Where'd This Shit Come From?

[SuburbanFarmer]

And I would add all the "insider sources" leaks from the deep state pointing fingers at China doesn't look that good to me. If they had evidence they would just dump it and burn China outright. But if they had evidence that it came from the US, I could definitely see them gas lighting the world about it in RussiaGate 2.0.

Also possible they’re doing a slow drip to get something out of PRC. Or to avoid demonstrating how far their tentacles reach....hard to tell at current moment.

If its true no A in Wuhan, then very weird to have A and B circulating at other sides of Earth at roughly same time - something not adding up - also, do we know A in US before Wuhan?

Agreed with respect to average citizens - I’ve made clear my anger is at PRC government not people who get butt raped all the time by the commies.

Right now the data shows most A type in America and amongst Americans who were tested in China. There might still be a large population of it in China, already having burn through and mutated to type B by now.

The problem with attacking the Wuhan Virology Institute is that you cannot target them without also targeting UNC Chapel Hill. The two labs worked together.

The other problem with it is that the labs were trying to get us better prepared for pandemics, not build weapons. If it leaked from either of them, then it was probably just an accident. And if we are going to go all John McCain on China because of that lab, then prepare your little assholes for the scenario where it turns out the fucking thing leaked from a lab in North Carolina. Just saying.

It's fucking stupid.

Don’t suppose we could just do both and actually admit to a fuckup for once

[Speaker to Animals]

If chinese scientists first got it from bats in a Wuhan cave, and that cave is easily accesible, American tourists may gotten it from a case of amateur spelunking in the same cave. Then returned home and the virus gradually mutate in their local community.

I voted for the wet markets option, but the second option of the smaller wuhan lab, closer to the wet market, a lab which had lesser health standards and where one of the bat researchers worked... is sounding credible, too. I'm split in the middle those two options.

Looking at global numbers of covid-19, though, Iran looks to be bullshitting everone even more than China. (NK ain't even worth mentioning).

The original virus was collected in a cave in Yunnan province, SW China. A completely different region from Wuhan. Those bats are not in Wuhan.

[Speaker to Animals]

Also possible they’re doing a slow drip to get something out of PRC. Or to avoid demonstrating how far their tentacles reach....hard to tell at current moment.

If its true no A in Wuhan, then very weird to have A and B circulating at other sides of Earth at roughly same time - something not adding up - also, do we know A in US before Wuhan?

Agreed with respect to average citizens - I’ve made clear my anger is at PRC government not people who get butt raped all the time by the commies.

Right now the data shows most A type in America and amongst Americans who were tested in China. There might still be a large population of it in China, already having burn through and mutated to type B by now.

The problem with attacking the Wuhan Virology Institute is that you cannot target them without also targeting UNC Chapel Hill. The two labs worked together.

The other problem with it is that the labs were trying to get us better prepared for pandemics, not build weapons. If it leaked from either of them, then it was probably just an accident. And if we are going to go all John McCain on China because of that lab, then prepare your little assholes for the scenario where it turns out the fucking thing leaked from a lab in North Carolina. Just saying.

It's fucking stupid.

Don’t suppose we could just do both and actually admit to a fuckup for once

Neither side is willing to admit to it. The PRC is doing the same stupid shit our federal government is doing and blaming us.

[Zlaxer]

Bats can already fly, why would they need to hitch a ride on a plane?

[Montegriffo]

Bats can already fly, why would they need to hitch a ride on a plane?

[C-Mag]

chi-na

+1

China is Asshoe

[SuburbanFarmer]

I eata de feesh.

[Zlaxer]

No idea. Evidence suggest either Wuhan Institute of Virology or possibly UNC Chapel Hill.

Media starting to slowly pick up on the genomic data mystery.

https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-ou ... an-1498566

They have created a network analysis using over 1,000 coronavirus genomes. This includes patient infection date and the "type" of virus the person was infected with. There are three types—A, B and C. A is closest to the coronavirus found in bats and is thought to be the original human virus genome. This type was found in Chinese and American individuals, with mutated versions in patients from Australia and the U.S.

However, A was not the virus type found in most cases in Wuhan, the city in China where COVID-19 was first identified. Instead, most people there had type B. Researchers suggest there was a "founder event" for type B in Wuhan. Type C, the "daughter" of type B, is what was identified in early cases in Europe, as well as South Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong—but appears absent from mainland China.

"But proof can only come from analysing more bats, possibly other potential host animals, and preserved tissue samples in Chinese hospitals stored between September and December.

Article also not peered reviewed....it’s possible... but smacks of PRC propaganda.

Here’s the journal article...

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020 ... 2004999117


So the article says must have started outside Wuhan bc closest/oldest known virus in Wuhan is slightly different than known Bat strains....

The question may be asked whether the rooting of the viral evolution can be achieved at this early stage by using the oldest available sampled genome as a root. As SI Appendix, Fig. S4 shows, however, the first virus genome that was sampled on 24 December 2019 already is distant from the root type according to the bat coronavirus outgroup rooting.

