White House ordered NIH to cancel coronavirus research funding, Fauci says

[Evry'soul]

Are you expecting people to accept logic when it contradicts their beliefs, you must be new to this site.

Well then I give up!

 

[disciple Clint]

Well then I give up!

Na dont quit, there are some very entertaining people on here they come up with some real creative ways of avoiding any acceptance of the facts.

 

[The Barbarian]

Anybody buying that?

It's a common thread among populist dictators. "The cult of the personality" is seen in authoritarian regimes in Hungary, The Philippines Brazil, etc.

 

[The Barbarian]

It is quite possible that this NIH-funded research in Wuhan led to an accidental release of virus that caused the current pandemic.

No, that's another fantasy:
More Evidence Suggests Pangolins May Have Passed Coronavirus From Bats to Humans

Coronavirus: From bats to pangolins, how do viruses reach us?

Pangolins are now confirmed carriers of viruses closely related to SARS-CoV-2. But as with SARS and MERS, bats are the most likely original source. Scientists believe bats' unique genetic quirks make them ideal hosts.
...
Coronaviruses are zoonotic viral diseases, meaning they are passed from animals to humans, and while in the animal, the virus goes through a series of genetic mutations that allows it to infect and multiply inside humans. Although the coronavirus is thought to have originated in bats, this doesn't mean it was directly passed from bats to humans.
...
Xiang says the evidence for those claims actually "already exists" in a paper from October 2019, which published genome sequences of sick pangolins smuggled from Malaysia to China, finding evidence of coronaviruses. Although there's a strong similarity between the coronaviruses found in pangolins and SARS-CoV-2, further research is needed to establish exactly how the virus jumped from animal to human.
Coronavirus: From bats to pangolins, how do viruses reach us? | DW | 26.03.2020

 

[Radagast]

No, that's another fantasy

No, it's eminently possible.

 

[The Barbarian]

No, it's eminently possible.

Sorry, so dramatically unlikely as to be effectively impossible.

No point in denial.

 

[Radagast]

Sorry, so dramatically unlikely as to be effectively impossible.

No point in denial.

What's your point? Because that seems to argue against the pangolin theory, and in favour of a bat source (which would be the case for an accidental lab release).

 

[The Barbarian]

What's your point? Because that seems to argue against the pangolin theory, and in favour of a bat source (which would be the case for an accidental lab release).

The genetic data from the virus indicate two animal vectors. So the virus, according to genetic data, originated in bats, but was passed to pangolins before it was spread to humans. The fact that pangolins have since been found to have bat viruses, makes this finding all the more conclusive.

Identifying SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses in Malayan pangolins

Lam, T.T., Jia, N., Zhang, Y. et al.
Identifying SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses in Malayan pangolins.
Nature (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2169-0

 

[The Barbarian]

COVID-19: Epidemiology, Evolution, and Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives
Trends in Molecular Medicine
Volume 26, Issue 5, May 2020, Pages 483-495

The recent outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan turned into a public health emergency of international concern. With no antiviral drugs nor vaccines, and the presence of carriers without obvious symptoms, traditional public health intervention measures are significantly less effective. Here, we report the epidemiological and virological characteristics of the COVID-19 outbreak. Originated in bats, 2019-nCoV/ severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2 likely experienced adaptive evolution in intermediate hosts before transfer to humans at a concentrated source of transmission.

 

[Radagast]

The genetic of the virus indicate two animal vectors. So the virus, according to genetic data, originated in bats, but was passed to pangolins before it was spread to humans. The fact that pangolins have since been found to have bat viruses, makes this finding all the more conclusive.

Identifying SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses in Malayan pangolins

Lam, T.T., Jia, N., Zhang, Y. et al.
Identifying SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses in Malayan pangolins.
Nature (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2169-0

I have read that paper.

A. Their Figure 2 shows clearly that the Yunnan bat virus is closer to SARS-CoV-2 than any pangolin virus.

B. Their conclusions relate to possible future diseases ("that pangolins should be considered as possible hosts in the emergence of new coronaviruses and should be removed from wet markets to prevent zoonotic transmission"). Their conclusions do not relate to the origin of SARS-CoV-2.

Why are you misrepresenting this research? Their Figure 2 clearly supports Yunnan bats being the most likely source of SARS-CoV-2.

 

[Radagast]

COVID-19: Epidemiology, Evolution, and Cross-Disciplinary Perspectives
Trends in Molecular Medicine
Volume 26, Issue 5, May 2020, Pages 483-495

The recent outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan turned into a public health emergency of international concern. With no antiviral drugs nor vaccines, and the presence of carriers without obvious symptoms, traditional public health intervention measures are significantly less effective. Here, we report the epidemiological and virological characteristics of the COVID-19 outbreak. Originated in bats, 2019-nCoV/ severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV)-2 likely experienced adaptive evolution in intermediate hosts before transfer to humans at a concentrated source of transmission.

I can't access this paper.

However, the sentence "likely experienced adaptive evolution in intermediate hosts before transfer to humans at a concentrated source of transmission" is totally consistent with the scenario of accidental release of a bat virus following GoF experiments in a lab.

