Social Dr. Sanjay Gupta backs up Trump's CDC director's claim the Virus was a lab escape

[Snackbar]

I agree the source could be a lab leak. That doesn’t mean it is an engineered virus.


Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus.

While the analyses above suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may bind human ACE2 with high affinity, computational analyses predict that the interaction is not ideal7and that the RBD sequence is different from those shown in SARS-CoV to be optimal for receptor binding7,11. Thus, the high-affinity binding of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to human ACE2 is most likely the result of natural selection on a human or human-like ACE2 that permits another optimal binding solution to arise. This is strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of purposeful manipulation.


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

In the previous link he explains how the Andersen paper is flawed.

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/

 

[badascan]

This was the speculation on day 1... A woman who worked in the lab wrote a paper on the exact thing months prior and also spoke about the conditions and security of the lab(s)... And don't prominent players in the show have connections to these Wuhan labs?

 

[Source]

In the previous link he explains how the Andersen paper is flawed.

https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/

He doesn’t like how Anderson came to thst conclusion but he doesn’t disprove the conclusion. As recently as 1 day ago Anderson still contends there is no scientific evidence of a lab leak.

 

[Snackbar]

He doesn’t like how Anderson came to thst conclusion but he doesn’t disprove the conclusion. As recently as 1 day Anderson still contends there is no scientific evidence of a lab leak.

Just like Andersen doesn't prove their conclusion.

If you are a virologist and you state your analysis "Clearly" shows something, maybe it should, you know, clearly show it.

 

[Source]

Just like Andersen doesn't prove their conclusion.

If you are a virologist and you state your analysis "Clearly" shows something, maybe it should, you know, clearly show it.

Do you believe that sars-cov2 was a manipulated virus?

 

[Snackbar]

Do you believe that sars-cov2 was a manipulated virus?

My opinion doesn't matter, I'm not writing garbage papers in nature.

 

[Source]

My opinion doesn't matter, I'm not writing garbage papers in nature.

You’re on a forum where for the most part all we do is give our opinions. It seems odd that now when you’re asked for it you refuse to give one.

 

[Snackbar]

You’re on a forum where for the most part all we do is give our opinions. It seems odd that now when you’re asked for it you refuse to give one.

It's odd that you care more about my opinion, than discussing how the writer picks apart Andersen's analysis.

 

[The Audience]

In response to the Wade paper -and primarily to the quote used in it from David Baltimore about the furin cleavage insert that is discussed in detail in the article,

“When I first saw the furin cleavage site in the viral sequence, with its arginine codons, I said to my wife it was the smoking gun for the origin of the virus,” said David Baltimore, an eminent virologist and former president of CalTech. “These features make a powerful challenge to the idea of a natural origin for SARS2,” he said.

one of the co-authors to the Nature paper that is criticised in the article has posted a very detailed response on twitter to the scientific claims made about this feature of the virus:



There was also an article written by another virologist last year that gave a scientific explanation as to why the most likely scenario was an emergence in nature:

The Origins of Sars-cov-2 Part 3
-Was this virus designed in a lab? Accidentally released? [Link]

Why it is unlikely that an unknown backbone was used;
The significance of the O-linked glycan feature in the virus (also highlighted in the Nature paper that Wade criticised);
The characterisations of the mutations found in the virus 'Ka/Ks ratio' is a strong indication that the virus was not the result of forced lab selection

 

[MicroBrew]

In response to the Wade paper -and primarily to the quote used in it from David Baltimore about the furin cleavage insert that is discussed in detail in the article,


one of the co-authors to the Nature paper that is criticised in the article has posted a very detailed response on twitter to the scientific claims made about this feature of the virus:



There was also an article written by another virologist last year that gave a scientific explanation as to why the most likely scenario was an emergence in nature:

The Origins of Sars-cov-2 Part 3
-Was this virus designed in a lab? Accidentally released? [Link]

Why it is unlikely that an unknown backbone was used;
The significance of the O-linked glycan feature in the virus (also highlighted in the Nature paper that Wade criticised);
The characterisations of the mutations found in the virus 'Ka/Ks ratio' is a strong indication that the virus was not the result of forced lab selection

One possible scenario is that It could be a naturally occuring virus that escaped from the lab. The closest match, though not an exact match, was found in bats in a cave in Yunnan province , which is around 1000 miles (give or take about 150 miles) away.