Seems like a hard try to deflect blame away from PRC as it completely ignores that this variation could also show earliest known case in Wuhan may have been modified in lab and that’s why it’s different than known natural strains....

@StA - Please feel free to dig further through article and counter my observation.


And then we have this from the news article...

According to the Chinese government, the first known coronavirus case was traced back to Nov. 17, 2019. The patient was a 55-year-old from the Hubei province, which has Wuhan as its capital.

When did the PRC make this “record” available? Any proof of its date? Can anyone besides PRC verify this? Why is it only coming out now - after western governments have stated they have evidence it came from lab...Just saying this smells fishy...

Then there’s this gem:

Forster also said that a consistent mutation rate is "admittedly unlikely to be the case, and the time estimate could therefore be wrong."

So, we have a virus that shows up in a human that has mutations that would have had to occur at an unnatural rate to get from known bat virus to COVID-19.... what’s the most likely way that happened?


Btw, my vote is still natural/escaped from lab - but the more I read the Cambridge study the closer I get to hopping on the engineered bandwagon...

[Speaker to Animals]

No idea. Evidence suggest either Wuhan Institute of Virology or possibly UNC Chapel Hill.

Media starting to slowly pick up on the genomic data mystery.

https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-ou ... an-1498566

They have created a network analysis using over 1,000 coronavirus genomes. This includes patient infection date and the "type" of virus the person was infected with. There are three types—A, B and C. A is closest to the coronavirus found in bats and is thought to be the original human virus genome. This type was found in Chinese and American individuals, with mutated versions in patients from Australia and the U.S.

However, A was not the virus type found in most cases in Wuhan, the city in China where COVID-19 was first identified. Instead, most people there had type B. Researchers suggest there was a "founder event" for type B in Wuhan. Type C, the "daughter" of type B, is what was identified in early cases in Europe, as well as South Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong—but appears absent from mainland China.

"But proof can only come from analysing more bats, possibly other potential host animals, and preserved tissue samples in Chinese hospitals stored between September and December.

Article also not peered reviewed....it’s possible... but smacks of PRC propaganda.

Here’s the journal article...

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020 ... 2004999117


So the article says must have started outside Wuhan bc closest/oldest known virus in Wuhan is slightly different than known Bat strains....

The question may be asked whether the rooting of the viral evolution can be achieved at this early stage by using the oldest available sampled genome as a root. As SI Appendix, Fig. S4 shows, however, the first virus genome that was sampled on 24 December 2019 already is distant from the root type according to the bat coronavirus outgroup rooting.

Seems like a hard try to deflect blame away from PRC as it completely ignores that this variation could also show earliest known case in Wuhan may have been modified in lab and that’s why it’s different than known natural strains....

@StA - Please feel free to dig further through article and counter my observation.


And then we have this from the news article...

According to the Chinese government, the first known coronavirus case was traced back to Nov. 17, 2019. The patient was a 55-year-old from the Hubei province, which has Wuhan as its capital.

When did the PRC make this “record” available? Any proof of its date? Can anyone besides PRC verify this? Why is it only coming out now - after western governments have stated they have evidence it came from lab...Just saying this smells fishy...

Then there’s this gem:

Forster also said that a consistent mutation rate is "admittedly unlikely to be the case, and the time estimate could therefore be wrong."

So, we have a virus that shows up in a human that has mutations that would have had to occur at an unnatural rate to get from known bat virus to COVID-19.... what’s the most likely way that happened?


Btw, my vote is still natural/escaped from lab - but the more I read the Cambridge study the closer I get to hopping on the engineered bandwagon...

(1) Peer review is mostly bullshit (seriously). The paper's value stands on its reproducibility (guaranteed since it derives from a common data set) and the value of the data set from which it was derived (that part is admittedly by the researchers to be weak).


(2) What he is saying about the mutation rate is that this thing had to have been in circulation for quite a lot longer than Nov.

(2.1) First of all, the evidence does NOT support an origin anywhere in Wuhan currently (though that might change if they can get more data). Wherever the first epidemic began is where you will find the larger samples of type A covid and that's not Wuhan which was type B.

(2.2) Secondly, to his point about the mutation rate, there is no fucking way this thing began in November because there were too many mutations even in type A for it to have reached human carriers that recently. That was his point about mutations, not that it was engineered (which is highly doubtful).

(2.2.1) This conjecture is corroborated by California's state government who's own research has suggested an epidemic in California at least since Sep 2019. https://www.theblaze.com/coronavirus-or ... idge-study

(2.2.2) More research out of California shows incredibly high rates of infection in certain counties that would not support a late Jan / early Feb start. https://thehill.com/homenews/news/49339 ... widespread



The fact that we are months into this debacle and our federal government has still been unable to deploy sufficient tests to get a handle on what is actually going on is highly suspect to me. They could literally have just bought the tests from Germany or China if they really wanted to test (they never wanted to test). We even know very early on the CDC and FDA threatened a university professor with prison if she continued to test the subjects in her Seattle influenza study. She told them to get fucked and tested anyway. That was when we realized it was already community spread here, because until that point the CDC refused to test for community spread. They would only look at travelers from China or people in contact with infected travelers from China. It was a deliberate scheme to suppress evidence of community spread or the extent of the epidemic in the United States. The additional facts of probable epidemic in California before the Wuhan epidemic even began and the mutation rate not supporting a start date of the Nov/Dec Wuhan epidemic indicates there is quite a lot more to this story than our federal government is letting on. I don't know what the answer is other than that the federal government is completely full of shit. I think you ought to redirect your gaze towards Washington. This OMG CHINA shit is just RussiaGate 2.0, honestly.

[Montegriffo]

No idea. Evidence suggest either Wuhan Institute of Virology or possibly UNC Chapel Hill.

Media starting to slowly pick up on the genomic data mystery.

https://www.newsweek.com/coronavirus-ou ... an-1498566

"But proof can only come from analysing more bats, possibly other potential host animals, and preserved tissue samples in Chinese hospitals stored between September and December.

Article also not peered reviewed....it’s possible... but smacks of PRC propaganda.

Here’s the journal article...

https://www.pnas.org/content/early/2020 ... 2004999117


So the article says must have started outside Wuhan bc closest/oldest known virus in Wuhan is slightly different than known Bat strains....

The question may be asked whether the rooting of the viral evolution can be achieved at this early stage by using the oldest available sampled genome as a root. As SI Appendix, Fig. S4 shows, however, the first virus genome that was sampled on 24 December 2019 already is distant from the root type according to the bat coronavirus outgroup rooting.

Seems like a hard try to deflect blame away from PRC as it completely ignores that this variation could also show earliest known case in Wuhan may have been modified in lab and that’s why it’s different than known natural strains....

@StA - Please feel free to dig further through article and counter my observation.


And then we have this from the news article...

According to the Chinese government, the first known coronavirus case was traced back to Nov. 17, 2019. The patient was a 55-year-old from the Hubei province, which has Wuhan as its capital.

When did the PRC make this “record” available? Any proof of its date? Can anyone besides PRC verify this? Why is it only coming out now - after western governments have stated they have evidence it came from lab...Just saying this smells fishy...

Then there’s this gem:

Forster also said that a consistent mutation rate is "admittedly unlikely to be the case, and the time estimate could therefore be wrong."

So, we have a virus that shows up in a human that has mutations that would have had to occur at an unnatural rate to get from known bat virus to COVID-19.... what’s the most likely way that happened?


Btw, my vote is still natural/escaped from lab - but the more I read the Cambridge study the closer I get to hopping on the engineered bandwagon...

(1) Peer review is mostly bullshit (seriously). The paper's value stands on its reproducibility (guaranteed since it derives from a common data set) and the value of the data set from which it was derived (that part is admittedly by the researchers to be weak).


(2) What he is saying about the mutation rate is that this thing had to have been in circulation for quite a lot longer than Nov.

(2.1) First of all, the evidence does NOT support an origin anywhere in Wuhan currently (though that might change if they can get more data). Wherever the first epidemic began is where you will find the larger samples of type A covid and that's not Wuhan which was type B.

(2.2) Secondly, to his point about the mutation rate, there is no fucking way this thing began in November because there were too many mutations even in type A for it to have reached human carriers that recently. That was his point about mutations, not that it was engineered (which is highly doubtful).

(2.2.1) This conjecture is corroborated by California's state government who's own research has suggested an epidemic in California at least since Sep 2019. https://www.theblaze.com/coronavirus-or ... idge-study

(2.2.2) More research out of California shows incredibly high rates of infection in certain counties that would not support a late Jan / early Feb start. https://thehill.com/homenews/news/49339 ... widespread



The fact that we are months into this debacle and our federal government has still been unable to deploy sufficient tests to get a handle on what is actually going on is highly suspect to me. They could literally have just bought the tests from Germany or China if they really wanted to test (they never wanted to test). We even know very early on the CDC and FDA threatened a university professor with prison if she continued to test the subjects in her Seattle influenza study. She told them to get fucked and tested anyway. That was when we realized it was already community spread here, because until that point the CDC refused to test for community spread. They would only look at travelers from China or people in contact with infected travelers from China. It was a deliberate scheme to suppress evidence of community spread or the extent of the epidemic in the United States. The additional facts of probable epidemic in California before the Wuhan epidemic even began and the mutation rate not supporting a start date of the Nov/Dec Wuhan epidemic indicates there is quite a lot more to this story than our federal government is letting on. I don't know what the answer is other than that the federal government is completely full of shit. I think you ought to redirect your gaze towards Washington. This OMG CHINA shit is just RussiaGate 2.0, honestly.

To be fair, the limited testing capacity is not just due to the availability of the testing kits but also the lab' capacity to process the results.
With a serious lack of testing capacity, it is logical to restrict the testing to those most likely to be infected.
Not to absolve the powers that be from responsibility since they should have had better preparation but they can only act according to the capacity available at the time.
To insist on returning to normal before there is sufficient capacity to verify that someone has already had the virus and therefore may have immunity is idiotic, or should I say covidiotic?