New peer-reviewed study: Lab leak NOT a plausible hypothesis

[stereologist]

20 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Fair to point out also that before the lab opened it was supposed to have 50 French researchers working there.  The French team refused to sign off on the lab due to corrupt practices involved in the construction and equipping of the lab.  

Looks like the French don't agree with you.

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/no-chance-former-wuhan-based-072833756.html

Quote

Gabriel Gras, a former French official in charge of safety standards at the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s (WIV) maximum security lab, told the Hong Kong-based South China Morning Post (SCMP) there was no chance that the coronavirus escaped from the institute.

The statement comes amid growing demand for a more thorough investigation on what started out as a fringe hypothesis.

Gras, a virology researcher and biosecurity expert was employed as a technical expert at the French embassy in China. He told the SCMP that he had “no doubt” about the safety of the institute’s biosafety level 4 (BSL-4) laboratory, the first of that security specification to be built in China.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8351113/Wuhan-virus-lab-signed-Michel-Barnier-2004-despite-French-intelligence-warnings.html

Quote

Mr Barnier – currently embroiled in acrimonious negotiations with the UK over a post-Brexit trade deal – was the French foreign minister when he gave the go-ahead for work to start on the Wuhan Institute of Virology in 2004, under a joint deal with the Chinese.

The move came despite strong opposition from French diplomatic and security advisers, who argued that the Chinese reputation for poor bio-security could lead to a catastrophic leak.

They also warned that Paris could lose control of the project, and even suggested that Beijing could harness the technology to make biowarfare weapons.

Eleven years later, as the laboratory prepared to open, the French architects of the project complained that they had, as feared, been ousted by the Chinese communist government.

Looks like the lack of a French sign off was due to other reasons.

https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/international/world-news/china-flaunts-french-connection-to-wuhan-lab-ambivalent-on-who-probe-into-origin-of-coronavirus/articleshow/75600806.cms

Actually we learn that the lab was signed off by the French in 2004. The French continued to work with the Chinese by training their researchers in proper procedures.

[psyche101]

5 hours ago, DieChecker said:

 

I think she's bring honest and forthright. Doesn't mean she knows everyone that works there and if any of them are sloppy with protocols.

Whenever there's a virus escape from a lab, or a work shooting, or just when an employee swears out the boss and quits... Most other employees will say something to the effect... "I never expected this to happen. I didn't know him well, but he seemed such a nice guy...".

She says the job was "routine". You know what happens at routine jobs? They lose attention to detail and start taking shortcuts. I see it everyday at work. Very professional, experienced people doing stuff that could get them fired. Because, "that won't happen to me.".

The actual quote is:

 

She says half-truths and distorted information have obscured an accurate accounting of the lab’s functions and activities, which were more routine than how they’ve been portrayed in the media.

 

“It’s not that it was boring, but it was a regular lab that worked in the same way as any other high-containment lab,” Anderson says. “What people are saying is just not how it is.”

Honestly, it's not hard to see a conspiracy theory being born on the subject is it? 

• Half truths are being told in the media.
• Not just any other lab. Any other high containment lab.

I feel the highlighted parts change that. She says what she witnessed was heavily exaggerated and there's no good reason to consider a lab leak. I'd say that's significant from a direct observer. And a great deal more likely than that disjointed theories that give rude to the lab leak theory.

I can't see how her report isn't significant. There's more than enough reason to consider her first hand report over conspiracy theories. 

Edited August 2, 2022 by psyche101

[+OverSword]

14 hours ago, stereologist said:

The move came despite strong opposition from French diplomatic and security advisers, who argued that the Chinese reputation for poor bio-security could lead to a catastrophic leak.

They also warned that Paris could lose control of the project, and even suggested that Beijing could harness the technology to make biowarfare weapons.

Eleven years later, as the laboratory prepared to open, the French architects of the project complained that they had, as feared, been ousted by the Chinese communist government.

Yeah.  They sound really positive about the whole thing   You found one guy (Chinese propaganda mouth piece) as compared to the rest of the mission.  What about the 50 French researchers that would have been working there if the integrity of the lab had not been undermined during many steps of it's construction?  Don't you think that if the WHO or the rest of the worlds researchers had access to the sight and all of the data we could have a clear picture?  Why would the Chinese block that?  Hmmm?  Let me think about why that may be and I'll get back to you.  

