virus zc45 and zxc21 SARS
https://sci-hub.tw/10.1038/s41586-020-2012-7
Zhou, P., Yang, X.-L., Wang, X.-G., Hu, B., Zhang, L., Zhang, W., … Shi, Z.-L. (2020). A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin. Nature. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2012-7
Sure enough she knows her viruses. (video interview)
But I analyzed all this data before...
https://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2020/03/creation-of-chimeric-viruses-based-on.html
The question is whether she can prove her case or not....
https://elixirfield.blogspot.com/2020/04/how-university-of-minnesota-ruled-out.html
So sure enough - it IS closest for those fragments...
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2008-3.pdf?proof=trueMay%2F
So basically she is stating that the Wuhan Lab did the recombination but hid the evidence.
Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route
She's not mentioning the Pangolin...
OH NOW she is....
And the specific genetic engineering evidence:
Dang - this is riveting !!
So the "Dr. Fang Li" that Scarlet is referring to - he is at University of Minnesota. She states he's been a long-time collaborator with the Wuhan lab scientist and that Dr. Fang Li must know that covid-2 was genetically engineered because Dr. Fang Li "recreated" the same genetic engineering using the same method that Scarlet discovered for the pandemic virus. So she's basically saying Dr. Fang Li is a military spy scientist for the Chinese.
https://www.foxnews.com/world/chinese-virologist-coronavirus-cover-up-flee-hong-kong-whistleblower
Yes based on her analysis
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344240007_Unusual_Features_of_the_SARS-CoV-2_Genome_Suggesting_Sophisticated_Laboratory_Modification_Rather_Than_Natural_Evolution_and_Delineation_of_Its_Probable_Synthetic_Route - the Pangolin and "exotic" market were used as a cover story. I knew about the gain of function but that in itself did not prove anything
since those "gain of function" studies were done using a Mouse
coronavirus. But this scientist exposed that the different military labs
- not the Wuhan lab - had the bat coronavirus in their lab - the two
bat coronavirus most close to the pandemic. And then she exposed
precisely how the ACE-2 receptor for humans based on the specific
protein - it was "snipped" into the coronavirus. She exposed how that
precise method had not been published previously. So she says if that
ACE-2 receptor had evolved via the Pangolin then there would have been
more cross-breeding of the Pangolin genes (the backbone) instead of the
backbone being matched to the military lab bats.
Anyway I sent
her study to Francis A. Boyle, he is an international law professor in
Illinois - and he had researched bioweapons. He also filed a genocide
lawsuit against the US for the sanctions on Iraq. So yes he previously
had been in the media stating that since the Coronavirus had already
been genetically engineered for "gain of function" to spread into humans
then SARS-covid-2 must have been created in the lab. But the
complication is that SARS virus, like Ebola, both were spread from bats
originally and the scientists have been studying the bats around Wuhan
because the concern was that the bats would spread a coronavirus again
to humans. Also MERS is the similar kind of coronavirus - but it only
spread in the Middle East. So that's why the WHO and GATES, etc. were
predicting that another coronavirus epidemic - like SARS or like MERS or
like Ebola - would be inevitable soon.
So yeah it's kind of like how
HIV spread into humans due to the encroaching reliance on bush meat -
from urbanization - and so then Big Pharma sold and exported blood
donations from poor Haitians - and that was a main vector for HIV to
spread into the US. Actually my high school best friend James T. Hong -
he's made films on the bioweapons of Taiwan and China - since Japan did
horrendous bioweapon damage in China. He tracked down the victims that
still have open wounds from WWII - from the bioweapons of Japan. So the
US then took that Unit 731 - Japanese fascist bioweapon research - and
did similar testing the U.S. - and supposedly even Roswell is explained
by Japanese Unit 731 test victims cause they used people with Progeria.
