Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Coronavirus - worldwide breaking news, discussion, stats, updates and more

From the BBC live updates page at 14:29: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-55992464

If one thing keeps me vaguely sane about this angle, its that the press have taken a more interesting and skeptical tone about the investigations of the lab angle, and I noticed recently that they werent just trying to dismiss it as a conspiracy theory, in contrast to their initial instincts when the possibility first arose.

People in China were able to watch livestreams of the World Health Organization press conference, and indeed, more than 1.5 million did via the official Xinhua news agency.

This showed that China was confident nothing was going to come out of this WHO’s press conference that it didn’t expect or want people to hear.

But China’s media have long stressed that there wasn’t going to be a “gotcha” moment out of the delegation’s visit. Papers have repeatedly said that China has long been cooperating with the WHO, that the visit is a scientific and not a political one, and that the team will need to investigate the virus’ origins in multiple countries.

It certainly came as no surprise to Chinese audiences that the WHO all but dismissed suggestions Covid-19 may have originated in a Wuhan laboratory.

China has repeatedly refuted suggestions, calling them nothing but a “massive smear campaign led by some US politicians”. In particular, they criticised the US government under former president, Donald Trump, for suggesting such.

On Friday, Chinese outlets were already highly publicising video footage of Peter Daszak from the delegation saying that the team had found “no evidence at all” to suggest the virus might have originated there, and that what he saw was “an incredibly well-built, well-designed, well-managed lab”.
 
Aside from a possible lab leak, another possibility investigated by the team was direct transmission from bats to humans. This was discounted because bats and humans don't come into contact much. Except of course for the coronavirus researchers in Wuhan who have been visiting caves collecting bats and bat shit for years (e.g. Google Translate).
 
Aside from a possible lab leak, another possibility investigated by the team was direct transmission from bats to humans. This was discounted because bats and humans don't come into contact much. Except of course for the coronavirus researchers in Wuhan who have been visiting caves collecting bats and bat shit for years (e.g. Google Translate).
Or the collection and use of bat guano as a fertiliser (in numerous communities throughout SE Asia and elsewhere).
 
Definitely not them then. Frozen food. Forrin frozen food.

" The WIV's second bat breeding-related patent describes the methods used. Referencing their bat cage patent, it describes how wild insectivorous bats captured from mountain caves are kept in the cages and fed a diet of insects. It covers the preparation of their feed, domestication of wild bats, overwintering, artificial reproduction, weaning of the young and raising them in six steps. The breeding method includes staff being in daily proximity to bats during feeding time and feeding young bats by hand. It mentions the risk of cross-species transmission of SARS coronaviruses in bats, a topic researched by Shi Zhengli at the WIV. "

The Wuhan Institute of Virology's Bat Breeding Program
Can't really vouch for this though. But a patent for breeding bats from WIV
 
The Wuhan Institute of Virology was also the least likely of the two Wuhan coronavirus labs to be involved. There was another lab only 280 meters away from the seafood market, first raised as a possible source by two Chinese researchers in February last year: https://img-prod.tgcom24.mediaset.i...0192-5eb8307f-017c-4075-a697-348628da0204.pdf

".....Within ~280 meters from the market, there was the Wuhan Center for Disease Control & Prevention (WHCDC) (Figure 1, from Baidu and Google maps). WHCDC hosted animals in laboratories for research purpose, one of which was specialized in pathogens collection and identification. In one of their studies, 155 bats including Rhinolophus affiniswere captured in Hubei province, and other 450 bats were captured in Zhejiang province4. The expert in collection was noted in the Author Contributions (JHT). Moreover, he was broadcasted for collecting viruses on nation-wide newspapers and websites in 2017 and 20197,8. He described that he was once by attacked by bats and the blood of a bat shot on his skin. He knew the extreme danger of the infection so he quarantined himself for 14 days. In another accident, he quarantined himself again because bats peed on him. He was once thrilled for capturing a bat carrying a live tick 8. Surgery was performed on the caged animals and the tissue samples were collected for DNA and RNA extraction and sequencing. The tissue samples and contaminated trashes were source of pathogens. They were only ~280 meters from the seafood market. The WHCDC was also adjacent to the Union Hospital (Figure 1, bottom) where the first group of doctors were infected during this epidemic. It is plausible that the virus leaked around and some of them contaminated the initial patients in this epidemic, though solid proofs are needed in future study. The second laboratory was ~12 kilometers from the seafood market and belonged to Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences..... "

I don't think the WHO investigation team mentioned it.
 
The top theory espoused by the team was that the virus came to humans from bats via an intermediary host. As all the live animals they tested were negative, suspicion naturally fell on imported frozen meat as the intermediary. Also, since infections have now been observed in cats and mink around the world, but not in pangolins or any other seafood market creatures, pet cats should be investigated.

That's not really an accurate characterization at all of what they said. It still sounds like the most likely thing they think is that it was transmitted to humans via live animals which had been transported to markets in Wuhan. And frozen wild animal meat wouldn't necessarily need to be imported.

 
I think it’s a fair reading. The idea that some animals susceptible to coronaviruses came from regions where there were bats is just a bit of an add-on to account for the fact that haven’t found anything. And the frozen imports coming from overseas was clearly where Laing Wannian was leading them, why else would he mention that it could have travelled long distances on frozen food if his only evidence was his research showing that the virus can survive at low temperatures. That simple fact isn’t enough to start pushing it as a theory in these circumstances.
 
I think it’s a fair reading. The idea that some animals susceptible to coronaviruses came from regions where there were bats is just a bit of an add-on to account for the fact that haven’t found anything.

But why would they add that on if as you say the aim was to say it didn't come from live animals, but from imported frozen meat. In fact they clearly are not saying the fact that they haven't found anything in live animal tests points to it being carried by frozen meat, because it coming from live animals still seems to be the leading theory.

Live animals could also be imported as well given the amount of live animal smuggling. It's not really any more or less damning whether it came from live animals/frozen meat, in the end it would still be down to there being a massive unregulated wild animal trade.
 
But why would they add that on if as you say the aim was to say it didn't come from live animals, but from imported frozen meat. In fact they clearly are not saying the fact that they haven't found anything in live animal tests points to it being carried by frozen meat, because it coming from live animals still seems to be the leading theory.

Live animals could also be imported as well given the amount of live animal smuggling. It's not really any more or less damning whether it came from live animals/frozen meat, in the end it would still be down to there being a massive unregulated wild animal trade.

The aim was to be clear that it didn’t come from a lab. So what are they left with while ensuring they don’t mention any actual evidence of anything: casting the net out of Wuhan, whether to bats in some other place or, if they can manage it, to other countries by implication.
 
Aside from a possible lab leak, another possibility investigated by the team was direct transmission from bats to humans. This was discounted because bats and humans don't come into contact much. Except of course for the coronavirus researchers in Wuhan who have been visiting caves collecting bats and bat shit for years (e.g. Google Translate).

The bat was just resting in my account.
 
I think it’s a fair reading. The idea that some animals susceptible to coronaviruses came from regions where there were bats is just a bit of an add-on to account for the fact that haven’t found anything. And the frozen imports coming from overseas was clearly where Laing Wannian was leading them, why else would he mention that it could have travelled long distances on frozen food if his only evidence was his research showing that the virus can survive at low temperatures. That simple fact isn’t enough to start pushing it as a theory in these circumstances.

Some of the research that the Chinese are basing these claims on can be found on this lengthy paper from Oct 2020
Although no direct link has been established between COVID-19 infection and foodborne transmission, a series of recent incidents highlighted frozen foods as carriers for the long-range transport of SARS-CoV-2 during the current pandemic. The earliest incident occurred on 12 June 2020 in the Xinfadi agricultural produce wholesale market in Beijing, where SARS-CoV-2 was detected on a cutting board used for processing imported salmon (Global Times 2020a). Although later investigations did not find conclusive evidence on its origin, this particular incident raised awareness by authorities and consumers on frozen foods as possible SARS-CoV-2 carriers. Since the beginning of July 2020, at least nine incidents of food contamination have been reported across the country, where SARS-CoV-2 was detected on imported foods, mostly on their packaging materials (Fig. 2). Most of those incidents traced to frozen shrimps imported from Ecuador, where novel coronavirus was found on their packaging materials, and in one particular case, SARS-CoV-2 was also detected on the interior of a shipping container. Notably, in the latest incident in Shenzhen, Guangdong province on August 12, 2020, local authorities found SARS-CoV-2 on the surface of a frozen chicken wing sample originated from Brazil, which became the first known case where the novel coronavirus was detected on actual food samples (SMHC 2020).
The frequent detection of SARS-CoV-2 in frozen foods suggest that these are not random, isolated incidents but rather alerting signs that viral contamination and foodborne transmission may present a systematic risk in the ongoing pandemic. This is plausible given that food contamination may occur via respiratory droplets, contact or other route, during the farming, processing, storage, transport, and retailing process where foods may contact with different workers and ambient environments in the “farm-to-table” lifecycle. It is particularly noteworthy that prior to the re-emergence of the first COVID-19 case on June 11, 2020, there had been no local transmission reported for 56 consecutive days in Beijing (China Daily 2020a). A total of 256 cases were confirmed over the next two weeks, with 98.8% of those linked to the Xinfadi market where a salmon cutting board was tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (Xinhua News 2020). Genome sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus sampled from the Xinfadi market identified a European coronavirus strain, providing strong evidence that the re-emergent COVID-19 cases in Beijing may be caused imported sources rather than continued transmission of the local coronavirus strain (CCDC 2020).

This was referenced in this paper from Jan 2021 which was co-authored by Shi Zhengli of the WIV
In addition to animal-to-human transmission in farms, cold food supplier chains are raising substantial concern. In various cities in China, several small-scale COVID-19 outbreaks caused by virus-contaminated uncooked seafood or pork from overseas countries have been documented. It was found that viral genome signatures in these outbreaks were different from the viral strains present in China (7, 8). There is evidence that SARS-CoV-2 can survive up to 3 weeks in meat and on the surface of cold food packages without losing infectivity (7, 8). Thus, meat from SARS-CoV-2–infected animals or food packaging contaminated by SARS-CoV-2 could be a source of human infection.
----
Another debate concerns the source of SARS-CoV-2 that caused the COVID-19 outbreak at the end of 2019. The current data question the animal origin of SARS-CoV-2 in the seafood market where the early cases were identified in Wuhan, China. Given the finding of SARS-CoV-2 on the surface of imported food packages, contact with contaminated uncooked food could be an important source of SARS-CoV-2 transmission (8). Recently, SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were found in human serum samples taken outside of China before the COVID-19 outbreak was detected (14, 15), which suggests that SARS-CoV-2 existed for some time before the first cases were described in Wuhan.
 
Some of the research that the Chinese are basing these claims on can be found on this lengthy paper from Oct 2020


This was referenced in this paper from Jan 2021 which was co-authored by Shi Zhengli of the WIV

Yes this is all obvious stuff, we know clusters of infections have happened in low temperature food processing environments. It’s really no surprise that the virus turned up in frozen food. It’s no basis for claiming frozen food is a likely route by which the virus arrived in Wuhan though.
 
Last edited:
It’s no basis for claiming frozen food is a likely route by which the virus arrived in Wuhan though.
I agree, just trying to find where they are getting this theory from or how they are propagating it. Although saying that, I think there is the possibility it came into Wuhan via fresh/frozen food or livestock from an area of China with a large bat population or over the border in a neighbouring country.
 
Last edited:
Promising signs in Portugal. The State of Emergency is reviewed next Thursday/ Friday (its done on a fortnightly basis) it's almost certain to be expected. The good news is that it has, at the moment in any case made an impact. There was a brief mention in one paper that the schools closing was a possible large contributor .

1612900566469.png
 
Interesting article about India:

No one really knows why cases seem to have fallen in India without them having done anything a great deal different to anyone else - milder variant? lots of viruses about that have made people less vulnerble to COVID? warmth and humidity? No one can be sure.

It mentions that they seem to have found that only a minority (c10%) of carriers seem to be resposible for most of the spreading, and I'd heard similar figures quoted from research from other countries. The interesting thing that throws up, as mentioned by this article, is that perhaps you can avoid unnecessary tracing by just testing the family of someone positive - as if they don't have it, it's probable the infected family member hasn't given it to anyone else either.

Which brings me to something else - I'm pretty sure early on the feeling seemed to be it was almost inevitable that if one family member caught it, everyone would, then I more recently saw that quote as about 17%, though checking again I see CDC reckons about 36% rate of infection in the household if symptomatic, 18% if asymptomatic. Transmission of SARS-COV-2 Infections in Households ....

Still altogether much less inevitable than I thought!
 
We’ve only gone and brewed up our own variant nearby in Bristol. Named E484K, looks like EEK !

Incorrect. The "Bristol" variant is the "Kent" variant (B.1.1.7) sporting the E484K mutation (aka VOC-202102/02). Bristol isn't unique - there are several 'homegrown' E484K varieties around the country, for example an older (B.1.177) flavoured one in the East Midlands, along with the "Liverpool" (A.23.1) Variant Under Investigation (VUI-202102/01).

Very approximate distribution of E484K mutations, both homegrown and imports as of a few days ago:
Et0Y4hLXYAAQ5vj

(Note: purely an indication of distribution at the county level and still a very small fraction of overall cases).
 
Last edited:
A good summary of evidence for the lab origin theory:

 
Viscount Ridley though

Sure, but I’m guessing it was mostly written by his co-author, a molecular biologist, and it’s fully referenced with inline citations and open to refutation should anyone disagree with any of it.

Would be nice if other figures in the scientific media felt able to pursue this without being accused of agreeing with Trump.:rolleyes:
 
There is also no doubt that Donald Trump’s botched intervention injected this important debate with lethal toxicity. Yet the US government in a sober statement from the State Department claimed it has “reason to believe” WIV researchers fell sick with Covid-like symptoms in autumn 2019 “before the first identified case of the outbreak”.
This was put up in the last days of the Trump administration and was removed as soon as Biden came in. I note for the article they've had to resort to linking to the US Embassy in Georgia to find a copy of it.

Although it looks like Biden is not totally following the WHO narrative.
 
From 9th Feb - evidence of SARSCoV-2 related coronaviruses in horseshoe bats in Thailand. Not as closely related as RaTG13 and with no ACE2 binding or furin cleavage site. SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies were also detected in bats of the same colony and in a pangolin at a wildlife checkpoint in Southern Thailand.
Among the many questions unanswered for the COVID-19 pandemic are the origin of SARS-CoV-2 and the potential role of intermediate animal host(s) in the early animal-to-human transmission. The discovery of RaTG13 bat coronavirus in China suggested a high probability of a bat origin. Here we report molecular and serological evidence of SARS-CoV-2 related coronaviruses (SC2r-CoVs) actively circulating in bats in Southeast Asia. Whole genome sequences were obtained from five independent bats (Rhinolophus acuminatus) in a Thai cave yielding a single isolate (named RacCS203) which is most related to the RmYN02 isolate found in Rhinolophus malayanus in Yunnan, China. SARS-CoV-2 neutralizing antibodies were also detected in bats of the same colony and in a pangolin at a wildlife checkpoint in Southern Thailand. Antisera raised against the receptor binding domain (RBD) of RmYN02 was able to cross-neutralize SARS-CoV-2 despite the fact that the RBD of RacCS203 or RmYN02 failed to bind ACE2. Although the origin of the virus remains unresolved, our study extended the geographic distribution of genetically diverse SC2r-CoVs from Japan and China to Thailand over a 4800-km range. Cross-border surveillance is urgently needed to find the immediate progenitor virus of SARS-CoV-2.

1613038352173.png

The researchers said sampling was limited, but they were confident that coronaviruses "with a high degree of genetic relatedness to Sars-CoV-2 are widely present in bats across many nations and regions in Asia".
The area includes Japan, China and Thailand, the researchers said in a report published in Nature Communications.
 
Back
Top Bottom