world

China pushes to expand virus origin search to other countries

107 Comments
By KEN MORITSUGU

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.


107 Comments
Login to comment

"China pushes to expand virus origin search to other countries"

We all lived this from the beginning of COVID and we all know where it originated. China.

29 ( +33 / -4 )

So long as China insists self-righteousness and infallibility of their country, they will never catch up with the west. They are revealing shortcomings of authoritarian dictatorship.

24 ( +27 / -3 )

No one believes the lying Chinese. Last year they were claiming the Italians gave Covid-19 to the world. Who is it now?

23 ( +25 / -2 )

Obvious deflecting is obvious.

Bats can fly very long distances to feed, and don't obey borders, colonies also "share" pathogens freely between them so it is not unthinkable to find bats from very distant areas having very similar isolates of pathogenic viruses.

For all practical purposes the reservoir of the SARS-CoV-2 can be found at the Hubei province, or a neighbor province at much, but since it is also possible that a closely related virus could be isolated from a completely unrelated place in another country Chinese authorities are pushing so it can be found first outside of China.

22 ( +29 / -7 )

Hey China....... Um, no.

20 ( +22 / -2 )

Are the CCP are trolling the whole planet?

20 ( +22 / -2 )

China:

Hey world - stop looking here - look anywhere else. Anywhere else.

Of course, we aren't hiding anything. That's why we escorted the WHO scientists everywhere and had a govt "handler" in the room whenever they spoke with anyone who actually knew anything. Wouldn't want any truth to be provided, accidentally.

We didn't allow Chinese scientists to share genetic data because ... well ... because. That should be good enough for the world. It was only after Singapore caught a recent traveler from Wuhan with the virus and sequenced, then published the genetic data world-wide that China finally admitted anything scientific.

> So ... there's nothing to see in China. Trust us. We've never fibbed, even just a little. And forget about Hong Kong's new city managers and Uighurs mandated birth control, systematic rapes, and forced labor. Nothing to see there either.

> Stop looking here. Go look anywhere else.

https://www.reuters.com/article/china-xinjiang-idINKBN2A31C3

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55794071

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-55930344

19 ( +22 / -3 )

Thanks for the morning laugh

17 ( +20 / -3 )

I hope the doctor who died last year of Covid-19, Li Wenliang, is not forgotten. He tried to warn people and was shouted down and threatened by Wuhan authorities. For a brief period he was honored as a martyr, but obviously the CCP is in the process of rewriting history. The worst part is that any Chinese citizens -- if they know what's good for them -- will parrot whatever their government demands they believe. To be a skeptic is dangerously unpatriotic and a tool of the dark foreign forces out to undermine the legitimacy of Big Brother.

17 ( +19 / -2 )

It wouldn't have even mattered that much that it ORIGINATED in China, if the utterly incompetent bu arrogant communist leadership there would have listened to their doctors and warned the whole world about it earlier. They tried to covering it up for long enough to explode into what we currently see. That is a "bulletable" offense, if you know what I mean, and caused solely because the communist regime there lives on a layer lies and deception... Basically like every other communist regime around the world.

13 ( +14 / -1 )

ChinaLiedPeopleDied

Hold the PRC and the CCP accountable for the Wuhan Virus.

13 ( +14 / -1 )

The CCP must first be accountable for own mishandling and systematic cover-ups in Wuhan. The world will never let them get away with it. #ChinaLiesPeopleDie

12 ( +15 / -3 )

Hehehe. Anti-China people are in for a shock!!!

Apart from obvious usual suspects, most of us aren't anti-China. But many of us are, quite rightly, anti-Xi and anti-regime.

12 ( +14 / -2 )

But it's the Wuhan Virus!

Why do we keep giving these history revisionists a spot at the table for modern civilized countries?

11 ( +17 / -6 )

the politically correct west has been too good to china, calling the mutated viruses by their “country names” e.g. uk or s africa but avoiding doing the same to the original virus itself, thereby helping china to hide the truth. this is the left liberals colluding with beijing.

10 ( +13 / -3 )

Not only are you dealing with a lying government in denial, you're also seeing a population blindly supporting the government believing anything they say in an effort to save face when in actuality it's making it worse. The Chinese are sheep.

10 ( +12 / -2 )

The Chinese are sheep.

Not all in my experience either in China or outside. Don’t think a fear of speaking out equals blind faith.

One of the reasons better-off Chinese people flock abroad is to buy trustworthy goods. If more had the money, I’m pretty sure more would come. They certainly don’t believe the standards set by those in power, particularly when it comes to essential items like milk for their babies.

10 ( +10 / -0 )

We will never know the truth which will allow conspiracy theories to flourish such as coronavirus was intentionally released to provide cover to take over Hong Kong.

9 ( +14 / -5 )

They would! Russians did that with UK concerning the Novichok poisoning. It's from an old playbook!!! This is how I see it. If China had nothing to hide, they would have given WHO full and transparent access to any area, building, laboratory, and interviews with anyone. But in fact, they did everything to hide as much information disclosure as possible even as far as attempting to stop some members from cumming in to the country. Therefore as far as I am concerned this IS a Chinese virus and most probably escaped from their lab. This is the ONLY explanation that I can think of that would explain Chinese governments actions!

9 ( +12 / -3 )

Why do I get the feeling I can't trust the Chinese on this....

9 ( +13 / -4 )

I think the incomplete WHO investigation of the origins in China should be finished first. It is known the lab had just recently relocated to Wuhan and the lab was engaging in gain of function testing of the virus. It is completely conceivable and almost likely the origin was from the lab. Additionally it is quite possible this was totally accidental (a worker becomes infected, a scrubbing/filtration system not functioning correctly, etc.)

From the article (link below)

""Peter Daszak, the leader of the EcoHealth Alliance, which steered at least $600,000 in National Institutes of Health funding to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for bat virus research, has defended China’s coronavirus response and previously criticized the Biden administration for being skeptical of the WHO-China report"", and

"“We met with them. We said, ‘Do you audit the lab?’ And they said, ‘Annually.’ ‘Did you audit it after the outbreak?’ ‘Yes.’ ‘Was anything found?’ ‘No.’ ‘Do you test your staff?’ ‘Yes.’ No one was —“ Daszak said, before being interrupted by Stahl.""

“But you're just taking their word for it!” she exclaimed, and Daszak didn’t deny it.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/who-investigator-admits-it-took-chinas-word-on-wuhan-lab-leak

A proper investigation which would dismiss the lab as a source of the virus would require a bit more examination then just talking to workers and "taking their word for it". How about a complete review of the QA program, the records supporting the QA program and an inspection of the containment facilities and associated safety features.

China made a condition of the inspection that China could reject any inspector (basically they could choose the inspectors). This is far from a proper independent investigation.

9 ( +15 / -6 )

Lies, spin, agitprop. disinformation, baseless accusations, propaganda, conspiracy theories and self-pity. The Chinese government playbook.

9 ( +11 / -2 )

YuriOtaniToday  11:51 am JST

Yet how does blaming China improve things? Do you really want a war with China perhaps nuclear?

It's not about blaming. It's about acknowledging that it started there. Once that's done, then steps can be taken to decrease the likelihood of it or something similar happening again. If you think that amounts to blaming, then you're just as bad as the Chinese about saving face.

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Bats can fly very long distances to feed, and don't obey borders, colonies also "share" pathogens freely between them so it is not unthinkable to find bats from very distant areas having very similar isolates of pathogenic viruses.

And Chinese people can catch bats, put them into cages, put the cages into trucks and onto trains, to be shipped to other parts of China as food too.

At least that's the rumor I've heard, from friends.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

Okay here's a simple logic based on Covid-19 as a "natural virus". Lets assume its natural and originated from bats somewhere in Asia. Well China is the first country (Wuhan is the first city) to get infected with this virus, means the intermediator/ vector (natural) was/is in China. OR the virus is very country specific like J-strain which is only activated after 8:00 pm.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

The WHO was careful to make their report diplomatic and generalized, with degrees of likelihoods, unable as they were to provide absolute answers.

But if you give an inch, you risk someone taking a mile.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

It's all a bunch of lies and BS but it's easy to see why the Chinese government is doing it. After all, who wants to be responsible for the deaths of millions of people around the world while wrecking their economies at the same time?

7 ( +9 / -2 )

I don't know, but wouldn't there have been a breakout somewhere outside of China prior to the breakout in China if it originated somewhere other than China?

7 ( +8 / -1 )

It's all a bunch of lies and BS but it's easy to see why the Chinese government is doing it. After all, who wants to be responsible for the deaths of millions of people around the world while wrecking their economies at the same time?

of course no one would want to. however it can be argued that chinese lack of transparency, cover ups and general bsing turned an epidemic into a pandemic. a more open government, while perhaps having less power to force immediate lockdowns of entire megacities, would be more open and transparent to the national and international community about the potential risks involved, instead of threatening jail and silencing the doctors who first identified signs of a potential novel outbreak.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

Lol, stonewall the Chinese investigators for a year, limit where they could go, and only give 'em a handpick set of data

6 ( +7 / -1 )

The 'English' variant was first isolated and recognized in the UK, and the name stuck.

This seventh corona virus was first spotted and recognized in Wuhan around November 2019, so I am happy to keep it simple and follow along from SARS, and MERS to WURS (or Covid-7 for those who like numbered sequences).

The when and the where of the actual physical transmission from bat to (X to) human, i.e. that first species jump is unlikely to ever be known.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

No, this is not true, read the link I provided

How can you say this is not true with the links I provided, this shows this is a very common opinion in the scientific circles, while the link you brought is grossly misrepresented in your comment, scientists are asking for all possible sources of information to be available, they are not saying that the laboratory escape theory is specially important to examine or that it should be given any kind of priority.

This is again the same as when you brought a paper that according to you proved herd immunity enough to interrupt transmission was never going to be reached for COVID-19, but in reality the paper assumed (without proving) this scenario in order to put forward a model, you keep making misrepresentations of the literature because of lack of knowledge of how to read it correctly, In the same way I proved "escape-mutants" is a perfectly acceptable term, my references prove that disregarding the laboratory escape as not realistic is a very common thing in science.

A consensus can be had even if not every single source is on board, there is consensus in the safety of vaccines, or the usefulness of masks and social distancing to avoid the spreading of COVID-19 but if you search long enough you will always find someone that says the contrary, even without evidence to do it. This is the same, you can for example search for official communications from scientific and medical institutions (journals, research institutes, professional societies, etc.) about the origin of the COVID-19 and it will be very clear what is the most common.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Funny how some people here try to murk up the water. Clearly, this is a virus originated in China. How many people around the world actually eat bats? I mean they actually eat ((( bats! )))

5 ( +8 / -3 )

I found the April 1st story.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The ancient Chinese probably invented the concept and word "Whataboutery". What did Confucius, he say? In modern parlance it's just more Oriental "gaslighting" and traditional Chinese whispers.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Personally I am completely convinced the virus was developed and released on purpose by Xi to serve his megalomaniac desires. The man is a sociopath and stops at nothing

5 ( +9 / -4 )

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-why-the-media-scientific-community-and-who-wont-investigate-covid-origins

Please do not insult our intelligence with rightwing MSM bobble-heads. Tucker Carlson is a children’s entertainer.

This is a serious matter. Be serious.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

Nothing new about China style here, ( keep on lying until you convince yourself it is the truth ).

5 ( +7 / -2 )

If China is not wrong, then why did it has been hiding the data? Why is China again and again claiming that the virus was neither developed not spread by China? But world also knows from where this virus originated. And as the world is aware how much WHO led down every country after the investigation which took place at Wuhan lab, China. As after the investigation WHO keeps on changing its own statement. Even WHO was blamed to be corrupted or threatened by CCP.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

Yesh, yeah..and those 200 ships stripping the Coral Reef bare in the Philippines is just “Sheltering from Foul Weather “...we believe you.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

That conclusion did not come from the WHO but from the whole scientific community last year.

This is factually not true. The problem with the WHO investigation is that it has not performed a scientifically rigorous forensic investigation of ALL potential origins of the virus, including lab-acquired or lab-escape infections. It is just not there. Instead it has been pressured by the Chinese to put forward a ridiculous theory about the frozen food origin which in that case, all qualified scientists in this field have called Chinese BS.

Now I don't know if the lab origin is valid or not. I am a fluid dynamics and high performance computing scientist but not an expert in that field. However as a scientist, I do see that the investigation made by the WHO is a joke since they have not been able to do it freely without the Chinese authorities behind their back and have not been given the required information, data and free access to all facilities and people involved.

A group of experts, the type of experts actually required to identify the source of a virus, have published last month an open letter calling for an unrestricted international forensic investigation into the origins of COVID-19. They explain why the WHO investigation is flawed and propose what to do to fix it. Those experts are not random crazy dudes posting on internet forums imaginary science. They know what they are talking about and their request is wise and totally makes sense.

If you don't agree with them, you need to have the expertise to do that. I don't think you have at all judging from your posts concerning that subject. If you do, please provide a concrete and scientifically constructed rebuttal and provide a list of your peer-reviewed papers from which I can judge your expertise on this field.

https://s.wsj.net/public/resources/documents/COVID%20OPEN%20LETTER%20FINAL%20030421%20(1).pdf

4 ( +12 / -8 )

how do these guys and all the wolf warrior diplomats, seriously sit their with a straight face and spout this bollox....?

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Saying there is a scientific consensus on the natural origins of SARSCoV2 is quite disingenuous.

It is true, the scientific community has a quite uniform opinion and that is that the natural origin is astronomically more likely as a correct explanation than the laboratory alternative. If you believe differently it is as easy as to search for the official communications of the research institutes, laboratories, universities, etc. of the world and see how many say they believe the virus is originated from a laboratory.

Your source only put forward strawman arguments, proving false something that every expert knew was not true from the beginning, this of course also points much more strongly to the origin being a natural occurrence, exactly as it has happened countless times before. The scientific evidence simply contradicts the terribly simplistic explanation that depends on almost everything found about the virus to be inexplicably wrong, from the actual first human cases to the virus genome and virological characteristics.

4 ( +9 / -5 )

I cannot trust a word the Government of China utters.

Look how Government of China treats there people.

The endless documented human rights abuse.

So, how could a single word spoken by Liang Wannian, the head of the Chinese team that worked with the WHO group of experts, be taken at face value?

2.81 million deaths and counting.

The global community must act, develop a spine, seize assets, cancel debts owed.

Deal with a bully.

More than a bloody nose, deliver a knock out blow.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

If this was Iraq or Afghanistan the USA would've invaded and changed the government. However, China is central to making many US millionaires and Billionaires. Therefore only after China is replaced as a cheap manufacturer and exporter will any significant action or sanctions be made. If only India had people that actually made decent products!

4 ( +6 / -2 )

LMFAO Lets say China did admit the virus came from China. No one would believe China, you can't tell when China is lying or telling the truth. The world knows the virus came from Chin

4 ( +6 / -2 )

Reckless

We will never know the truth which will allow conspiracy theories to flourish such as coronavirus was intentionally released to provide cover to take over Hong Kong

Funny, I have never heard of that particular conspiracy theory. Where did you hear it?

However, I have heard a lot of the conspiracy theories that the a) the virus mysteriously sprung into action at a fish marked in Wuhan, while the virus lab that was doing research on this type of virus has nothing to do with it, and b) that it was imported into Wuhan by foreigners. (Both have been touted by the CCP.... never mind that they contradict each other.)

4 ( +6 / -2 )

More hypocrisy and lies by the CCP. What a bad joke!

4 ( +6 / -2 )

I learned as young person that there are positive forces and negative forces. Negative forces just bring negativity to the world and you just stay clear from working or being around them. Nothing good will come from being around them.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

@virusrex

That is false, the scientific consensus is that the laboratory escape theory is not realistically possible by a huge miriad of reasons

No, this is not true, read the link I provided you and answer to it instead of going into completely meaningless nonsense which is frankly painful to read. The experts there (which again you are not qualified to rebut) do acknowledge that lab-acquired or lab-escape origins are possible and that a rigorous forensic investigation should be done in order to assess whether or not this could have happen, together with all other credible origins. This was not done by WHO. That's the point here, nothing more, nothing less.

You claimed that there is a consensus on the matter, it is clearly not the case, you were wrong. Some people in the scientific community do say that a lab origin is not possible (which I am of course aware of), some do question that this conclusion is rushed and not fully scientifically proven.

What remains is that WHO's conclusions are flawed because their investigation is flawed. Politics is involved here and I can see that you are more into the political side of argumentation than the scientific one.

3 ( +11 / -8 )

How many people around the world actually eat bats? I mean they actually eat ((( bats! )))

Very common in Pacific and South East Asian countries. Much more widespread than just China.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Personally I am completely convinced the virus was developed and released on purpose by Xi to serve his megalomaniac desires. The man is a sociopath and stops at nothing

What would change your mind?

3 ( +7 / -4 )

Like it or not, the search for virus origin has been overly politicized. WHO should know better, the world ought to take note seriously.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

China pushes to expand virus origin search to other countries

LOL, but of course. Be assured that the CCP finds an origin outside China, just like they keep finding ancient maps showing all sorts of territory belonging to China.

3 ( +11 / -8 )

Does that "scientific community" include the director of the CDC, Robert Redfield?

No, because serious scientist have to base their public opinions on scientific data, Redfield is known for giving ultimate importance to his personal opinions, even if they run against the available evidence. His trajectory is full of examples where he was predictably wrong because of this, and his appointment as the director of the CDC could only happen in the presidency where it did. Just search for his opinions on HIV so you can understand the kind of researcher he has always been.

Seems to me that your supposed "suppression of dissident voices" is more a valid and positive segregation of opinions between those that are based on evidence and those that are pulled out of thin air. If you are going to elevate to the status of "dissident" people that disregard evidence as if it had no value flatearthers would also be included.

3 ( +8 / -5 )

Is that something like shifting the blame on someone else???

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Toasted, sadly that article was a year ago. I would be interested to see something updated, say since the WHO report.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

China literally killed their own doctors warning of the virus, of course it's from China

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Still today such a clear work result amazes me: In what the WHO published as a report about the virus, they confirm it cannot come from a laboratory, totally unlikely, so unlikely that the suggestion of further research about the origin should extend in every direction - with the explicit exception of a laboratory accident. This is truly a remarkable assessment result. Maybe it's just me having some thoughts about this...

2 ( +4 / -2 )

WHO published as a report about the virus, they confirm it cannot come from a laboratory

That conclusion did not come from the WHO but from the whole scientific community last year. The lab escape explanation makes no sense, it would require convoluted explanations on top of other convoluted explanations and it is contradicted by all the evidence available (from the genetic sequence of the virus to the place and timing of the first human infections).

This grab from the Chinese authorities also supports the natural origin, because if it was from a laboratory it would be useless to search in other countries (since no natural virus would be more similar than what has been already found), but if the virus actually came from nature (as the first SARS, MERS, and every other viral infection in humans) then the chances are that if you look for long enough you will find a viral strain that is close enough to be labeled as the origin of the pandemic, the "trick" they are trying to pull is to do the searching elsewhere so this strain will be found first away from China.

2 ( +12 / -10 )

This is factually not true. The problem with the WHO investigation is that it has not performed a scientifically rigorous forensic investigation of ALL potential origins of the virus, including lab-acquired or lab-escape infections. It is just not there.

That is false, the scientific consensus is that the laboratory escape theory is not realistically possible by a huge miriad of reasons, so there is no special need to investigate it, the same as there is no need to see if it came from a meteorite or if unicorns are the reservoir animals. The frozen food theory is also not a realistic possibility which is why nobody is taking it seriously either.

Now I don't know if the lab origin is valid or not. 

According to the experts of the world it is not, because it contradicts the evidence repeatedly. You cannot judge the investigation of the WHO because its purpose is to identify the ecological source of the virus which is a process that will take literally years, you are judging how well the WHO is acting according to your own preconceived conclusions about what it should be looking out and what it "must" find. That is not valid.

It is not me who is the one saying that the lab origin is not realistic, is the wide scientific community in general, based on the real first human cases (that obviously were not in Wuhan), the completely congruent genome of the virus that indicates a natural introduction a couple of months before the first identified outbreak and the obvious impossibility of an outbreak from the WIV being able to escape the whole city of wuhan without making any outbreaks for weeks and instead appearing in cases in more rural areas.

There is nothing wrong with demanding more information, samples, testimonies, etc. But assuming the lab escape theory is realistic is not. That is still as worth of investigating as the frozen food theory. Nothing is lost if every other actually possible origin is investigated first.

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/coronavirus-covid-19-not-human-made-lab-genetic-analysis-nature

https://apnews.com/article/9391149002

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/coronavirus-origins-misinformation-yan-report-fact-check-cvd

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/why-scientists-think-the-novel-coronavirus-developed-naturally-not-in-a-chinese-lab/

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did_not_come_from_the_wuhan_institute_of/

https://mediamanipulation.org/case-studies/cloaked-science-yan-reports

2 ( +9 / -7 )

The WHO was careful to make their report diplomatic and generalized, with degrees of likelihoods, unable as they were to provide absolute answers.

They need funding and follow their masters. It’s like the UN is headquartered in NY, but visas are denied to certain experts. Life’s a game.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Dr John Campbell does quite a good job summing up the recent report.

Mostly it just say the same thing as reported elsewhere, virus jumped weeks to months before Wuhan with the most likely explanation a direct zoonotic spillover, no clear reservoir animal, no closely related virus isolated yet, laboratory escape least likely explanation etc. No new insights, not extra information, just 30 minutes to say what you could read in 5, good probably for people that like to take their time and prefer audiobooks to reading.

In the video, you can hear Daszak (main member of the "investigation" team) explain how easy it is to engineer a coronaviruses to infect humans.

Sure, and that would leave a ton of evidence in the genome, evidence that is not there, and Judging from the work done in coronaviruses and published by the WIV the engineering would have been in a completely different direction but again this is not true. This evidence again points away from the artificial origin of the virus.

2 ( +7 / -5 )

Some things are not meant to be eaten. Their disgusting food habits have caused 5 pandemics at least in the past century -

H7N9 Avian Influenza, SARS, H5N1 Bird Flu, HK Flu and Asian Flu H2N2

so any such attempts at deflecting blame are laughable.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

That is false, Campbell gives no such comment nor there is any evidence that say this happened in the city of Wuhan at all,

Sorry, but that is what Campbell says. I don't know if he is correct or if its in the report, but he does say it.

Where does your evidence that it did not start in Wuhan come from?

2 ( +5 / -3 )

The WHO report concluded that the virus or a progenitor of it was most likely carried by a bat, which infected another animal that infected a human. Researchers have not been able to trace the bat or the intermediate animal yet, but suspicion has fallen on bat habitats in southwest China or nearby Southeast Asia.

.

How about this theory.

.

Virus taken from bat. ..............................................Bat

injected into mouse to see what happens. ......intermediate animal

Researcher is bitten by the mouse. ....................human

.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

bakakuma

What a joke! and with the WHO entertaining these ridiculous ideas, is beyond comprehension.

Can we spell "wining and dining"? These clowns where driven to expensive restaurants and tourist sites by the CCP, never mind all sort of other benefits, while the Wuhan Insitute of Virology was not even on the tour agenda.

Yep, just the organization to support with taxpayer money.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

just like they keep finding ancient maps showing all sorts of territory belonging to China.

I'm sure their allies in Moscow will continue to support them.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/24/russia-says-coronavirus-origin-is-unknown-as-us-china-tensions-rise.html

1 ( +4 / -3 )

Let's say it comes from uyghurs to lock them in labour camps !

Gosh, it's already done ...

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The origin of the virus was not a lab in Wuhan?

Of course it was...

1 ( +5 / -4 )

> The origin of the virus was not a lab in Wuhan?

Of course it was...

Evidence?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

virusrex

OK, lets take a look at your scientific consensus:

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

They talk about probability. Nothing about any scientific consensus.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-01205-5

Political opinion article by Angela Anderson, heavily laced with comments how she dislikes Trump. 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S096098222030662X

" the origins of the virus remain unclear"

https://www.govexec.com/technology/2020/04/genomic-study-points-natural-origin-covid-19/164463/

"The director of the National Institutes of Health debunks the claim" ... well, and the director of the CDC debunks the debunking. So it is your director against my director.

Seems to me your "scientific consensus" translates into a selective reading of journal articles. Someone with a different filter can find very different opinions from virologists (although they are suppressed by Big Tech and pushed down in the search ratings by Google.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Virusrex

strong evidence that such insertion events can occur naturally in animal betacoronaviruses." which disproves the basic reason why a laboratory creation is necessary,

Who is talking about a "laboratory creation"? We are talking about the origin of the pandemic. Nobody has ruled out a simple accident.

to show your pet theory is commonly held as valid.

So what is my "pet theory" that you are attacking? As far as I remember, I never speculated about details. But the existance of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, its track record, its published articles, its suddenly disappearing scientists, its suddenly scrubbed website, and the insistence of the CCP to black out the this instiution which was doing respearch with precisely this virus and the bats that are related to it (and which were NOT sold at the Wuhan fish market) means nothing to you?

Who has a pet theory here?

1 ( +4 / -3 )

I think the incomplete WHO investigation of the origins in China should be finished first. It is known the lab had just recently relocated to Wuhan and the lab was engaging in gain of function testing of the virus. It is completely conceivable and almost likely the origin was from the lab. Additionally it is quite possible this was totally accidental (a worker becomes infected, a scrubbing/filtration system not functioning correctly, etc.)

First, every single lab working on virology is doing research in gain of function, by now this kind of research is so basic it would be actually extraordinary to find one not doing it, it would be like a hospital that has no nurses.

Second, the first human cases were not from the city of Wuhan and this is well known from months ago, if the virus escaped from the lab it would be unthinkable that no outbreaks appeared in the city for months while human cases were found elsewhere, and just after these human cases began to spread was when the city became involved with a terribly obvious outbreak. This makes this theory hugely less likely, the virus behaved as if it was introduced from nature.

A proper investigation which would dismiss the lab as a source of the virus would require a bit more examination then just talking to workers and "taking their word for it". 

And it has it, because of multiple reasons that have absolutely nothing to do with anything China has to say about it, pretending that the testimony of the Chinese workers is the cornerstone for the rejection of the theory is a huge misrepresentation, it just mean that for this purpose the testimonies have no real importance, even if the workers said the lab was the source the natural thing to do would be to be highly skeptical of that testimony (since it contradicts the rest of the evidence).

0 ( +9 / -9 )

Virusrex

Seems to me that your supposed "suppression of dissident voices" is more a valid and positive segregation of opinions between those that are based on evidence and those that are pulled out of thin air.

You are aware of the number of the scientists who got censored on Youtube, Twitter et al, or are you unaware of that?

Apparently, the anynomous "fact checkers" at Big Tech know more about virology than i.e. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, John P.A. Ioannidis, or Sucharit Bhakdi (and those are just at the top of my head). Google them if you wonder about qualifications.

Fact is the is no uniform block of experts who agree with the official narrative. We only get that impression because of censorship.

0 ( +6 / -6 )

Well, the transmission isn’t directly from bats, and the are some studies exonerating the pangolin (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7405773/#!po=7.14286). If they can figure out the intermediary animal, it would help.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Evidence?

Let me guess... it was hidden by a conspiracy that includes every doctor and scientist in the world except for the very few that profit from writing about it.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

I recommend you reconsider your approach.

Listening to the science, and the scientific and medical consensus, is a much better option than following mistaken theories easily debunked. You are free to do it but your recommendation to follow suit lacks value.

There is no need to worry about what is the opinion of people that put too much of their self-value into wrong ideas to recognize it, even when they cannot refute any of the reasons that prove them so.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

virusrex

Listening to the science, and the scientific and medical consensus, is a much better option than following mistaken theories easily debunked. You are free to do it but your recommendation to follow suit lacks value.

Can you explain where you get your "scientific and medical consensus" from? What exactly is this consensus about, and is there more basis for the claim of a consensus than opionion articles in the media?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Can you explain where you get your "scientific and medical consensus" from? What exactly is this consensus about, and is there more basis for the claim of a consensus than opionion articles in the media?

Many have asked already, but all she has are reports "debunking" the Yan report, as if that was the only way of engineering a virus in the lab.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Who is talking about a "laboratory creation"? We are talking about the origin of the pandemic. Nobody has ruled out a simple accident.

Read the comments that I reply to. A "simple accident" is an unnecessary convoluted explanation for a completely natural virus that comes in contact with humans as it happened countless times before. It becomes necessary only if the virus is not natural, but since it is then the natural introduction is the hugely more likely explanation, specially be cause the first human cases were NOT from the city of Wuhan. which would mean the convoluted laboratory escape theory becomes even more difficult to justify because now it needs to explain how a natural virus escaped a whole populous city without causing outbreaks for weeks, cause cases in more rural areas and then go back to the city to now produce immediately a big outbreak.

So what is my "pet theory" that you are attacking?

That the natural origin and introduction is not the consensus of science.

You have failed to produce any kind of support in the scientific or medical community (as in official professional opinions from institutions, as I did) that say that the natural origin and introduction is not the most likely explanation for the origin of the pandemic.

None of the things you mention had any relevance in any of the scientific arguments contained in the articles I presented, at all. You would have know if you at least tried to read them instead of misrepresent them to the point to attributing them to people that didn't even wrote them or pick an irrelevant quote instead of the clearly written conclusion of the article.

That is your pet theory, that the scientific and medical community does not have a consensus about what is the hugely more likely origin of the pandemic. This is wrong.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

As long as we are stretching this out, then how about starting with China's Chang'e-5 lunar lander...

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

[ but China's insistence on broadening the research seems partly politically motivated in the face of Western criticism. ]

Obviously if you're accused of something and there is evidence to the contrary, you're going to point that out. Blatantly biased writing by the author, who happens to be Japanese.

-1 ( +3 / -4 )

Maybe in return for their gentle behavior in China and afterwards in the reports, the Chinese now want to enable the WHO friends to unlimited traveling around the globe although it is impossible for anyone else because of corona. Many places to visit, many years to search the origin, and all paid by international contributors. Ingenious from the Chinese to thank in this way. lol

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

What a joke! and with the WHO entertaining these ridiculous ideas, is beyond comprehension. The institutional organizations like WHO and UN have become meaningless. I dont like Trump but im happy that he cut them off financially. Billions received with almost no output. which we will see with this China investigation as they spread false information and just cause confusion, to throw everyone off. The cancer of this world. China!

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

Can you explain where you get your "scientific and medical consensus" from? What exactly is this consensus about, and is there more basis for the claim of a consensus than opionion articles in the media?

Media is a perfectly valid source to read the official opinion expressed by the experts representing their institutions, second that is not the only kind of links I have provided. What are the arguments you have used against those official opinions? or even what kind of official opinions from medical and scientific institutions have you found that say the laboratory escape is a realistic probability?

I mean, if it is terribly easy to find scientific institutions supporting one theory and impossible to find them supporting the contrary it is not hard to understand what is the scientific consensus.

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

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-01205-5

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S096098222030662X

https://www.govexec.com/technology/2020/04/genomic-study-points-natural-origin-covid-19/164463/

Many have asked already, but all she has are reports "debunking" the Yan report, as if that was the only way of engineering a virus in the lab.

Unfortunately not many have asked, for too most of people too invested into believing the theory having evidence of the contrary is too strong of a shock, so they refuse to ask for something they don't want to read.

Other are reduced to pretend the sources were never presented, and argument obvious falsehoods expecting people not to read the previous comments.

Anyway, as you can see it is extremely easy to find scientific sources and media where scientific or medical professionals express the official opinion of their institutes or universities about how the natural origin is the only realistic explanation.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

And about this one:

you are judging how well the WHO is acting according to your own preconceived conclusions about what it should be looking out and what it "must" find. That is not valid.

I am starting to wonder if you can read properly. This is not me, look at the link I provided.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

virusrex

It is true, the scientific community has a quite uniform opinion and that is that the natural origin is astronomically more likely as a correct explanation than the laboratory alternative

Does that "scientific community" include the director of the CDC, Robert Redfield?

Seems to me your "uniform opinion" is more a reflection of the suppression of dissident voices in the mainstream media and social platforms than actual reality.

-2 ( +6 / -8 )

Dr John Campbell does quite a good job summing up the recent report.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FD54-7qc88

And if you want to go through the (coverup) report yourself:

https://www.youtube.com/redirect?event=video_description&redir_token=QUFFLUhqbWNoYkQzSHdCVEgwRHRHUFlPXzdPSi1OWXRFZ3xBQ3Jtc0trNXJFUmVtdjJHby1tT3FtUTNKSm9hdTZFV3Q4bXBIVTMtckN5MllFV1B5NG9KT1pRMVdDei1Dc3lnN3N4QW9LOXB1dHZjaGF3Q2xzUnBwaFppSzFjeVJNUGdSdEVlU0VrNEdDb1dpVlNFU1llOXFRbw&q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.who.int%2Fhealth-topics%2Fcoronavirus%2Forigins-of-the-virus

-2 ( +3 / -5 )

@virusrex

I'm quite surprised that is what you got out of Dr John Campbell's summing up of the report; perhaps you should give it another listen:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2FD54-7qc88

virus jumped weeks to months before Wuhan

No, it likely started weeks to months before initial reports, but he states clearly that it most likely did start in Wuhan. I know you're always pushing the idea that it started elsewhere to deflect from the WIV.

He also states that the report only scratches the surface, the investigators couldn't really investigate and were basically given information by the Chinese authorities, and they did not seriously look at the possibility of the lab origins (only spent 3 hours there). He mentioned other reported criticisms of the report.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

I'm quite surprised that is what you got out of Dr John Campbell's summing up of the report; perhaps you should give it another listen:

He just reads the report and comments obvious things. He offers no extra insight at all. Saying that the information is not complete is part of the etc. etc. that is also reported elsewhere.

No, it likely started weeks to months before initial reports, but he states clearly that it most likely did start in Wuhan. I know you're always pushing the idea that it started elsewhere to deflect from the WIV.

That is false, Campbell gives no such comment nor there is any evidence that say this happened in the city of Wuhan at all, on the contrary since the first identification was in one very obvious outbreak that happened weeks after the initial human cases it is obvious those initial cases were not in the city (else you would have many of the outbreaks happening) but instead outside of the city up to the point where the virus was brought in by one of the infected patients and that is why the single big outbreak was found in the city and soon everywhere else, the disease spread long before it entered Wuhan.

You are aware of the number of the scientists who got censored on Youtube, Twitter et al, or are you unaware of that?

You are aware that scientific communications are not made in social media, or are you unaware of that?

There is a huge problem with people with lousy (or no) evidence trying to convince professionals in the usual channels, and that is that they are eaten alive by their peers for trying to push unsubstantiated conclusions and without a proper discussion of the mountains of data that contradicts them. That is why these people have to go to unscientific forums to try and mislead people that know less than them into believing the information they are providing is accurate when it is nothing of the sort.

In science names have no meaning, only evidence. If your beliefs depend of people found to be doing lousy science, specially if they lowering their standards to push for an invalid conclusion for personal profit in a huge conflict of interest like Ioannidis is doing, then you are unable to even judge what is the scientific consensus.

Try and search official communications from professional organizations, laboratories, universities, research insittues, hospitals, etc. Are any of those communications supporting what you want to believe? if not, that means it is not the scientific consensus, and the best thing of all is that none of this depends on social media, as it should be.

Yes, the experts are quite uniform, even if outliers try to mislead people into thinking this is not true, once you get rid of invalid science and people trying to impose opinions without evidence the general opinion is very much the same. People that go against this evidence are criticized not because they contradict others, but because they are trying to pass bad science as if it were valid.

-2 ( +5 / -7 )

Sorry, but that is what Campbell says. I don't know if he is correct or if its in the report, but he does say it.

What second exactly, there is no point where he says the actual first cases, weeks to months before the wuhan market happened in the city of Wuhan, at all.

What is the point on saying something obviously false if the source is there for anybody to corroborate it is false?

Read my previous reply, it is not congruent with reality that the infection was running for weeks or months in a city only to suddenly originate one single very evident outbreak while small number of cases are found in rural areas.

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

Alex, those corona viruses are not highly (or at all) infectious to humans.

When they say it was created in a lab, they mean that they took a natural corona virus and turned it into one that can easily infect humans. It is no secret that the Wuhan lab was doing that kind of work.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

When they say it was created in a lab, they mean that they took a natural corona virus and turned it into one that can easily infect humans. It is no secret that the Wuhan lab was doing that kind of work.

And that is where they are still going against astronomically higher chances of a natural origin because the natural coronavirus are legion and routinely are transmitted between species, it is still much more natural to think this endlessly repeating pattern just happened again for humans, the same as MERS and SARS that had no laboratory involved.

The epidemiological data is another reason why the lab theory is nonsense. The pandemic did not begin in a big city but in less populated areas with much more contact with nature, as expected from a naturally introduced zoonosis.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

And that is where they are still going against astronomically higher chances of a natural origin...

I recommend you reconsider your approach. You still have some credibility when it comes to vaccines, but by insisting so strongly on SARSCoV2 emerging naturally you risk losing your followers and turning everyone into "antivaxxers". Perhaps you can get someone else to focus on this topic for you....

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

They talk about probability. Nothing about any scientific consensus.

Wait, you believed there would be a scientific article saying literally "this is the scientific consensus"? I am showing you the most likely explanation, that is defended as adequate and valid by scientific authorities and that says there is no other realistic probability.

Can you show simmilar support for the opposite conclusion? because if you can't that means this is the scientific consensus.

Political opinion article by Angela Anderson, heavily laced with comments how she dislikes Trump.

What? are you reading the links or just trying to pretend? Are you so desperate to simply misrepresent something that is there for anybody to read?

This is a well defended article by Angela L. Rasmussen, speaking in behalf of the Center for Global Health Science and Security, Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA

" the origins of the virus remain unclear"

But as the conclusions show "strong evidence that such insertion events can occur naturally in animal betacoronaviruses." which disproves the basic reason why a laboratory creation is necessary, thus again supporting the natural origin as the hugely more likely explanation, the scientific consensus at this point.

"The director of the National Institutes of Health debunks the claim" ... well, and the director of the CDC debunks the debunking. So it is your director against my director.

No, a director expressing the official position of his institute, not an ex-director clearly expressing his own personal opinion. Those are two completely different things.

Seems to me your "scientific consensus" translates into a selective reading of journal articles

Of course not, it depends on finding easily and quickly clear evidence that scientific and medical organizations openly defend one conclusion while you cannot do the same.

You did not even try, you showed zero institutions, zero articles that are well accepted and cited in the scientific community to show your pet theory is commonly held as valid. An honest person would take that as a very strong indication this is not the consensus of science.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-why-the-media-scientific-community-and-who-wont-investigate-covid-origins

Please do not insult our intelligence with rightwing MSM bobble-heads. Tucker Carlson is a children’s entertainer.

In the video, you can hear Daszak (main member of the "investigation" team) explain how easy it is to engineer a coronaviruses to infect humans. You can also hear former CDC director Redfield explain why the lab origins of SARSCoV2 is much more likely than a natural origin.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Well if we want to find out the truth then what is the issue ? Maybe have a look at Italy ? No Maybe it doesn’t follow the narrative I guess .

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Everyone knows that there are thousands of different t corona viruses all over the world right ? In Brisbane there is the Hendra virus that lives in the bat population or is that another one created by China ?

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

Saying there is a scientific consensus on the natural origins of SARSCoV2 is quite disingenuous. There is plenty of experts and evidence pointing to the lab origin. Instead of reposting the usual quotes, I'll just recommend checking out the following, which includes statements from Daszak, Redfield, and others:

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-why-the-media-scientific-community-and-who-wont-investigate-covid-origins

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

Yet how does blaming China improve things? Do you really want a war with China perhaps nuclear?

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

The only true fact we can be sure of is: China was the first to bring the virus to the attention of WHO

Doesn't mean it started there.

Yes, it could have started anywhere in the world, and was silently circulating for a while before it was detected.

The 1919 / 1920 Spanish Flu pandemic was first detected in an army camp in Kentucky, USA, but it was discovered many years later that the index case was in Dieppe, France, in 1916. (At that time Dieppe was a rallying point for soldiers during WW2).

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

The only true fact we can be sure of is: China was the first to bring the virus to the attention of WHO

Doesn't mean it started there.

-5 ( +5 / -10 )

How about this theory.

.Virus taken from bat. ..............................................Bat

injected into mouse to see what happens. ......intermediate animal

Researcher is bitten by the mouse. ....................human

Terribly easy to disprove, not only because a bite is not a believable mechanism of action but because mice are not susceptible to infection by this coronavirus.

However, I have heard a lot of the conspiracy theories that the a) the virus mysteriously sprung into action at a fish marked in Wuhan, while the virus lab that was doing research on this type of virus has nothing to do with it, and b) that it was imported into Wuhan by foreigners. (Both have been touted by the CCP.... never mind that they contradict each other.)

If "foreigners" it means people from outside of the city that is no conspiracy but the most likely mechanism according to the experts. The virus did appear without warning in the fish market, and the only logical explanation is that it was brought there by infected humans coming from other areas of the province where the virus was spreading, there is no contradiction.

-5 ( +2 / -7 )

China made a condition of the inspection that China could reject any inspector (basically they could choose the inspectors). This is far from a proper independent investigation.

Can I just walk into the 4 Big Tech US laborites and demand full access to all their data, because I believe they may be collecting private information on individuals?

I think China with 1.4billion citizens probably cares also about the virus...why would they hide crucial information?

-12 ( +2 / -14 )

They would! Russians did that with UK concerning the Novichok poisoning

You do know Nobuchika is produced at Porton Down right?

-15 ( +2 / -17 )

Hehehe. Anti-China people are in for a shock!!!

-16 ( +2 / -18 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites