The coronavirus did not escape from a lab. Here's how we know.

Page 2 - For the science geek in everyone, Live Science breaks down the stories behind the most interesting news and photos on the Internet.
Mar 21, 2020
11
2
30
It really appears that this article is a disinformation campaign to cloud the truth, which is that the government of China is in the bio-weapon business. Of course, so are the others governments world wide. Doing a little research today verifies that China was responsible for this pandemic. The are plenty information to disprove this article, as their are interviews Chinese scientists that were reporting the exact opposite of what this article claims.

Is COVID-19 a distraction that is being used for other purposes?
why do you automatically assume it's a distraction.
I swear I bet we can take flat eathers in a spaceship and have them stare out of the damn window bring them back to earth and they'll still say it's flat.
This is very similar reasoning here and we're witnessing it all come about!
Like the holocuast deniers...for crying out loud back in ww2 germany when the atrocities were taking place they already started the campaign to claim it was fake.
That's like what's happening here.
for the conspiracy kooks NOTHING EXISTS RIGHT?
No moon landing, no planes hit towers, no one was shot at sandy hook. etc
Y'all live in an IMAGINARY WORLD
If the internet had existed during the bubonic plague and during the 1918 spanish I swear you mofos would have said that was an engineered bacteria and virus!
 
Mar 21, 2020
11
2
30
Glad that there's been an article debunking this. It's depressing how many people on the forums think that this virus was manmade.
dude i'm surprised that the konspiracy types made it on here.
I bet the ones claiming this is "fake" didnt even read the nature article which by the way is available for FREE.
And even if they did read it I hate to cast judgement but I doubt they possess the science knowledge or mental aptitude to even understand/ interpret what said article says.
Goddamn
 
Mar 21, 2020
11
2
30
by not addressing that 2015 article directly, this new article only adds to the conspiracies.
dude why is it that everyone wants to assume these things without EVEN HAVING training in virology?The extent of my schooling is college level virology and immunology. But I bet yourself and others assuming this dont so I can sort of see why it has to be some nefarious thing.
 
Mar 21, 2020
11
2
30
Yeah it looks legit and it is good to see. I'm almost ready to take the tinfoil off. 😁 However, is it not possible that it could still be engineered but made not to look engineered?
Instead of parsimony...you give that idea some weight? Could it happen I dont' know enough molecular biology to say that. Neither do probably the majority posting here.
If you were alive during the plague or 1918 spanish flu and we had the internet what you think?
 
Mar 21, 2020
11
2
30
I still will observe and wait for more information. The fact that Wuhan has a level 4 lab in place (known since the 80s) is still troubling imho. Maybe they just had the virus intact as is and were studying it. Seems coincidental to me. But hey you guys are scientists, and you're always right. And propaganda doesn't exist. Stay calm sheep.
Scientists dont say they're always right. Science has a self correcting mechanism called the scientific method.
No one said propaganda didnt exist but sounds like you've bought into more of that more often than not by your statement. All you did and you know Im right is that you read this simple article and did not read the nature article and you know I'm right again you dont have enough molecular biology learning to decipher or make an armchair decision that your reasoning is superior to ppl that spend thieir life studying's reasoning.
 
Mar 21, 2020
11
2
30
This article is misleading. Most viruses held in labs are not genetically engineered and originate from natural sources. Just because this virus isn’t genetically modified does not mean the pandemic did not originate from a lab accident. I doubt we’ll ever know the truth, but the fact is, an accidental release from a lab is still plausible especially given the poor laboratory practices in China, notably selling carcasses of lab animals for consumption (!!!).