The scientist called "batwoman" who worked on coronaviruses at the Wuhan Inst. of Tech was in Yunnan exploring the caves for bat coronaviruses. Peter Daszak, who provided funding to the WIV, and is the subject of criticism by the Wade paper is on video stating they were researching bat coronaviruses in the caves in Yunnan province. He also states the viruses can be modified.

 

[Snackbar]

In response to the Wade paper -and primarily to the quote used in it from David Baltimore about the furin cleavage insert that is discussed in detail in the article,


one of the co-authors to the Nature paper that is criticised in the article has posted a very detailed response on twitter to the scientific claims made about this feature of the virus:



There was also an article written by another virologist last year that gave a scientific explanation as to why the most likely scenario was an emergence in nature:

The Origins of Sars-cov-2 Part 3
-Was this virus designed in a lab? Accidentally released? [Link]

Why it is unlikely that an unknown backbone was used;
The significance of the O-linked glycan feature in the virus (also highlighted in the Nature paper that Wade criticised);
The characterisations of the mutations found in the virus 'Ka/Ks ratio' is a strong indication that the virus was not the result of forced lab selection

I think we can agree that in the midst of a global pandemic experts need to be mindful of throwing around absolutes and certainty.

 

[HereticBD]

Have Liberals ever thought what they get out of denying this theory outright? I mean, I know Orange Man had similar theories, but is that seriously all it comes down to? It's almost like it would absolutely crush them to learn it escaped from a lab, but why? Why do they care so much to deny this perfectly rational theory? It's very strange.

 

[PhitePhan]

Have Liberals ever thought what they get out of denying this theory outright? I mean, I know Orange Man had similar theories, but is that seriously all it comes down to? It's almost like it would absolutely crush them to learn it escaped from a lab, but why? Why do they care so much to deny this perfectly rational theory? It's very strange.

It’s science, bro!

 

[The_Renaissance]

Have Liberals ever thought what they get out of denying this theory outright? I mean, I know Orange Man had similar theories, but is that seriously all it comes down to? It's almost like it would absolutely crush them to learn it escaped from a lab, but why? Why do they care so much to deny this perfectly rational theory? It's very strange.

It would stray from the narrative, and may force them to ask 'what else isn't strictly what we've been told'? It would break the illusion of trust, only on one point of the entire narrative but enough to put some nagging doubts about what else might have been covered up, lied about or manipulated over the past 15months.

 

[bobgeese]

Have Liberals ever thought what they get out of denying this theory outright? I mean, I know Orange Man had similar theories, but is that seriously all it comes down to? It's almost like it would absolutely crush them to learn it escaped from a lab, but why? Why do they care so much to deny this perfectly rational theory? It's very strange.

"There's no scientific evidence that it's a lab leak"



That certainly couldn't have anything to do with the fact that China prevented experts from examining the lab in a timely manner...

 

[HereticBD]

It would stray from the narrative, and may force them to ask 'what else isn't strictly what we've been told'? It would break the illusion of trust, only on one point of the entire narrative but enough to put some nagging doubts about what else might have been covered up, lied about or manipulated over the past 15months.

I don't think this is all that unique to any other things they've been proven wrong on over the past four or five years, though. They believe literally everything the Liberal media tells them, and when they turn out to be wrong, they just pretend that they weren't. Those kinds of doubts would be well ingrained into them by now. At least there is usually some political motivation to believe the bullshit, though. This goes beyond politics. It's some sort of psychosis.

 

[Scerpi]

Have Liberals ever thought what they get out of denying this theory outright? I mean, I know Orange Man had similar theories, but is that seriously all it comes down to? It's almost like it would absolutely crush them to learn it escaped from a lab, but why? Why do they care so much to deny this perfectly rational theory? It's very strange.

Chinese money in pockets behind closed doors...

 

[MicroBrew]

I don't think this is all that unique to any other things they've been proven wrong on over the past four or five years, though. They believe literally everything the Liberal media tells them, and when they turn out to be wrong, they just pretend that they weren't. Those kinds of doubts would be well ingrained into them by now. At least there is usually some political motivation to believe the bullshit, though. This goes beyond politics. It's some sort of psychosis.

Your average liberal might believe the virus came form the seafood market because that is what the media reported. I highly doubt they are aware of all the info we talk about here. We are a niche group, the vast majority of Americans are not interested in current affairs like we are.

 

[bobgeese]

the vast majority of Americans are not interested in current affairs like we are.

 

[Diogenes of Sinope]

RIP @Kandyland. You will be missed.

Why was he banned?