 

[The Barbarian]

Therefore, it is possible that the amino acid similarity between the RBD of the Guangdong pangolin coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2 is due to selectively mediated convergent evolution rather than recombination, although it is difficult to differentiate between these scenarios on the basis of the current data. This observation is consistent with the fact that the sequence similarity of ACE2 is higher between humans and pangolins (84.8%) than between humans and bats (80.8–81.4% for Rhinolophus sp.) (Extended Data Table 3). The occurrence of recombination and/or convergent evolution further highlights the role that intermediate animal hosts have in the emergence of viruses that can infect humans. However, all of the pangolin coronaviruses identified to date lack the insertion of a polybasic (furin-like) S1/S2 cleavage site in the spike protein that distinguishes human SARS-CoV-2 from related betacoronaviruses (including RaTG13)10 and that may have helped to facilitate the emergence and rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 through human populations.
Identifying SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses in Malayan pangolins | Nature

 

[The Barbarian]

However, the sentence "likely experienced adaptive evolution in intermediate hosts before transfer to humans at a concentrated source of transmission" is totally consistent with the scenario of accidental release of a bat virus following GoF experiments in a lab.

Or more likely, via a market in Wuhan, where such cross-contamination exposure would happen every day.

 

[Radagast]

Or more likely, via a market in Wuhan, where such cross-contamination exposure would happen every day.

You cited the paper.

The sentence "likely experienced adaptive evolution in intermediate hosts before transfer to humans at a concentrated source of transmission" does not refer to accidental cross-contamination exposure in a market, because it implies multiple generations under selective pressure.

It is, in fact, more consistent with gain-of-function experiments in a lab ("adaptive evolution in intermediate hosts" is exactly what such experiments are about), followed by accidental release.

The fact that there actually is a lab doing gain-of-function experiments with bat coronaviruses in Wuhan puts that particular hypothesis at the top of the pile.

 

[Radagast]

However, all of the pangolin coronaviruses identified to date lack the insertion of a polybasic (furin-like) S1/S2 cleavage site in the spike protein that distinguishes human SARS-CoV-2 from related betacoronaviruses (including RaTG13)10 and that may have helped to facilitate the emergence and rapid spread of SARS-CoV-2 through human populations.
Identifying SARS-CoV-2-related coronaviruses in Malayan pangolins | Nature

Translation: one of the key proteins in human SARS-CoV-2 is absent from pangolin coronaviruses.

More solid evidence against the pangolin theory.

 

[The Barbarian]

Scientists Are Tired of Explaining Why The COVID-19 Virus Was Not Made in a Lab

JACINTA BOWLER

20 APRIL 2020

It's a rumour that just won't die. When asked whether the COVID-19 virus was genetically engineered in a lab, scientists have already said "no" rather firmly, but the matter of the new coronavirus' origin is unlikely to be put to rest so easily.
...
"All evidence so far points to the fact the COVID-19 virus is naturally derived and not man-made," explains immunologist Nigel McMillan from the Menzies Health Institute Queensland.

"If you were going to design it in a lab the sequence changes make no sense as all previous evidence would tell you it would make the virus worse. No system exists in the lab to make some of the changes found."

Back in late March, we covered a study published in Nature Medicine, in which the researchers investigated the genomic data of SARS-CoV-2 - particularly the receptor-binding domain (RBD) sections of the virus - to try and discover how it mutated into the virulent and deadly version we're currently struggling to contain.

As a by-product of their research, they were able to determine that SARS-CoV-2 was not genetically manipulated.
Scientists Are Tired of Explaining Why The COVID-19 Virus Was Not Made in a Lab

 

[The Barbarian]

No, COVID-19 Coronavirus Was Not Bioengineered. Here’s The Research That Debunks That Idea
No, COVID-19 Coronavirus Was Not Bioengineered. Here’s The Research That Debunks That Idea

 

[Radagast]

Scientists Are Tired of Explaining Why The COVID-19 Virus Was Not Made in a Lab

JACINTA BOWLER

20 APRIL 2020

It's a rumour that just won't die. When asked whether the COVID-19 virus was genetically engineered in a lab, scientists have already said "no" rather firmly, but the matter of the new coronavirus' origin is unlikely to be put to rest so easily.
...
"All evidence so far points to the fact the COVID-19 virus is naturally derived and not man-made," explains immunologist Nigel McMillan from the Menzies Health Institute Queensland.

"If you were going to design it in a lab the sequence changes make no sense as all previous evidence would tell you it would make the virus worse. No system exists in the lab to make some of the changes found."

Back in late March, we covered a study published in Nature Medicine, in which the researchers investigated the genomic data of SARS-CoV-2 - particularly the receptor-binding domain (RBD) sections of the virus - to try and discover how it mutated into the virulent and deadly version we're currently struggling to contain.

As a by-product of their research, they were able to determine that SARS-CoV-2 was not genetically manipulated.
Scientists Are Tired of Explaining Why The COVID-19 Virus Was Not Made in a Lab

Nobody is claiming that the virus was "genetically engineered in a lab."

What the evidence supports is that the virus was "accidentally released from a lab, following gain-of-function experiments on naturally occurring viruses in that lab."

Do you not understand the difference?

 

[Radagast]

No, COVID-19 Coronavirus Was Not Bioengineered. Here’s The Research That Debunks That Idea
No, COVID-19 Coronavirus Was Not Bioengineered. Here’s The Research That Debunks That Idea

Nobody is claiming that the virus was "genetically engineered in a lab."

What the evidence supports is that the virus was "accidentally released from a lab, following gain-of-function experiments on naturally occurring viruses in that lab."

So this article is totally beside the point.... or else it's a deliberate smokescreen.

 

[The Barbarian]

As a by-product of their research, they were able to determine that SARS-CoV-2 was not genetically manipulated.
Scientists Are Tired of Explaining Why The COVID-19 Virus Was Not Made in a Lab

Pretty clear. Not from a lab.

Notice the Chinese are making the same excuses as Trump; they're claiming it was made by Americans. For the same reasons.