[HN Gopher] Closest known relatives of virus behind Covid-19 fou...
___________________________________________________________________
Closest known relatives of virus behind Covid-19 found in Laos
Author : MKais
Score : 43 points
Date : 2021-09-25 21:11 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.nature.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.nature.com)
| farmerstan wrote:
| It's weird how people are trying so hard to convince others that
| the virus came from nature sources when it's obvious now it
| didn't. The amount of propaganda is really scary.
|
| All other viruses from animals were found very soon after an
| outbreak. It's been almost 2 years now and the closest they could
| find is thousands of miles away and kind of sort of similar.
|
| Let's not look for a zebra when all we have is a horse.
| inter_netuser wrote:
| "thousand miles away" in Yunnan (right on the border with Laos)
| is where the "Bat Woman" was sent to investigate an pneumonia
| oubreak with case fatality rate of 50% in 2012.
|
| At the very minimum samples would've been brought back to WIV.
|
| Were they manipulated/gain-of-function enhanced since?
|
| I do not have enough back ground in bio to say, but what are
| the odds they'd just let samples sit and do nothing with them
| for years in a research lab? is that something they normally
| do?
|
| "Lethal Pneumonia Cases in Mojiang Miners (2012)"
| https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.7021...
|
| Shi Zheng-Li's research, 2017:
|
| https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bat-cave-solves-m...
| ch4s3 wrote:
| > All other viruses from animals were found very soon after an
| outbreak.
|
| It took a long time to find the animal source for HIV and if
| memory serves, swine flu took some time to be tracked down.
|
| > obvious now it didn't
|
| I'm open to the lab leak origin as a possibility, but it seems
| far from obvious either way. The evidence is still pretty
| circumstantial. It's worth further investigation, but I don't
| think we should rush to a conclusion.
| htjglhktbrn wrote:
| > It's weird how people are trying so hard to convince others
| that the virus came from nature sources when it's obvious now
| it didn't.
|
| It's not weird at all, as the host of the biggest virology
| podcast (TWiV) said, "lab leak confirmation would be the
| biggest scandal in the history of science".
|
| The field of virology would be decimated by the fallout. No
| wonder almost all the virologists are circling the wagons and
| are desperate for any shred of evidence pointing away from WIV.
| danw1979 wrote:
| > The study also doesn't clarify how a progenitor of the virus
| could have travelled to Wuhan, in central China, where the first
| known cases of COVID-19 were identified -- or whether the virus
| hitched a ride on an intermediate animal.
|
| "The main problems that the Institute of Virology has is that the
| outbreak occurred in close proximity to that Institute. That
| Institute has in essence the best collection of virologists in
| the world that have gone out and sought out, and isolated, and
| sampled bat species throughout Southeast Asia. So they have a
| very large collection of viruses in their laboratory. And so it's
| -- you know -- proximity is a problem. It's a problem." - Ralph
| Baric
|
| (https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-esca...)
| inter_netuser wrote:
| Remember that bat cave in Yunnan (specifically Mojiang) which
| supposedly had also similar viruses? Right on the border of
| Laos.
|
| What's weird is that nobody talks about WHY Shi Zheng-Li/"Bat
| Woman" was digging around random caves in Yunnan.
|
| She was sent to investigate a lethal outbreak with CFR of 50%.
|
| "Lethal Pneumonia Cases in Mojiang Miners (2012)"
| https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.7021...
|
| https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bat-cave-solves-m...
|
| https://journals.plos.org/plospathogens/article?id=10.1371/j...
| btilly wrote:
| There are actually 2 virology institutions in Wuhan. WIV is
| fairly far from the neighborhood where things got going.
|
| Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention is a 5 minute
| walk from the wet market. And went through the disruption of a
| move just before COVID broke out.
|
| See https://nypost.com/2021/08/13/who-scientist-eyes-on-wuhan-
| la... for more.
| moralestapia wrote:
| >WIV is fairly far from the neighborhood where things got
| going.
|
| Still closer than Southeast Asia, though.
| lubos wrote:
| They could have been infected by locals in regions they've been
| travelling to. Many possibilities. Why do we have to speculate?
| Let's just wait for more data.
|
| The timeline of HIV pandemic has been established decades after
| pandemic started. This will take time.
|
| I'd assume that virus originating anywhere in SEA region would
| be detected in China first. Just like many other viruses
| originating in America continent would be first detected in
| USA.
| cm2187 wrote:
| We may have to wait for the fall of chinese communism to know
| what happened though, like for Katyn. Might take a few
| decades.
|
| And assuming the chinese haven't destroyed the relevant Wuhan
| lab samples. That's what I would do in their place. Better
| never know than take the risk that a technician leak such
| sensitive information.
| inter_netuser wrote:
| Soviets had a number of either accidents or sabotage
| incidents with lethal biological agents.
|
| Afaik, there was zero additional clarity around those after
| USSR dissolved, so don't hold your breath.
| JetSetWilly wrote:
| > To make the discovery, Marc Eloit, a virologist at the Pasteur
| Institute in Paris and his colleagues in France and Laos, took
| saliva, faeces and urine samples from 645 bats in caves in
| northern Laos. In three horseshoe (Rhinolophus) bat species, they
| found viruses that are each more than 95% identical to SARS-
| CoV-2, which they named BANAL-52, BANAL-103 and BANAL-236.
|
| The most scary thing about this research is scientists creating a
| non-zero risk of _another_ zoonotic virus transfer by getting up
| close and personal with live bats.
|
| The benefits of the research (extremely minor) don't seem to
| justify the risk. We should just defund not only gain of function
| research but also trips to remote bat caves that have no
| particular benefit but a lot of downside risk.
| ch4s3 wrote:
| Sampling seems reasonable to me, especially now that we can
| spin up vaccines so quickly. In this new age of rapid mRNA
| vaccines it may make a lot of sense to catalog and sequence
| viruses before they jump the species barrier.
|
| This is off the cuff so I'm not sure.
| cblconfederate wrote:
| i hope Laos doesnt have an institute of virology nearby
| goldenkey wrote:
| Those damn conspiracy theorists with their reasonable
| observations! I mean, it's not like a fire ever started near a
| forest! /s
| charlchi wrote:
| Do you have a license for that viewpoint, sir? In this
| jurisdiction, all viewpoints must by approved by the relevant
| state-approved Authority. Independant journalism strictly
| forbidden.
