All this article proves, if true, is that the characteristics of the virus do not prove that it was engineered, but neither do they prove it wasn’t.
And yet patient zero STILL had no contact with the market where all of this supposedly started.
Unfortunately the lie’s halfway around the world...
And, all of the so-called first-hand information is ciming from a Communist government intent on suppressing the truth and withholding information.
I would like to get a look into the research files at that level 4 lab that just happens to be in Wuhan.
Funny because it appears the Chicoms are treating it with HIV drugs
China Using HIV Drugs For Coronavirus Treatment
By GreatGameIndia - February 1, 2020
China is using HIV drugs for Coronavirus treatment. China is using AbbVie Inc’s HIV drugs as an ad-hoc treatment for pneumonia caused by the novel coronavirus while the global search for a cure continues
China Using HIV Drugs To Treat Coronavirus
The Beijing branch of China’s National Health Commission said that a combination of lopinavir and ritonavir, sold under the brand name Kaletra by AbbVie, is part of its latest treatment plan for patients infected by the virus, which has killed at least 56 people in China and sickened more than 2,000 worldwide.
The NHC said that while there is not yet any effective anti-viral drug, it recommends patients are given two lopinavir and ritonavir tablets twice a day and a dose of alpha-interpheron through nebulization twice daily.
Medical journal Lancet said on Friday that a clinical trial is under way using ritonavir and lopinavir to treat cases of the new coronavirus. Meanwhile, China’s Center for Disease Control and Prevention will start developing a vaccine, according to the Global Times.
Wang Guangfa, a respiratory expert at Peking University First Hospital in Beijing who was infected by the virus after visiting Wuhan to inspect to coronavirus patients, told China News Week earlier this week that his doctor recommended he take the HIV drugs to fight the new virus and they worked on him.
Makes sense, but who is Ari Allyn-Feuer? Is he an epidemiologist?
Conversely, if you were trying to engineer new envelope proteins into coronavirus, you might take some of the sequences of HIV envelope proteins (e.g. those sequences that encode a region allowing anchoring/embedding in the lipid envelope) - and then add different sequences to the receptor-binding region of the envelope protein, creating a hybrid envelope protein with only a small amount of HIV sequences.
The bottom line is that the sequencing they've done doesn't exclude, nor conclude that genetic engineering was performed on this strain of coronavirus. I am assuming it wasn't genetically engineered, but such a thing is definitely possible.
The fact that there’s a big communist Chinese bio weapons lab right there at the infection epicenter - and that it’s been critiqued for inadequate safety containment - are still very curious.
Why would they put HIV in a bio weapon when medical science has almost cured it at this point.
So the author doesn't really know if it is or isn't. I cannot take his opinion as gospel, yet at any rate. We shall wait and see what transpires on this issue.
Issue still open, as far as I can see. But I am no expert by and shape or form. Which is why I remain open to more experts on the issue.
“The unique biological properties that HIV sequences could theoretically impart to another virus are completely missing from 2019-nCoV...”
I hope that is true. Even natural HIV sequences might cause real problems, but from this sentence it seems like the HIV parts that could cause trouble aren’t here?
“You don’t need to ID any virus”
“These are not the Viri you’re looking for”
“You can go about your business...”
Who even asks these silly questions that experts seem compelled to answer?
The Wuhan Coronavirus came out of the sewers of Wuhan.
It didn’t have to be engineered by man.
Nature did it. And any/every Chinese wet market is the perfect environment for more of the same.
And they’ll keep coming.
If you get one fact wrong all the others are placed in doubt whether true or false.
“Huanan seafood market in Wuhan”
It is not a ‘seafood’ market but rather a common inexpensive Chinese market called a ‘wet’ market weer all manner of foods may be found and eaten.
Note about the author (Ari Allyn-Feuer) from the article:
“Author’s note: I have a Ph.D. in bioinformatics, and am a principal data scientist at a major pharmaceutical company. ***This paper isn’t directly in my wheelhouse, but it’s pretty close***.”
In other words, he has no idea what he is talking about if the virus is a bi-weapon - information he would not be party to or have knowledge of.
Any bio-weapons worker would be under heavy secrecy like any other person involved in SAPs and could ******never reveal****** what he knows or does not know.
Further this guy has no NO access to any Chinese bio-weapons research facility, so he has no idea what the Chinese have done or not done. He is speculating with a little bit of knowledge.
Use salt liberally
I freaking HATE article titles like this! “No, such and such does not mean such and such”
Whenever I read that I know I’m in for Spin City on whatever the topic is.
Biorxiv is a preprint server for uploading finished manuscripts, before (or during) the process of submitting them to a journal for publication. It is not peer reviewed and there seems to be but only very basic screening and a check against plagiarism (in other words, does it follow the basic outline of a scientific paper and ensuring it is not a word for word copy of another paper). Thta doesn’t mean everything posted there is garbage, but also doens’t mean everthing posted there is valid.
https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_biorxiv_And_what_do_people_use_it_for
7th Jul, 2018
Bernhard Hommel
Leiden University
But the problem is that such servers blur the line between peer-reviewed articles and fake news. Many authors and readers treat pre-publications just like peer-reviewed papers accepted by a journal, and so we read twitter messages about „evidence for xyz“ with a link to unreviewed papers with sometimes questionable methodology and conclusions, and laypeople (and I‘m afraid some researchers as well) take that as scientific evidence already. That has the potential to undermine the credibility of our science.
Criticisms in the comment section of the Biorxiv paper – “Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag”:
Brian Hanley • 7 hours ago • edited
I agree with Jason Weir, Song Yang, and others.
Regarding these purported HIV sequences. I studied gp120 structure in an transmission electron microscopy lab in grad school. gp120 has long non-conserved regions that effectively hypermutate. This is a major mechanism of HIV immune system evasion, because it changes the gp120 presented region so fast the immune system can’t keep up with it.
This happens because HIV is an RNA virus. It has a couple of mutations per replication on average. In late stagesof infection there can be 500K to 1 million copies per milliliter. do the math on that. Because of this, we call HIV a quasi-species. It’s got a very bushy tree within one person that is infected.
Within the quasi species of HIV, in the gp120 non-conserved high mutationregions you are going to find just about any short sequence there sooner or later. These inserts are short, up to 15 or so nucleotides, but mostly 5 to 8. And this is the spike protein, which is an area that mutates and finds new receptors.
If you want to look at anengineered virus, look up SHIV (simian HIV). That was designed and produced in a laboratory. It has huge regions transferred from other viruses. It makes monkeys sick with human-like HIV.
I think that this paper is ignorant and amateurish pseudoscience. No. Absolutely not. This is not some escaped bioweapon.
Jason Weir • 14 hours ago
I blasted each of the four 2019 - nCoV inserts shown in Table 1 and received 100% identity with a number of other hits other than HIV-1. For example, BLAST-P results for insert RSYLTPGDSSSG received 100% identity with Spike glycoprotein from a bat coronovirus with Genbank accession number GenBank: QHR63300.1. It is thus much closer to a known bat coronovirus than it is to HIV-1. Likewise each of the other three inserts have 100% amino acid identity to other non-HIV sources. The paper is thus highly misleading in that it does not discuss the other blast hits to non HIV-1 related sources, some of which have high identity than those from HIV-1. The implications of the paper that 2019 - nCoV coronovirus has elements of HIV-1 virus inserted into it should be treated with scepticism.
-Jason Weir (Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Toronto)
Read others here:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v1.article-info
And something that jumped to me as well:
Kenrod • 12 hours ago
It strikes me that the phrase “uncanny similarity” and continued use of the word uncanny in the manuscript is not scientific. Unless there is a way to measure or gauge a comparison via some sort of statistics this reads more like astrology and is irresponsible.
In other words, HE SAYS the coronavirus was not "engineered" to contain HIV virus portions ...
Color me skeptical.
Bring Out Your Dead
Post to me or FReep mail to be on/off the Bring Out Your Dead ping list.
The purpose of the “Bring Out Your Dead” ping list (formerly the “Ebola” ping list) is very early warning of emerging pandemics, as such it has a high false positive rate.
So far the false positive rate is 100%.
At some point we may well have a high mortality pandemic, and likely as not the “Bring Out Your Dead” threads will miss the beginning entirely.
*sigh* Such is life, and death...
If a quarantine saves just one child's life, it's worth it.
Possibility that HIV virus is in Corona virus, intentional, man made
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v1.full.pdf