Did the Coronavirus Originate in the US?

[Vince]

In February of 2020, the Japanese Asahi news report (print and TV) claimed the coronavirus originated in the US, not in China, and that some (or many) of the 14,000 American deaths attributed to influenza may have in fact have resulted from the coronavirus. (5)


a top virologist and pharmacologist who performed a long and detailed search for the source of the virus explains how they are related to each other, how one must have come before another, and how one type derived from another. He explains this is merely elementary science and nothing to do with geopolitical issues, describing how, just as with numbers in order, 3 must always follow 2.


One of his main points is that the type infecting Taiwan exists only in Australia and the US and, since Taiwan was not infected by Australians, the infection in Taiwan could have come only from the US.
The basic logic is that the geographical location with the greatest diversity of virus strains must be the original source because a single strain cannot emerge from nothing. He demonstrated that only the US has all the five known strains of the virus (while Wuhan and most of China have only one, as do Taiwan and South Korea, Thailand and Vietnam, Singapore, and England, Belgium and Germany), constituting a thesis that the haplotypes in other nations may have originated in the US.
The Virologist further stated that the US has recently had more than 200 “pulmonary fibrosis” cases that resulted in death due to patients’ inability to breathe, but whose conditions and symptoms could not be explained by pulmonary fibrosis. He said he wrote articles informing the US health authorities to consider seriously those deaths as resulting from the coronavirus, but they responded by blaming the deaths on e-cigarettes, then silenced further discussion. ...
The Taiwanese doctor then stated the virus outbreak began earlier than assumed, saying, “We must look to September of 2019”.

China’s Coronavirus: Did It Originate in the US? - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com

 

[fifty]

This seems off but could be plausible. My doubt stems from the fact that the USA currently only has 2,000 reported cases but the governor of Ohio (and the director of his medial board) estimate they (Ohio) have 100,000 cases. At the same time, China is reporting <10 cases per day now (yeah right). Lots of misinformation as usual.

"The TV Asahi network presented scientific documentation for their claims, raising the issue that no one would know the cause of death because the US either neglected to test or failed to release the results."

 

[Cataceous]

Fact check: Coronavirus originated in China, not elsewhere, researchers and studies say

An article circulating on social media claims the coronavirus did not originate in China. We examine the research and rate this claim false.

www.yahoo.com

The consensus among experts researching the virus places the beginning of its spread at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, China.​

 

[MarkLA]

Here's some posts from someone much smarter than me. He makes a good case that the virus had an accelerated evolution in lab ferrets (same ACE2 receptor as humans) which provided about 260 years of evolution from known relative Coronavirusis to Covid19. This method had already been used to evolve H1N1.

That to jump between species, there are always many dead-ends as the virus fails to optimize itself. That we'd expect to see those and immunity to them in people, but we don't. We'd expect to find an intermediate animal host but none has been found. Many other items that don't add up in the official narrative. There's much more in the links and better articulated than my little snippet.

Debunking Nature Article saying it's not from a lab

Origins of Wuhan Virus

Finally, not in those articles, but comment by me: There must be 100,000 meat markets in China. The virus emerged at one 20 miles from the only Virus bio research center in China. Who are you kidding.

 

[fifty]

We don’t know anything other than this won’t end soon.

 

[Cataceous]

Fact check: Coronavirus not man-made or engineered but its origin remains unclear

Suggestions that coronavirus was manmade or engineered for use in Chinese bioweapons are false. Beyond that, conclusions can't be drawn on its origin.

www.yahoo.com

​

...​

The Scripps Research Institute released a study that rejects the notion that the virus was man-made. Researchers concluded that if the virus were engineered, its genome sequence would more closely resemble earlier and more serious versions of the coronavirus.​

​

"If someone were seeking to engineer a new coronavirus as a pathogen, they would have constructed it from the backbone of a virus known to cause illness,” the report said. “But the scientists found that the SARS-CoV-2 backbone differed substantially from those of already known coronaviruses and mostly resembled related viruses found in bats and pangolins."​

​

A statement in the Lancet, a medical journal, written by public health officials who have been following the progression of the virus also asserted that animals are the likely source: “Scientists from multiple countries have published and analysed genomes of the causative agent, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), and they overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.”​

​

The statement referenced multiple academic and government sources that supported the Lancet article’s conclusion. These sources include the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory; Nature; U.S. National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine; the New England Journal of Medicine; the Chinese Medical Journal; and the medical journal Infection, Genetics and Evolution.​

...​

 

[Cataceous]

The coronavirus did not escape from a lab: Here's how we know

As the novel coronavirus causing COVID-19 spreads across the globe, with cases surpassing 284,000 worldwide today (March 20), misinformation is spreading almost as fast.

www.foxnews.com

 

[fifty]

We get the real truth about 20 years late. Sometimes.

 

[Cataceous]

We get the real truth about 20 years late. Sometimes.

You think all the disparate experts are conspiring to mislead us? Waiting for your evidence.

 

[fifty]

Which experts? The Japanese, Taiwanese, Chinese, Americans, or other?

 

[Cataceous]

Which experts? The Japanese, Taiwanese, Chinese, Americans, or other?

Well start with the ones publishing the recent origins paper. Three different countries and several institutions and they're all in on it:

Kristian G. Andersen, Department of Immunology and Microbiology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA

Andrew Rambaut, Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

W. Ian Lipkin, Center for Infection and Immunity, Mailman School of Public Health of Columbia University, New York, NY, USA

Edward C. Holmes, Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases and Biosecurity, School of Life and Environmental Sciences and School of Medical Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

Robert F. Garry, Tulane University, School of Medicine, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, New Orleans, LA, USA

 

[Guided_by_Voices]

I have no expertise in this but for any scientific question I always ask "Is a particular answer forbidden or highly damaging to an influencial group?" If so, then no answer can be trusted. In this case, it appears that there is large incentive for this to be blamed on something other than humans and the people doing so avoid parts of the logic that could implicate humans; a huge red flag. Also, note that just because more strains exist in a particular place doesn't mean the virus originated there. That said, I have not heard an explanation for why the strain profile appears to be the opposite of what one would expect if it truly jumped out of a bat. Finally note that much of the world may have immunity if fairly benign strains have been circulating for a while.

 

[Rock H. Johnson]

Thats 3 of the 5-Eyes.......Legit......lol

 

[Cataceous]

I have no expertise in this ...

Which in a perfect world would be enough to stop you from encouraging these puerile conspiracy theories. "I don't know enough to properly critique your work so instead I'll impugn your character while hiding in anonymity." Where's your evidence that an "influential group" is corrupting scientific research all over the world, or would even be capable of such? Do you know many scientists? I wouldn't think so if you believe their overall integrity is so low.

 

[Guided_by_Voices]

I do have a lot of knowledge of health science in general and overall the quality is, to put it politely, very low. Look at any observational study. To my point, any conclusion which (to point out one of many examples) suggests LDL cholesterol is not an issue is well-know to be a "forbidden" conclusion and a scientist who goes there will lose their funding. Go ask a scientist that actually relies on mainstream funding about this. Go talk to scientists who had the option to work with climate "science". I did and they said "in climate science, only one answer is allowed and that's not science, so we avoid it." This is also easily verifiable in many other ways. Notice that I didn't take a position (on the origin of the virus) and you seem to think I did. What I said was that no scientist who depends on mainstream funding is likely to risk their career on this issue, which, for this forum is very relevant for other health issues when some answers are not allowed. What do you think would happen if this were found to have been originated by humans? Who benefits and who is threatened?

 

[Cataceous]

I do have a lot of knowledge of health science in general and overall the quality is, to put it politely, very low. Look at any observational study. To my point, any conclusion which (to point out one of many examples) suggests LDL cholesterol is not an issue is well-know to be a "forbidden" conclusion and a scientist who goes there will lose their funding. Go ask a scientist that actually relies on mainstream funding about this. Go talk to scientists who had the option to work with climate "science". I did and they said "in climate science, only one answer is allowed and that's not science, so we avoid it." This is also easily verifiable in many other ways. Notice that I didn't take a position (on the origin of the virus) and you seem to think I did. What I said was that no scientist who depends on mainstream funding is likely to risk their career on this issue, which, for this forum is very relevant for other health issues when some answers are not allowed. What do you think would happen if this were found to have been originated by humans? Who benefits and who is threatened?

This is mainly a broad evasion of the specific issue. There's a peer-reviewed article presenting evidence that this virus does not appear to have been manipulated. Instead of refuting it with evidence you want to vaguely argue that mysterious entities may be unhappy with certain publication results and may have the power to quash them. The mere possibility of such entities means that "no answer can be trusted." You should know that in publishing his work, no good scientist is going to give an answer and say "Trust me." Instead, he lays out all the information and says "We think this means X and we welcome attempts by others to reproduce this work and either provide further support for our conclusions or refute them."

Regarding politicization, à la climate change, are you suggesting it's already occurred, such that the most published experts in this field will look the other way if there is evidence of human involvement in this virus? Or is it suddenly taking place now, with all these scientists being threatened, yet quite dubiously not one has rebelled and made the pressure public?

In the end these are pretty outlandish suggestions, able to survive only because it's difficult to prove a negative. Someone says you robbed a bank in the last 10 years. Prove you didn't.

 

[Guided_by_Voices]

Time may tell...Fortunately this origin issue doesn't, as far as I know, require individuals to make near-term decisions. Those interested in the general topic of scientific reliability could start with:

Why most published research finding are false (a bit of an overstatement IMO, but still with good issues to be aware of):

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

Published research findings are sometimes refuted by subsequent evidence, says Ioannidis, with ensuing confusion and disappointment.

journals.plos.org

The book Doctoring Data

Search for "the Crisis of reproducibility in Science"


We are all faced with the need to make decisions in areas where we are not "experts" so having guidelines to assess reliability of information is IME one of the most essential life skills one can have.

 

[pqteb1r]

Fact check: Coronavirus originated in China, not elsewhere, researchers and studies say

An article circulating on social media claims the coronavirus did not originate in China. We examine the research and rate this claim false.

www.yahoo.com

The consensus among experts researching the virus places the beginning of its spread at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, China.​

The consensus among experts placed the beginning of the spread of HIV to a "convention of gays in Haiti". Then they moved on to green monkeys. Now we have a monkey in the WH and a shortage of fly paper due to hoarders trying to protect themselves from jumping viruses.

 

[Cataceous]

The consensus among experts placed the beginning of the spread of HIV to a "convention of gays in Haiti". ...

Source?

AIDS was first clinically observed in 1981 in the United States. The initial cases were a cluster of injection drug users and *** men with no known cause of impaired immunity who showed symptoms of Pneumocystis pneumonia ...[1]​

AIDS in Haitians was first recognized in 34 Haitians living in the United States in 1982, ...[2]​

A Haitian origin to western hemisphere spread is still the consensus:

...The current consensus is that HIV was introduced to Haiti by an unknown individual or individuals who contracted it while working in the Democratic Republic of the Congo circa 1966. A mini-epidemic followed, and circa 1969, yet another unknown individual took HIV from Haiti to the United States. The vast majority of cases of AIDS outside sub-Saharan Africa can be traced back to that single patient.[3]​

And if you want to argue politics, go find another forum.

 

[pqteb1r]

Source?

AIDS was first clinically observed in 1981 in the United States. The initial cases were a cluster of injection drug users and *** men with no known cause of impaired immunity who showed symptoms of Pneumocystis pneumonia ...[1]​

AIDS in Haitians was first recognized in 34 Haitians living in the United States in 1982, ...[2]​

A Haitian origin to western hemisphere spread is still the consensus:

...The current consensus is that HIV was introduced to Haiti by an unknown individual or individuals who contracted it while working in the Democratic Republic of the Congo circa 1966. A mini-epidemic followed, and circa 1969, yet another unknown individual took HIV from Haiti to the United States. The vast majority of cases of AIDS outside sub-Saharan Africa can be traced back to that single patient.[3]​

And if you want to argue politics, go find another forum.

Had you been around when GRID emerged then you would not be asking today about the alleged convention of gays in Haiti or the green monkeys or any of the other extreme propaganda spread by so called experts. You might even recognize the original name given to HIV AIDS. And because there absolutely was an organized campaign of disinformation you would not now be impugning me to silence. As an original observer I could not be more aware of the historical revisionism. Whatever you read today about current consensus is b.s, fabricated, a lie.

Your citation of alleged epidemiology does not fit the facts. Rather than a single epicenter in the U.S. there were at least three all centered in what was known as *** ghettos, inner cities prior to urban renewal. An original pt 0 arriving in the U.S. from Haiti defies the facts and insults common sense. Why weren't women and heterosexuals equally affected?

More damning than any of the bogus genetic tracing on ancient degraded samples is that it fails to explain who was responsible for the daily barrage of disinformation designed to drive fear and resentment in the U.S. public, to make every heterosexual in America feel at risk. The daily dissemination of manipulated statistics that concealed source data was from Africa. The cover-up that failed to disclose that it was preventable by use of condoms.

Must I list for you all the impossible things that either never occurred or have conveniently disappeared from history?

What do your reference sources have to say about the bizarre public needle sticks going on in *** communities just prior to the emergence of GRID? I was there. I witnessed. I will never forget.

Or the mysterious disappearance of control blood samples form the *** hepatitis vaccine tests?

Or why strangers claiming to be from the CDC descended upon a terrified community with trays of bulk unwrapped needles to perform mass testing rather than tests being made available to local doctors for private testing?

Or why the original cohort was made to sit through a psyops film prior to the test where graphics and bogus science 'proved' that a positive result meant 100% would be dead within 9 to 12 months when no such science existed in 1985?

As an educated person it took far more than just theses events to to jar me to the difficult realization that things were not as they seemed to be with my government.

Anyone from that era recognizes the jargon. Given the history of HIV AIDS one would have to be quite naive to believe a single statement from government on the origins of the current pandemic.

Dwelling on the origin of SARS CoV-2 is not helpful at the moment but at some point humanity needs to come to terms with the true nature of the society it permits to exist.