Suffering from diseases such as dwarfism and progeria – rapid aging – they had been brought to the US from the Japanese Unit 731, the infamous Japanese military unit responsible for experiments on humans. These experiments were every bit as sick and horrific as Mengele’s and the Nazis’. A little while ago one of the Horror blogs reviewed a film someone had made about the Unit’s atrocities in Japanese-occupied China and Mongolia during the Second World War. The film claimed to be recreations of real experiments. From reading the review, I decided it was definitely one to miss. Apparently the victims of the Roswell and similar crashes were being used as guinea pigs to assess the effects of exposure to high altitude and radiation.https://beastrabban.wordpress.com/2019/09/15/more-lies-and-disinformation-about-roswell-crash-hoaxed-with-victims-of-nazi-and-japanese-human-experiments/
Compare Update: 2003 SARS Pandemic Versus 2020 COVID-19 Pandemic Published: Sep 07, 2020 By Gail Dutton
Although at this stage we cannot rule out the possibility of direct transmission from the natural reservoir host to humans, molecular epidemiologic studies (2,10) and studies of the receptor-S protein interaction (35) indicate that the progenitor viruses are unlikely to be able to infect humans and that a rapid viral evolution in an intermediate host (such as civets) seems to be necessary to adapt the virus for human infection. Ability to efficiently use the receptor molecules (ACE2 for human and civet) seems to be a major limiting factor for animal-to-human and human-to-human transmission (35). This also explains why the SARS-CoV was able to cause the human pandemic but the closely related bat SARS-like–CoVs were not. For the SARS-like–CoVs to infect humans, substantial genetic changes in the S1 receptor-binding domain will be necessary. These changes may be achieved in 1 of 2 possible ways. They could be achieved by genetic recombination, as coronaviruses are known to be able to recombine. For example, bat SARS-like–CoVs and another yet unknown coronavirus could coinfect an intermediate host, and the bat viruses would gain the ACE2 binding site in the S1 domain by recombination.
Despite the SARS-CoV-2 lineage’s acquisition of residues in its Spike (S) protein’s receptor-binding domain (RBD) permitting the use of human ACE2 (ref. 27) receptors and its RBD being genetically closer to a pangolin virus than to RaTG13 (refs. 11,12,13,22,28)—a signal that suggests recombination—the divergence patterns in the S protein do not show evidence of recombination between the lineage leading to SARS-CoV-2 and known sarbecoviruses. Our results indicate the presence of a single lineage circulating in bats with properties that allowed it to infect human cells, as previously described for bat sarbecoviruses related to the first SARS-CoV lineage29,30,31.
The unsampled diversity descended from the SARS-CoV-2/RaTG13 common ancestor forms a clade of bat sarbecoviruses with generalist properties—with respect to their ability to infect a range of mammalian cells—that facilitated its jump to humans and may do so again. Although the human ACE2-compatible RBD was very likely to have been present in a bat sarbecovirus lineage that ultimately led to SARS-CoV-2, this RBD sequence has hitherto been found in only a few pangolin viruses. Furthermore, the other key feature thought to be instrumental in the ability of SARS-CoV-2 to infect humans—a polybasic cleavage site insertion in the S protein—has not yet been seen in another close bat relative of the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Evolutionary origins of the SARS-CoV-2 sarbecovirus lineage responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic
Additionally, we show that RaTG13, a bat coronavirus closely related to SARS-CoV-2, also uses hACE2 as its receptor. The differences among SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV and RaTG13 in Structural basis of receptor recognition by SARS-CoV-2
Mutations from bat ACE2 orthologs markedly enhance ACE2-Fc neutralization of SARS-CoV-2
We observed that the SARS-CoV-2 RBD bound human, pangolin, and horseshoe bat (R. macrotis) ACE2 more efficiently than the SARS-CoV-1 or RaTG13 RBD. Only the RaTG13 RBD bound rodent ACE2 orthologs efficiently.
Unexpectedly the RBD of the SARS-like coronavirus RaTG13 isolated from horseshoe bats (R. affinis) did not bind either horseshoe bat ACE2 ortholog tested, indicating that the not-yet-described R. affinis ACE2 varies in significant ways from these horseshoe-bat orthologs.
No comments:
Post a Comment