]

2 hours ago, Laxtonto said:

The issue here isn’t whether it came from a lab or not at this point. The lab leak theory is probably the only one they actually makes real since from both a scientific and spread/proliferation standpoint. 
 

The issue is why did we (and the rest of the world) decide to allow the alternative scenario flourish as long as it did. And before we get all political, just remember what this type of allegation means, both economically and militarily. 
 

So, this thing came from a Chinese lab and killed millions of people globally and wrecked the world economy. Who is liable and how do you get restitution? Is this a scenario where we go to the world court and demand China makes this right? When they don’t do we bomb them into the Stone Age? Do we embargo China and further tank the global economy? Does everyone globally follow along? What happens is other nations do or do not side with us over this?

The problem with the lab leak theory isn’t that it is plausible or likely, but once proven as true then humans are now liable. It is no longer an act of god but instead negligence by people working at the behest of a foreign government. 
 

Once this Pandora’s box is opened, the world is going to change forever. There is no way for this not to have global repercussions. 
 

So we talk about cause, but we need to accept that this is purposely being obfuscated because once the direct claim is proven, then it is no longer the virus as the bad guy, but instead a country.

This is the post that can't be glossed over. There are still people today who want to hand wave the root cause and just saw "what's done is done, lets move on, water under the bridge", etc. because the truth might be dangerous.

But at some point, we need to hold China accountable. The problem is they aren't some tier-2 country we can bully around, so to put their nose in this and smack them with the rolled up newspaper is going to cause a lot of pain and damage and cost. Further, acknowledging the root cause of this gives oxygen to theories and people and politics who are a) prone to take a mile if given an inch and b) throw a monkey wrench in what has been pretty buttoned up for easy consumption, which a lot of people don't want.

[TwiceHorn 31434]

8 hours ago, atomheartbevo said:

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

Kind of like semiconductors, they can steal the IP, but they lack the fundamental know-how to pull it off at the highest levels.

[TwiceHorn 31434]

I don't know, do we really need to hold China liable or accountable in any other way than assigning blame or fault?

Serious question.

There really isn't a world court for negligence cases.  Most "liability" as between countries is inflicted by war, or treaties ending wars, and, of course, economic sanctions, but that's mostly coercive more than retributive.

[jimmyjazz 45877]

7 hours ago, FartingMonk said:

Like I said I'm not hung up on it. 

You absolutely are hung up on it.

 

Quote

I'm saying that people are denying that we use gain of function research is weird.  I'm not trying to be political I'm saying we use it.  We create bad shit in labs because that's one of the beliefs we say is how we "protect" America.  We weaponized anthrax.  We've weaponized a lot of stuff that we say well we better do it before someone else does.  

You don't know what GoF is.