China’s ‘bat woman’ researcher warns coronavirus is just ‘tip of iceberg’

[disciple Clint]

I hope she is wrong but in any event our government need to consider this.


https://nypost.com/2020/05/25/chinese-researcher-warns-coronavirus-is-just-tip-of-iceberg/

[staff edited]

 

[Radagast]

I hope she is wrong but in any event our government need to consider this.

Just to clarify: this is the deputy director of the lab in Wuhan, which has been accused of accidentally releasing the virus.

She is arguing for the continuation of the bat virus work that the Wuhan lab is doing.

Even scientists who don't believe that the virus was accidentally released from the lab still, in many cases, believe that this bat virus work is too dangerous to continue.

 

[disciple Clint]

Just to clarify: this is the deputy director of the lab in Wuhan, which has been accused of accidentally releasing the virus.

She is arguing for the continuation of the bat virus work that the Wuhan lab is doing.

Even scientists who don't believe that the virus was accidentally released from the lab still, in many cases, believe that this bat virus work is too dangerous to continue.

yes that is a problem but also it is her statement that this is just one virus of many that could become a threat to health that should cause serious concern for us.

 

[Radagast]

her statement that this is just one virus of many that could become a threat to health

We have known that for years. There have been other viruses. And there have even been movies about the threat.

 

[cow451]

We have known that for years. There have been other viruses. And there have even been movies about the threat.

And a TV series.....

 

[Tanj]

Just to clarify: this is the deputy director of the lab in Wuhan, which has been accused of accidentally releasing the virus.

With no evidence.

She is arguing for the continuation of the bat virus work that the Wuhan lab is doing.

Even scientists who don't believe that the virus was accidentally released from the lab still, in many cases, believe that this bat virus work is too dangerous to continue.

Evidence please. You could start by pointing out what is "too dangerous" about virus epidemiology, then point to a biologist that thinks that.

 

[Radagast]

With no evidence.

I would say: with purely circumstantial evidence.

Evidence please. You could start by pointing out what is "too dangerous" about virus epidemiology, then point to a biologist that thinks that.

It's gain-of-function experiments, performed in Wuhan and elsewhere, that are widely recognised as dangerous:

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/1/212431...ing-viruses-deadlier-and-why-they-should-stop

Scientists Debate If It's OK To Make Viruses More Dangerous In The Lab

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(18)30006-9/fulltext

Europe PMC

 

[Tanj]

I would say: with purely circumstantial evidence.

Got any of that you could show me?

It's gain-of-function experiments, performed in Wuhan and elsewhere, that are widely recognised as dangerous:

I am entirely familiar with the concept of gain-of-function, having being involved in one myself a while ago. Now then, please provide evidence that this was being done at Wuhan, and then go on to provide any evidence that it had anything whatsoever to do with the cov2 outbreak, given even Trump agrees it was not man made.

 

[Radagast]

Got any of that you could show me?

The location of the outbreak; the GoF experiments at Wuhan; and the unconfirmed allegations of poor safety protocols.

All, obviously, circumstantial.

I am entirely familiar with the concept of gain-of-function, having being involved in one myself a while ago.

Well, please stop putting the planet at risk.

Now then, please provide evidence that this was being done at Wuhan

This is well-known. Check out the lab's publications.

and then go on to provide any evidence that it had anything whatsoever to do with the cov2 outbreak, given even Trump agrees it was not man made.

It wasn't "man-made" in the sense of being genetically engineered. Covid-19 was quite possibly the result of a GoF experiment gone wrong.

 

[sfs]

even Trump agrees it was not man made

I think you may have just provided the first reason to think it was man-made.

 

[Tanj]

the GoF experiments at Wuhan

Of which there is no evidence beyond you constantly repeating it.

This is well-known. Check out the lab's publications.

Yeah I'm gonna run off and do your evidence collecting for you like I do for everyone else that makes baseless unevidenced accusations. In case it's not clear, I'm kidding.

That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

It wasn't "man-made" in the sense of being genetically engineered. Covid-19 was quite possibly the result of a GoF experiment gone wrong.

And what exactly do you think GoF experiments entail, exactly? How the heck do I engineer a gain of function without engineering the underlying genome? There is 0 evidence Cov2 came from any kind of human manipulation of any kind, and a massive host of evidence it is of entirely natural origin.