[Setton]

On 7/31/2022 at 9:51 PM, DieChecker said:

Very true. Like I said. Maybe in time with more samples from a wider collection, or perhaps deep DNA analysis? I don't know... maybe.

It's been shown back in 2020 that the virus has not been artificially manipulated in a lab.

Quote

It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of a related SARS-CoV-like coronavirus. As noted above, the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is optimized for binding to human ACE2 with an efficient solution different from those previously predicted7,11. Furthermore, if genetic manipulation had been performed, one of the several reverse-genetic systems available for betacoronaviruses would probably have been used19. However, the genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone20.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

[+OverSword]

46 minutes ago, Setton said:

It's been shown back in 2020 that the virus has not been artificially manipulated in a lab.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

With words in your quote such as improbable and probably how is it shown in 2020?  It's guessed.  

[Setton]

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

With words in your quote such as improbable and probably how is it shown in 2020?  It's guessed.  

Quote

However, the genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone20.

Go and read the paper. You might want to take a high school science class first if that was a genuine question.

[+OverSword]

2 minutes ago, Setton said:

Go and read the paper. You might want to take a high school science class first if that was a genuine question.

It was estimated, not shown.  Guessed, not demonstrated.  Not proven.

[+OverSword]

Oh I see you typing @Setton  I'll read the paper if you watch this video addressing the flaws of the peer review system 

 

[zep73]

30 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Oh I see you typing @Setton  I'll read the paper if you watch this video addressing the flaws of the peer review system 

 

Bret Weinstein is a persona non grata in the scientific community, due to his Covid lies, and promotion of Ivermectin against Covid.

Edited August 2, 2022 by zep73

[+OverSword]

50 minutes ago, zep73 said:

Bret Weinstein is a persona non grata in the scientific community, due to his Covid lies, and promotion of Ivermectin against Covid.

Good for him.  Notably, me fully vaxxed and boosted has had Covid, he not.

edit: the real reason for the link is because I know Setton wouldn’t interact with me if he didn’t want a Weinstein video reference 

Edited August 3, 2022 by OverSword

[+DieChecker]

18 hours ago, psyche101 said:

The actual quote is:

 

She says half-truths and distorted information have obscured an accurate accounting of the lab’s functions and activities, which were more routine than how they’ve been portrayed in the media.

 

“It’s not that it was boring, but it was a regular lab that worked in the same way as any other high-containment lab,” Anderson says. “What people are saying is just not how it is.”

Honestly, it's not hard to see a conspiracy theory being born on the subject is it? 

• Half truths are being told in the media.
• Not just any other lab. Any other high containment lab.

I feel the highlighted parts change that. She says what she witnessed was heavily exaggerated and there's no good reason to consider a lab leak. I'd say that's significant from a direct observer. And a great deal more likely than that disjointed theories that give rude to the lab leak theory.

I can't see how her report isn't significant. There's more than enough reason to consider her first hand report over conspiracy theories. 

It's significant. I'm simply saying other "high-containment" labs in China have had serious issues. It happens. 

To me it's like these people who drive 90 mph (140 kph), and claim they never had an accident, so they say they never will. They justify their high speed driving. Then they have an accident...

[+DieChecker]

4 hours ago, Setton said:

It's been shown back in 2020 that the virus has not been artificially manipulated in a lab.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

I'm going to agree with OverSword. This is a informed conclusion, but not necessarily a fact. The Wuhan lab DID do genetic tinkering. Do we know 100% this is the method they used? Did China let anyone investigate the lab, the records, the experiments, and such? To my knowledge, they have not. They resisted the WHO investigation and assisted them so they could direct what got investigated. 

As has been gone over, and over, the evidence and conclusions of such articles have been disputed to greater and lesser effect.

The idea that the ACE binding isn't perfect, and thus is natural, goes against the idea of the genetic testing done at the Wuhan labs. They adjusted things in any of thousands of ways, and then saw what happened. Thus, an imperfect ACE binding wouldn't be unusual, or unexpected.

I am not disagreeing that the data points mainly at the virus not being altered, but I disagree that it's conclusive proof. 

