Comments by "MRA" (@yassassin6425) on "Debunking COVID-19 Conspiracies (Coronavirus Update #2)" video.

And meanwhile it couldn't possibly be anything whatsoever to do with that f**k off 50,000 m2 wet market and second largest seafood market in China that you chose to ignore - located right next to it, half a mile from the station and directly in the middle of one of the city's largest residential areas? A place in which stalls are practically on top of each other, the aisles are narrow and close proximity, livestock brought in from the surrounding province were kept alongside wild animals and dead produce, and slaughtered and their carcasses skinned. The consilience of the scientific community (virology) is that it resulted from a natural spillover, but it could equally be the result of research-related activity, such as a lab leak or even a fieldwork incident - we simply don't know. That is also accepted as a possibility However, there is no equivocal evidence either way, just largely historical precedent and circumstantial evidence. And what do you mean "the more information that becomes available the more likely it seems" that it originated in the Wuhan Institute of Virology? On the contrary, there have been a multitude of studies which indicate a natural origin for Sars-CoV-2 and this data/literature has steadily grown in volume since the outbreak. Only this week a published study examines samples taken from raccoon dogs, bamboo rats, palm civets: (these are just some of the animals whose DNA has been found in swabs taken from the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, China,) The swabs also tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, which causes the disease. The analysis, provides evidence supporting the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 spilled over from animals to humans at the market. Conversely, there is not one paper offering evidence that a lab leak was responsible to have passed peer review because the is no substantive data to support it. Additionally, although the DOE have backed the recent FBI intelligence assessment indicating a lab leak, they have a 'low confidence level. According to guidance from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence: “A low confidence level generally indicates that the information used in the analysis is scant, questionable, fragmented, or that solid analytical conclusions cannot be inferred from the information, or that the IC has significant concerns or problems with the information sources.” Again, this does not mean that the possibility of a lab leak should be ruled out. In my view, it's a very strong possibility that we won't ever determine the source. Pinpointing the site of a spillover is tricky and becomes increasingly challenging with time. Also, matching the genetics of those initially infected by Alpha with sequences derived from animals to isolate the host is a very difficult task. In terms of the lab leak possibility, as relationships between China and the West continue to deteriorate, the situation continues to be so politicised, and whilst Beijing refuses to cooperate the necessary transparency to allow an independent forensic investigation into research activities at WIV, we have nothing more than circumstantial supposition.
3
@tawnyard4649 You are simply regurgitating sensationalist reports from right wing US media whilst the allegations concerning Fauci's involvement stemmed from Republican Senator Rand Paul. It is beyond reasonable doubt that China was and is conducting experiments into 'gain of function'. Dr Fauci, as well as being an adviser to President Biden, is the director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the US government's National Institutes of Health (NIH). This body did indeed allocate grant money to Eco-Health Alliance, an organisation that collaborated with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Half a million dollars as I recall. However the research in question has been demonstrated not fall under 'Gain of Function' (even though there can be slightly differing interpretations as to what constitutes this). What it does unequivocally show is that it was a molecular level investigation of newly-discovered bat viruses and their spike proteins. When you read the papers though, none of the viruses which were the subject of the 2015 study are remotely related to SARS-CoV-2, which caused the pandemic in 2020.
1
@w.o.jackson8432 "The PRRA furin cleavage site could not have spontaneously mutated from any known wild coronavirus." I find it odd, that whilst correctly calling out charlatans such as Dr. John Campbell, you are repeating the above misconception, which was actually widely disseminated through right wing U.S. mainstream media and subsequently perpetuated through online conspiracy theory. From my recollection, the main protagonist of this theory is Dr. Alina Chan - but the science does not support it. Although she is correct that the furin cleavage site is not found in the closest known relatives of SARS-CoV-2, this should not be unexpected because the lineage culminating in this virus is poorly sampled and the closest bat viruses have divergent spike proteins due to recombination. The suggestion that the Furin cleavage site is "a unique feature" is utterly disingenuous. Furin cleavage sites are scattered across the coronavirus family and present in their spike proteins. Simple evolutionary mechanisms routinely explain the evolution of an out-of-frame insertion of a furin cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2.
1
@willybilly5691 No they weren't. That is completely false.
1