By the way, this is what evidence looks like...
COVID-19 coronavirus epidemic has a natural origin
Why Scientists Think The Novel Coronavirus Developed Naturally — Not In A Chinese Lab
Scientists have strong evidence coronavirus originated naturally
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2

 

[Tinker Grey]

Of which there is no evidence beyond you constantly repeating it.



Yeah I'm gonna run off and do your evidence collecting for you like I do for everyone else that makes baseless unevidenced accusations. In case it's not clear, I'm kidding.

That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.



And what exactly do you think GoF experiments entail, exactly? How the heck do I engineer a gain of function without engineering the underlying genome? There is 0 evidence Cov2 came from any kind of human manipulation of any kind, and a massive host of evidence it is of entirely natural origin.

By the way, this is what evidence looks like...
COVID-19 coronavirus epidemic has a natural origin
Why Scientists Think The Novel Coronavirus Developed Naturally — Not In A Chinese Lab
Scientists have strong evidence coronavirus originated naturally
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2

I don't remember if potholer54 has been mentioned in this context but he does a remarkable job breaking down the conspiracy theory:

 

[Radagast]

Of which there is no evidence beyond you constantly repeating it.

Everybody knows it. I'm sure you do too.

For other readers: The controversial experiments and Wuhan lab suspected of starting the coronavirus pandemic

And what exactly do you think GoF experiments entail, exactly?

GoF experiments, as you know, involve a natural mutation and selection process that makes the virus more deadly.

GoF experiments change the genome, but in similar ways to mutation and selection processes outside the lab.

Unlike artificial gene insertions, GoF experiments leave few tell-tail traces behind.

By the way, this is what evidence looks like...
COVID-19 coronavirus epidemic has a natural origin

You are being disingenuous. The first link says "The analysis of public genome sequence data from SARS-CoV-2 and related viruses found no evidence that the virus was made in a laboratory or otherwise engineered. ... By comparing the available genome sequence data for known coronavirus strains, we can firmly determine that SARS-CoV-2 originated through natural processes."

Like I said, the virus wasn't engineered. But genome analysis doesn't rule out its being created in a lab through a GoF process, which is, after all, "natural."

 

[Tanj]

Everybody knows it. I'm sure you do too.

For other readers: The controversial experiments and Wuhan lab suspected of starting the coronavirus pandemic

The experiments described in that article were direct genetic manipulation, which, to quote said article

"A natural virus altered with these methods would be easily flagged in a genetic analysis, like a contemporary addition to an old Victorian house."

and

"There is no published record of animal-passage work on coronaviruses in the Wuhan Institute."

Now sure, you can go with the "they musta dun it because reasons", but that's not a great argument.

GoF experiments, as you know, involve a natural mutation and selection process that makes the virus more deadly.

Except the vast majority of passage experiments are a part of routine process in the lab and have nothing to do with GoF, and even if they were then "making it more deadly" is not the only reason you would do it. GoF is very poorly if at all defined. It's just a catch phrase that for some reason you have latched on to and want to throw at this outbreak

Gain-of-Function Research: Background and Alternatives - Potential Risks and Benefits of Gain-of-Function Research - NCBI Bookshelf

and from that paper:

BOX 3-2Where Does Virological Research Cross the Line into GoF Research as Defined by the U.S. Government?

• Adaptation of MERS-CoV to animal models
• Elucidating the molecular determinants of transmissibility by the airborne route (influenza)
• Elucidating the biological basis for adverse outcomes associated with candidate SARS vaccines
• Conclusive experiments to demonstrate the biological significance of
  • novel gene products
  • genetic differences between isolates from animals and/or humans for newly emerged viruses, e.g., H7N9, H5N8, H5N2, H10N7, and H10N8 influenza and MERS-CoV
  • Virulence determinants of newly emerged viruses, e.g., H7N9, H5N8, H5N2, H10N7, and H10N8 influenza and MERS-CoV
• Molecular basis for resistance to antiviral drugs and MAbs
• Viral evolution under immune pressure
• Viral evolution in the presence of antiviral drugs

Given the virus in question was not an actual pathogen at the time, there would be absolutely no reason to perform any of these experiments with it, an I again iterate there's no evidence anyone did. No-one out there is looking to increase the mammalian transmissibility of rando virus isolate #5463, which at the time was known to cause disease in 0 creatures.