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| I eagerly await the discussion of how we need to start imposing
| accountability on the country behind it all.
| Tostino wrote:
| That's been something I've barely seen discussed. Why are you
| bringing it up?
| thaumasiotes wrote:
| Because it's discussed _all the time_ , and somehow I suspect
| that suddenly no one will be interested in it if "the country
| behind it all" is Laos.
| slg wrote:
| You can't exactly put a country in jail so the only real
| way to punish a country is economically. Once we start
| talking economics, it is a lot easier to punish Bill Gates
| than a homeless man. China is #2 in the world in GDP and
| Laos is #118.
|
| Beyond that, it wouldn't even make sense to punish Laos if
| the virus did have zoological origins there. The first
| outbreak didn't occur in Laos so there is little validity
| to accusations of a coverup or mishandling of that non-
| existent outbreak. The only reasons people have wanted to
| punish China is because they believe that China either
| created this virus and let it leak or that their initial
| reaction to the virus is what allowed it to spread
| globally. There would be fault in the case of China. There
| would be no fault in the case of Laos.
| basicplus2 wrote:
| Laos is no where near wuhan
| _3u10 wrote:
| Oh good, I was worried that it came from a lab where they were
| working on changing the RNA of the virus with the exact changes
| present in COVID-19 as proposed in their grant applications and
| weren't wearing masks when working with modified corona viruses.
|
| Glad we can finally rule the lab out.
| newacct583 wrote:
| > changing the RNA of the virus with the exact changes present
| in COVID-19
|
| Sorry, not sure what you're reading, but this isn't remotely
| correct. Wild mistruths like this are precisely why no one
| takes you people seriously.
| sega_sai wrote:
| It is good there is more data being collected, so we can discuss
| actual facts with evidence, as opposed to pure speculations 'I
| believe it is a lab leak' vs 'I believe it is natural'.
| labster wrote:
| It could easily be a natural virus that was collected, but
| leaked from a the lab that studied it. To me, it makes sense to
| look at biohazard lab safety procedures if there was even a
| chance the lab was a factor in its spread. It's possible to
| make mistakes while following best practices, or that those
| practices themselves need improved. It's sad that it's become a
| blame game of who caused the pandemic, when what we really need
| is an impartial account to prevent the next pandemic.
| peter422 wrote:
| If it was a natural virus it is way, way more likely that it
| would have infected locals (farming bat guano for instance)
| than it would be discovered by a researcher, then brought
| back to Wuhan, then leaked there.
|
| We also have no idea where the outbreak started, only where
| the first hotspot was.
| inter_netuser wrote:
| Shi Zheng-Li/"Bat Woman" was sent to investigate a lethal
| outbreak with CFR of 50% in Yunnan in 2012 (!!!)
|
| "Lethal Pneumonia Cases in Mojiang Miners (2012)" https://w
| ww.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpubh.2021.7021...
|
| https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/bat-cave-
| solves-m...
|
| Supposedly that's the closest related virus?
| moralestapia wrote:
| >If it was a natural virus it is way, way more likely that
| it would have infected locals
|
| Not really, if they've been coexisting with the virus for a
| while they could be somewhat immune already. Also, you
| cannot compare the impact of an outbreak in a rural town in
| Laos vs. Wuhan with 11 million people and much more
| international commuters.
| MoreenDichele wrote:
| The only thing that's sad is that you're a gullible cunt.
| This was obviously part of a plan to establish the new world
| order, as multiple world leaders have literally been scripted
| to tell you already in plain english. Die you fucking moron.
| exporectomy wrote:
| A blame game is only sad if it was a true accident. If both
| the US and China were actually trying to develop such a virus
| and one of them accidentally released it, neither will be
| able to tolerate transparency because it would lead to
| international blame and desire for revenge.
| newacct583 wrote:
| You powered that comment with two "if's" and a "would"! At
| what point should we expect you guys to start using
| "because" and "did"?
| labster wrote:
| The bio weapon theory just seems crazy, because why would a
| nation make a highly transmissible virus that it has no
| tools to control the pathogen? I'm working on the
| assumption that states like stability, workforce not dying,
| and strong economies.
|
| The Trumpist attacks on China make the most sense as being
| for the domestic political audience. The Chinese coverup of
| anything that makes CCP rule seem imperfect is SOP. I mean
| seriously, that guy in charge is afraid of a talking teddy
| bear.
| poorjohnmacafee wrote:
| The lab's published research program, the lab's funding, the
| almost exact proximity of the outbreak, the lab's and CCP's
| actions since October 2019, the whistleblowers, the analysis of
| the virus's genome, does not add up to "pure speculation". We
| may never know 100% conclusively, but juries never do either.
| sega_sai wrote:
| That is your opinion. From my point of view, what I have seen
| is consistent with both natural and lab leak hypothesis. One
| can argue how much indirect indications tilt the scale one
| way or another (from my point of view not much), but at least
| in my book it's still an open question. That's why I think
| more data is good.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-09-25 23:00 UTC)