Edited August 3, 2022 by DieChecker

[stereologist]

9 hours ago, OverSword said:

Yeah.  They sound really positive about the whole thing   You found one guy (Chinese propaganda mouth piece) as compared to the rest of the mission.  What about the 50 French researchers that would have been working there if the integrity of the lab had not been undermined during many steps of it's construction?  Don't you think that if the WHO or the rest of the worlds researchers had access to the sight and all of the data we could have a clear picture?  Why would the Chinese block that?  Hmmm?  Let me think about why that may be and I'll get back to you.  

No. That is not what I found Please show that anything you posted is real.

Apparently, you have no idea that the original lab leak theory came from China.

[stereologist]

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

It was estimated, not shown.  Guessed, not demonstrated.  Not proven.

Apparently you are as clueless as I imagined. It is not possible to prove in science.

[stereologist]

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

Oh I see you typing @Setton  I'll read the paper if you watch this video addressing the flaws of the peer review system 

 

More ignorance from you. It so you!

[stereologist]

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

It's significant. I'm simply saying other "high-containment" labs in China have had serious issues. It happens. 

To me it's like these people who drive 90 mph (140 kph), and claim they never had an accident, so they say they never will. They justify their high speed driving. Then they have an accident...

Innuendo, which not of  interest. Please look for facts, not BS

[stereologist]

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

I'm going to agree with OverSword. This is a informed conclusion, but not necessarily a fact. The Wuhan lab DID do genetic tinkering. Do we know 100% this is the method they used? Did China let anyone investigate the lab, the records, the experiments, and such? To my knowledge, they have not. They resisted the WHO investigation and assisted them so they could direct what got investigated. 

As has been gone over, and over, the evidence and conclusions of such articles have been disputed to greater and lesser effect.

The idea that the ACE binding isn't perfect, and thus is natural, goes against the idea of the genetic testing done at the Wuhan labs. They adjusted things in any of thousands of ways, and then saw what happened. Thus, an imperfect ACE binding wouldn't be unusual, or unexpected.

I am not disagreeing that the data points mainly at the virus not being altered, but I disagree that it's conclusive proof. 

Please try and show that anything  you stated is indeed fact. Looks like you are posting nothing but innuendo

[psyche101]

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

It's significant. I'm simply saying other "high-containment" labs in China have had serious issues. It happens. 

To me it's like these people who drive 90 mph (140 kph), and claim they never had an accident, so they say they never will. They justify their high speed driving. Then they have an accident...

Not so much. It's more like a bystander reporting on an accident. In this case there's wasn't one, and just no good reason to champion that idea. 

I would trust a person who was there and trained in that particular area over the paranoia of anti authority posters with a chip in their shoulder the size of the rock of Gibraltar.

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

I'm going to agree with OverSword.

Some quotes from this very threat 

Quote

 

Or reviewed by scientists that accept funding from China

So you aren't qualified but (understandably and reasonably) choose to trust what random authorities say about the data. 

I don't know why people that were already convinced the virus did not leak from a lab 

 

1 hour ago, DieChecker said:

This is a informed conclusion

With all due respect.

Your fn kidding right? That's paranoid dribble. 

[+OverSword]

45 minutes ago, stereologist said:

More ignorance from you. It so you!

Thank you. That’s one of the only posts of yours I’ve read all the way through 

[stereologist]

49 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Thank you. That’s one of the only posts of yours I’ve read all the way through 

Thank you because  you never bothered to falsely defend the inane crap you post.

Edited August 3, 2022 by stereologist

[+OverSword]

29 minutes ago, stereologist said:

Thank you because  you never bothered to falsely defend the inane crap you post.

You are welcome 

[stereologist]

9 minutes ago, OverSword said:

You are welcome 

Still no defense of the inane false crap you post. Have you considered posting non-trash content?

[+DieChecker]

4 hours ago, stereologist said:

Innuendo, which not of  interest. Please look for facts, not BS

Here is an example...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SARS#Laboratory_accidents

Quote

Two researchers at the Chinese Institute of Virology in Beijing, China around April 2004, who spread it to around six other people. The two researchers contracted it 2 weeks apart.[77]

Study of live SARS specimens requires a biosafety level 3 (BSL-3) facility; some studies of inactivated SARS specimens can be done at biosafety level 2 facilities.[78]

I did also find this...

https://www.voanews.com/a/covid-19-pandemic_chinese-lab-checkered-safety-record-draws-scrutiny-over-covid-19/6187947.html

Quote

Two State Department cables show that American embassy officials in Beijing made several visits to the research facility and sent two official warnings back to Washington in early 2018 about the lab’s inadequate safety measures. This was at a time when researchers were conducting risky studies on coronaviruses from bats, The Washington Post reported, citing intelligence sources.

 

[+DieChecker]

5 hours ago, stereologist said:

Please try and show that anything  you stated is indeed fact. Looks like you are posting nothing but innuendo

It's supposition. Possibilities given actual events. 

The Chinese self admitted they do genetic research at Wuhan. The description I read was basically, "make changes and see what happens". I'll look it up again if you're not familiar with that statement. 

Did I misread the link, or is the non-perfect binding not one of their main bits of evidence? And such a change can't be done other then the way that they can detect easily? I believe I've read in the past there are several ways of doing viral genetic manipulation, and some don't show the change in the way they were looking for. I'll go look for a link.

Here's a link to a article suggesting the cleavage and receptors could very well be lab created.

Wiley: The genetic structure of SARS‐CoV‐2 does not rule out a laboratory origin.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/bies.202000240

I'll not pretend to know what all that means, but I did see that it suggests this could be a chimeric virus. And I did see that Wuhan was doing chimeric virus studies going back to 2015.

Financial Times: Genetic engineering: why some fear the next pandemic could be lab-made.
https://www.ft.com/content/f81f18b0-0f93-4b4a-b299-ba0e39a82074

Quote

    Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles. Copying articles to share with others is a breach of FT.com T&Cs and Copyright Policy. Email licensing@ft.com to buy additional rights. Subscribers may share up to 10 or 20 articles per month using the gift article service. More information can be found at https://www.ft.com/tour.
   https://www.ft.com/content/f81f18b0-0f93-4b4a-b299-ba0e39a82074

    Baric provided his mice for Shi to experiment on in Wuhan and in 2015, the pair published a paper describing how they had spliced the Sars virus together with another coronavirus to create a “chimeric” virus which could replicate quickly in human cells. The findings were so alarming that the authors added a cautionary note to their paper: “Scientific review panels may deem similar studies building chimeric viruses based on circulating strains too risky to pursue.”

This article suggests the virus mutates very quickly. This could be accelerated in a lab environment. The basis could have been the Thailand bat samples. And the lab simply, over several years, and introducing it repeatedly during experiments, simply had to wait. 

We know they studied coronaviruses and were watching for changes that would affect infectiousness. We can easily suppose they had the base virus. 

The only missing element would be a known protocol fail.

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2105253118

 

Edited August 3, 2022 by DieChecker

[+DieChecker]

5 hours ago, psyche101 said:

Not so much. It's more like a bystander reporting on an accident. In this case there's wasn't one, and just no good reason to champion that idea. 

No good reason? Did you see the year where China basically refused to allow any access to anything that could be research on the lab, or the viruses origins? We had to accept what they told us. Very shady.

It's more like a police department who says none of their guys are racists, when "somehow" a black man gets shot while lying on the ground defenseless. Maybe it was an act of nature? Or shot himself in the back during the traffic stop?

Quote

I would trust a person who was there and trained in that particular area over the paranoia of anti authority posters with a chip in their shoulder the size of the rock of Gibraltar.

It's a logical fallacy to state you'll not consider evidence, because you dont like who presented it. Much less cast aside an entire branch of discussion because one poster seems crazy to you.

I deny nothing she says. But suggest she wasn't everywhere, all the time. If I remember right she didn't work on coronaviruses, but on ebola? Apparently she did work in the P4 Lab, so the mechanisms and protocols would be known to her.

Myself, I have no idea who is working in the next department at work. I can state that I believe they run their clean room just as good as we do ours, but it would ultimately be guessing?

How many work in each department at the Wuhan lab, and could she know them all, and swear none if them would take shortcuts?

Quote

Some quotes from this very threat 

With all due respect.

Your fn kidding right? That's paranoid dribble. 

Come on, you know what I meant. The conclusion in the article mentioned... That it could not be genetic engineered, was a informed conclusion, but it wasn't a scientific fact. It wasn't proven, only concluded. That it's more likely then not isn't the point. The point is there's a non-zero chance of "not".

Edited August 3, 2022 by DieChecker