People simply do not want to believe this is possible, hence articles like this. Not exactly scientifically rigorous.
This is a simple article. The real article I've posted a link to. The nature article is the more as you put it scientifically rigorous one. Now if you want to actually read the scientifically rigorous one then go do it.
If you dont read it then shut it. Come back after you read it. Cause I know you probably didnt
 
  • Like
Reactions: Truth
Mar 9, 2020
48
5
55
Mainly as others have noted
1) The (mythic? hypothesized) "lab" might have wanted a less infectious virus to make a vaccine. This was an early "conspiracy theory," now withdrawn. I am not sure why.
2) The "lab" might have wanted a less infectious virus at the cellular level to increase asymptomatic infection between humans.
3) The "lab" might have wanted a less infectious virus so as to less infect their own nationals.
4) The "lab" might have wanted a less infectious virus to cause fear and uncertainty, but less death.
5) The "lab" may have not used a computer simulation, but trial and error, or both.
6) The "lab" may have had a better computer than the guy that that wrote this paper.
I am not sure why this article is said to be "myth busting." It makes me more inclined to believe the myth. I am not connected with medicine or biology.

Prayers for France, Italy, Europe including my homeland the UK as a whole.
 
Mar 22, 2020
4
2
15
Is this article another piece of misinformation?
Perhaps YES, it certainly appears to contain speculation.
First i'll make the assumption that the article is an accurate representation of what those 'scientists' have stated.
I have a problem with this "If scientists had deliberately engineered this virus, they wouldn't have chosen mutations that computer models suggest won't work ".
Clearly the hooks on the spikes DO work, they have led to a pandemic..
What this article shows is that the computer models used by the researchers are insufficient and the "wouldn't have chosen" sentence is nothing but SPECULATION.
Speculation is NOT science even when uttered by a scientist..
Thus the myth of the virus having been created in a lab is NOT debunked.
I joined this site in the hope that I could get real information but it seems to be not much better than the tabloid press when i read of such speculation being passed off as science.
Disappointed.
 
Mar 22, 2020
1
0
10
Why did China delay notifying the world of the issue with COVID-19? If they didn’t make it, were they conducting experimental modifications on SARS-2 Corona viruses. Questions are numerous, and valid responses are small
Re: SARS-Cov-2 conspiracy theories -- motive
The local authorities in Wuhan probably had a motive to suppress acknowledging an epidemic, possibly because of business interests in that wet market, as well as wanting to avoid a quarantine, etc...

With regard to the rest of the PRC and the lab -- they may have been studying SARS, and other viruses, no doubt. But there would be no motive to be sloppy w/regard to potentially letting any viruses out.
Deliberately engineering a virus so that it doesn't look engineered -- no motive -- since the effect on their economy and the world economy would be against their interests.

However, look at the enormously positive effect on the environment, and the reduction of carbon emissions. Movies such as 12 Monkeys, the Da-Vinci Code : Inferno, even Avengers: Infinity War -- all have essentially speculated that there could be pro-environmental motives to cull the human population, in order to benefit the environment. It's an extreme stretch, but the results of this virus would align with such a hypothetical motive.
 
Mar 22, 2020
1
3
15
I have no opinion either way on this but what concerns me is the bad thinking that is surrounding it. If we are going to be serious about approaching things scientifically then we need to be truly scientific about it - that means we don't engage in shut up and shut down behaviour. We don't deal in absolutes - stating that we have proof that the virus did not escape from a lab by using a paper that shows the virus could only have evolved naturally is not good science. It does not take the full picture into account but rather leans on a strawman argument.

As has already been stated on this forum a virus in a lab does not mean it was manufactured. Viruses are studied, manipulated in most cases for purely beneficial outcomes - understanding what makes it tick. Such labs have strict protocols ensuring that pathogens do not escape but people make mistakes. To categorically make the claim that this did not come from a lab and base this on the nature of grabbers on the virus - to me seems very unscientific - and of grave concern because this seems to be where our "thinking" is going. It bothers me that our "thinkers" are this amateurish in how they go about solving problems.

It seems from this article, and some of the comments, that this is more an attempt at shutting down and shutting up than it is about getting to the truth. If we are to get to the truth we are not going to do it only by looking at one side of the coin. No matter how unpleasant or illogical or ridiculous other avenues of study may appear to be - history has taught us that we spend a lot of time slapping our foreheads and going "Oh".

Interesting statement from this article "But it turns out, nature is smarter than scientists ... " - which I agree with - and which, in my view, says that when we have a situation where our scientists are saying, we think, or we suspect or we simply don't know that making absolute statements about anything is just plain silly.

I am going to state this for the CD people out there (for what good it will do) - I have no dog in this fight either way - I am terribly concerned by the way in which we, as a society, are tackling important issues and problems, allowing too much emotion and agenda to get in the way of intelligent thought and proper research.
 
Mar 22, 2020
1
1
10
Actually, this article gives a proof that it is purposely engineered.

The method is that those Evil Scientists took animal coronavirus samples and infected human prisoners. And then bred the virus capable for human-human transmission.

Viruses in general are too complex that it is not very useful to make genetically engineered viruses. But with selective breeding it is very much possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Truth

LLL

Mar 22, 2020
2
1
10
I'm not a scientist but I've always thought in order for something to be a scientific fact it had to be replicatable in a controlled, lab setting? It seems that theories about origins of this virus have yet to be proven so the title of this article is unverifiable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: truthmonger

LLL

Mar 22, 2020
2
1
10
A step by step debunking of this demagogic China sponsored article

1. "One persistent myth is that this virus, called SARS-CoV-2, was made by scientists and escaped from a lab in Wuhan, China, where the outbreak began. "

It didn't escape!

2. "Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus," after "a group of researchers compared the genome of this novel coronavirus with the seven other corona viruses known to infect humans: SARS, MERS and SARS-CoV-2, which can cause severe disease; " (?!?)
Where's your proof?! I bet you don't even have it sampled!

3. "It is so effective at attaching to human cells that the researchers said the spike proteins were the result of natural selection and not genetic engineering."
- How did it become "so effective at attaching (itself) to human cells"? Is it by training on snakes, or on bats first? Because that's exactly how you - that is: it, does not become "effective" on infecting human cells. It's quite the contrary. You need to train it on humans!
3.1. A bonus debunk :: and an explanation on :: why it is proving fatal to elderly people?
cit: "That analysis showed that the "hook" part of the spike had (*)evolved to target a receptor on the outside of human cells called ACE2, which is involved in blood pressure regulation. "
*Not evolved but engineered - (1st-ly : because viruses don't evolve, they mutate! 2nd-ly it's evolution would need a great uninterrupted supply of expendable human subjects to be training with ). The ACE2 receptor was chosen as a hook for the second edition of SARS-CoV, so that it can penetrate easier (and therefore become far more fatal to ) to a particular group of people; subjects with age related high blood pressure problems, who are on medications that boos the levels of ACE2 being used as a receptor by the novel corona strand. Which in turn - clearly explains higher death rates on elder population.

Shall I continue?...

I don't have time to bother with such an obvious Chinese military counterintelligence propaganda.
Agreed on all points except Chinese propaganda. If anything it might be American propaganda. As far as I can see neither side is trustworthy and each have reason to benefit.
 
Mar 5, 2020
10
0
30
This one of the most close minded articles written. The references are equally (dis)credible as "police or government officials". Because it seems impossible to them they assume nobody is smarter....dumb.
 
Mar 22, 2020
1
0
10
The reasoning in this article is sound, but still speculative. We have no way of knowing what sample(s) a lab might have been working with unbeknownst to the scientific community at large.

That said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and I have seen nothing to suggest this was released from a lab, accidentally or otherwise. If it was, I'm sure that information will come out sooner or later, but the implications in the near term are largely irrelevant anyway.
 
Mar 22, 2020
4
1
10
I don't suppose it matters that Shi Zhengli the lead researcher at Wuhan Virology was a master of bat related coronaviruses?
Correction to: Molecular detection of viruses in Kenyan bats and discovery of novel astroviruses, caliciviruses and rotaviruses,

Discovery of novel bat coronaviruses in south China that use the same receptor as MERS coronavirus

Longitudinal Surveillance of Betacoronaviruses in Fruit Bats in Yunnan Province, China During 2009–2016

Serological Evidence of Bat SARS-Related Coronavirus Infection in Humans, China

S8 Fig Quantification of SARSr-CoV in individual bat fecal samples. The number of genome copies of SARSr-CoV per gram of bat feces was determined by quantitative real-time PCR targeting the RdRp gene. Samples from which the SARSr-CoV RBD sequences were successfully amplified are indicated in red. (PPTX)

S1 Table Comparison of the novel bat SARSr-CoVs identified in this study with human/civet SARS-CoVs and previously described bat SARSr-CoVs. (DOCX)

My personal favourite!!........Chimeric means man made using 2 or more viruses combined!! S7 Fig
The successful or failed rescue of the chimeric SARSr-CoVs. (A) Cytopathic effects in Vero E6 cells transfected with the infectious BAC clones constructed with the backbone of WIV1 and various S genes of different bat SARSr-CoV strains. Microphotographs were taken 24 hours post transfection. (B) The culture media supernatant collected from the cell...

Discovery of a rich gene pool of bat SARS-related coronaviruses provides new insights into the origin of SARS coronavirus

S1 Fig
Alignment of amino acid sequences of the receptor-binding motif (corresponding to aa 424–495 of SARS-CoV S protein). Two clades of the SARSr-CoVs identified from bats in the studied cave are indicated with vertical lines on the left. (PPTX)

Love this one too!! Spike substitution so what? change the receptor on the coronavirus why would we do that??......I wonder

S9 Fig Spike substitution strategy. The original fragments E and F were shortened to leave spike gene as an independent fragment. The new fragments were designated as Es and Fs. BsaI or BsmBI sites were introduced into the junctions of Es/Spike and Spike/Fs. Then any spike could be substituted into the genome of SARSr-CoV WIV1 through this strategy. (TIF)

Cross-neutralization of SARS coronavirus-specific antibodies against bat SARS-like coronaviruses

Coexistence of multiple coronaviruses in several bat colonies in an abandoned mineshaft

Isolation and characterization of a bat SARS-like coronavirus that uses the ACE2 receptor

Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) proteins of different bat species confer variable susceptibility to SARS-CoV entry

Difference in receptor usage between severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) coronavirus and SARS-like coronavirus of bat origin

Bats are natural reservoirs of SARS-like coronaviruses

A SARS-like cluster of circulating bat coronaviruses shows potential for human emergence

Bat origin of human coronaviruses

Intraspecies diversity of SARS-like coronaviruses in Rhinolophus sinicus and its implications for the origin of SARS coronaviruses in humans

Isolation and characterization of a novel bat coronavirus closely related to the direct progenitor of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus

Two mutations were critical for bat-to-human transmission of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus








 
  • Like
Reactions: EastofMaeWest
Mar 22, 2020
4
1
10
They even bragged they had made a chimeric coronavirus to and I quote "increase its mode of function" which basically means they made it more pathogenic, more infectious

BUT DON'T TAKE MY WORD FOR IT GO READ IT YOURSELVES....CONSPIRACY THEORY NUT SIGNING OUT
 
Mar 22, 2020
1
0
10
You say it didn't come from a lab, but you use the term 'analysis' and 'analyzed' multiple times. Was this analysis done in someone's kitchen sink or trunk of their car? Regardless if it was genetically engineered or not, one would hope that it was being studied in a lab and not on a picnic table in someone's backyard. There is a research lab less than 20 miles from where the epicenter has been established, a lab that does microbiology research, so very conceivable that the spread came from that lab. Still, the origin is Wuhan and no amount of 'spin' is going to change that. Be careful that you are not just a mouthpiece for the Communist China propaganda machine. It is possible it originated in a million different ways, but remember Occam's razor and what is most likely. Oh, and take a look at this document floating around twitter: here's the link
 
Mar 22, 2020
4
0
10
A persistent coronavirus myth that this virus, called SARS-CoV-2, was made by scientists and escaped from a lab in Wuhan is completely unfounded. Here's how we know.

The coronavirus did not escape from a lab. Here's how we know. : Read more
I agree. No one ever said this virus was made in a lab. People said the virus was naturally occurring, was being studied in the lab in Wuhan. The story is that they were testing animal transmission of the virus. The dead infected animals were then sold in the Wuhan dead animal market instead of being destroyed.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY