J
josie_L
Guest
I have this if any wish to read:
- Status
M
mrad25
Guest
As I stated. But given the similarities of the virus to a virus synthetically engineered by bat lady and the fact the new virus has the S- protein that we see on the SARs virus, which was 1st successfully synthetically sliced by bat lady (makes coronaviruses transmittable to humans, not common) makes one’s eyes pop open.
J
josie_L
Guest
I respect that response/conclusion. But I must admit I’m partial to the idea that the Chinese were up to no good in their labs in Wuhan.
M
mrad25
Guest
You are focused one article. I’m not sure why you believe they blew their credibility. It opens up the fact that the virus did not 100% originate from the wet market as what has been put out there by the media.
J
josie_L
Guest
Absolutely!
O
OraLabora
Guest
There’s nothing wrong per se with studying viruses in bats. We did it for Ebola as well. It’s important to understand the behaviour and transmissibility between species. Otherwise how will we develop preventive measures? Of course precautions need to be taken but we’re humans and prone to accidents. Major lab accidents have occurred in the West as well. Google the Marburg virus outbreak in a West German facility conducting research on monkeys.
The US too has seen it’s share of accidents:
blogs.scientificamerican.com
As for the unconnected cases, once a virus is in the population it can be difficult to trace all contacts. As some cases are asymptomatic or have the symptoms of a mild cold, the first patient might not be the first confirmed patient. The first true patient may have picked up at the market, remained asymptomatic, and passed it on to someone who had never been to the market. Again, flimsy grounds for a conspiracy theory.
The US too has seen it’s share of accidents:
Nearly 400 Accidents with Dangerous Pathogens and Biotoxins Reported in U.S. Labs over 7 Years
As for the unconnected cases, once a virus is in the population it can be difficult to trace all contacts. As some cases are asymptomatic or have the symptoms of a mild cold, the first patient might not be the first confirmed patient. The first true patient may have picked up at the market, remained asymptomatic, and passed it on to someone who had never been to the market. Again, flimsy grounds for a conspiracy theory.
Last edited:
J
josie_L
Guest
It’s not on flimsy grounds, here let me quote from the National Review article I posted earlier:
O
OraLabora
Guest
No it doesn’t. See my response to Josie. The fact that the virus can be asymptomatic or lead to only mild symptoms suggests the possibility that we don’t know the true patient zero. We only know the first confirmed patient, who may have picked up from someone without symptoms who had been to the wet market but remains unidentified.
O
OraLabora
Guest
Meaningless. It just stated it was imported from elsewhere. That includes the possibility of bush meat or other foods imported from another area. It could have been bat to pig on a farm somewhere.
Last edited:
J
josie_L
Guest
The point Ora Labora is that the origins of this virus is not from the wet markets as we were repeatedly told.
Last edited:
O
OraLabora
Guest
We have always known that. The virus was transmitted to humans via the wet market. How it got there, bats to pigs or to whatever, still needs to be determined.
J
josie_L
Guest
We are talking in circles, I.e., how do you know it was FIRST transmitted to humans via the wet markets when there are 33% of people who had no contact to the wet markets and the first case of Covid-19 is debatable?
O
OraLabora
Guest
I explained because for some people it is asymptomatic, and we don’t know who they are, but they are transmitting it to others.
J
josie_L
Guest
The explanation you gave is not a fact nor has it been confirmed. You are hypothesizing while telling others they can’t.
Last edited:
O
OraLabora
Guest
Example: someone picks it up at the wet market, but remains asymptomatic. Then rides the bus or subway, and infects someone who does develop symptoms. But that person has never been to the wet market, but has symptoms and tests positive but cannot be linked to the market.
All far more plausible than a conspiracy theory. It’s based on the factual behaviour of the virus.
All far more plausible than a conspiracy theory. It’s based on the factual behaviour of the virus.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
But it should not lead to jumping to the conclusion that it was a leak from the biolab.
I and many others here reject citations that are just a video of someone talking. If you want to present the argument that you learned from such a video, present it yourself. I, for one, will not waste my time with videos.
J
josie_L
Guest
I agree it is plausible but I disagree that it is MORE plausible. The quote I gave stated that the source of the virus was potentially imported from elsewhere other than the wet market, meaning the remaining 33% unaccounted for could have come in contact with the ORIGINAL SOURCE, which we as YET DO NOT KNOW.
“Phyloepidemiologic analyses suggested that the SARS-CoV-2 source at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was potentially imported from elsewhere. The crowded market then boosted SARS-CoV-2 circulation and spread it to the whole city in early December 2019.”
“Phyloepidemiologic analyses suggested that the SARS-CoV-2 source at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was potentially imported from elsewhere. The crowded market then boosted SARS-CoV-2 circulation and spread it to the whole city in early December 2019.”
Last edited:
J
josie_L
Guest
I did not jump to conclusions I simply advocate at this point that it is MORE PLAUSIBLE than what we have thus far been told.
And that you view the video as a waste of your time claiming they are no citations when there are clear sources stated is a pity, you might have learnt something.
And that you view the video as a waste of your time claiming they are no citations when there are clear sources stated is a pity, you might have learnt something.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
It is a pity you could have linked to original text sources, then we all might have learned something. I don’t like having to learn about something through someone’s ideological filter.
O
OraLabora
Guest
Ever hear of Occam’s Razor? Always start with the simplest possibility.
- The virus can be asymptomatic.
- It appears to have an animal source, likely bats.
- Bats are not sold at the wet market but other animals, including bush meat, that could have been into contact with bats or bat guano, are.
- An asymptomatic patient can unwittingly transmit the virus to others; the R0 of COVID-19 is estimated at 2.28 (Estimation of the reproductive number of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) and the probable outbreak size on the Diamond Princess cruise ship: A data-driven analysis - PubMed); that means one infected person infects on average 2.28 others.
Are there other possibilities? Of course. Just be careful of confirmation bias. But as we go down the ladder of plausibility, a conspiracy theory about a virus manufactured in the lab is near the bottom.
Last edited:
- Status