Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Coronavirus

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
The report indicates that there might be more data that hasn't been made public by the CCDC yet, that would allow further analysis.

Direct link: Genetic evidence of susceptible wildlife in SARS-CoV-2 positive samples at the Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market, Wuhan: Analysis and interpretation of data released by the Chinese Center for Disease Control

(It also addresses those "ethical" concerns.)
That answers some of my questions. It appears the swabs demonstrating several susceptible animal mtDNA mixed with Covid RNA were collected in January and February of 2020. The data were uploaded June 2, 2022 but embargoed for 8 months. Not sure how that works. Then discovered by the team March 4, 2023. Analyzed with permission and on March 10 communicated that to the Gao preprint author. On March 11 the data were taken down. The team was then informed they had violated the terms of service (they deny it). So much drama.

1679496211231.png


So at best this means that the virus and the susceptible animals probably coexisted in January 2020. There is evidence, of course, however, that the viral horse was already out of the barn in fall 2019.

Interesting stuff.
 
That answers some of my questions. It appears the swabs demonstrating several susceptible animal mtDNA mixed with Covid RNA were collected in January and February of 2020. The data were uploaded June 2, 2022 but embargoed for 8 months. Not sure how that works. Then discovered by the team March 4, 2023. Analyzed with permission and on March 10 communicated that to the Gao preprint author. On March 11 the data were taken down. The team was then informed they had violated the terms of service (they deny it). So much drama.

View attachment 920120

Also they contacted Gao's team "multiple times".

EDIT: Although the sequence data was uploaded in June 2022 according to metadata, "they evidently had not been released at that time".

So at best this means that the virus and the susceptible animals probably coexisted in January 2020. There is evidence, of course, however, that the viral horse was already out of the barn in fall 2019.

Interesting stuff.

As far as I can tell from superficial reading, the market was closed January 1st, 2020. If so, then the samples, even though they were collected afterwards, were apparently from 2019.

"Our analysis of metagenomic sequence data provides genomic evidence of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 susceptible live animals at the Huanan market, Wuhan, before it was closed on 1 January 2020."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: DrGriz
China approves first home-grown mRNA Covid vaccine

"China has approved its first home-produced mRNA Covid vaccine, months after ending strict pandemic rules.
...
China's labs have been trying to create an mRNA vaccine for years - the country refused to clear foreign-made ones for widespread domestic use."

Wonder where they got the tech for this. mRNA vaccine "sauce" is under patent. It's why Moderna has Pfizer in a lawsuit for IP theft. mRNA strands are easy to make, the hard part are the chemicals that tell the cells to open their membranes and uptake the mRNA strands.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: GSP and DrGriz
As far as I can tell from superficial reading, the market was closed January 1st, 2020. If so, then the samples, even though they were collected afterwards, were apparently from 2019.

"Our analysis of metagenomic sequence data provides genomic evidence of the presence of SARS-CoV-2 susceptible live animals at the Huanan market, Wuhan, before it was closed on 1 January 2020."
Yes. How long DNA remains identifiable on a surface depends on a number of things. Temp, UV (sun exposure), moisture, etc. It could be only a few days, or months. Or years, potentially. That may be why only mtDNA was found. It is more stable than nDNA.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: jerry33 and Norbert
This article in Science has more information around the new report and the GISAID data, and also writes about the report itself.
(One of the co-authors of the report wrote that this article "gets the details right here where other reporters have floundered".)

It is definitely well written. It will be interesting to see how CCDC and the Gao team follow up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Norbert
So, apart from the recent low/medium confidence from DoE and FBI, and the proximity of both lab and market to early Wuhan cases, does anyone of you know what speaks in favor of the lab leak theory?
The only thing I'm aware of is the lab move, discussed earlier, which makes the leak theory more believable. Doesn't mean that it happened though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bkp_duke
Yes, I think the extraordinarily coincidental location, the lab move, and the extent to which the Chinese stood on their heads to prevent any investigation of the possibility of a lab leak at all means it can't be ignored. While I think a wild source is most likely, I also think the Chinese protested too much. It's hard to come up with an explanation for why they did that unless something was less than sparkling clean.

 
  • Like
Reactions: bkp_duke
Yes, I think the extraordinarily coincidental location, the lab move, and the extent to which the Chinese stood on their heads to prevent any investigation of the possibility of a lab leak at all means it can't be ignored. While I think a wild source is most likely, I also think the Chinese protested too much. It's hard to come up with an explanation for why they did that unless something was less than sparkling clean.


Thanks. Well, I think those are definitely good reasons for an investigation. However as far as I am concerned, not really more than that. For example, as far as I can tell, non-democratic states have a tendency to oppose outside investigations in general, and even more so accusations of major mistakes. I don't have difficulties coming up with explanations.

We'll have to see what FBI and DoE have, now that they are apparently ordered to release that information.
 
Thanks. Well, I think those are definitely good reasons for an investigation. However as far as I am concerned, not really more than that. For example, as far as I can tell, non-democratic states have a tendency to oppose outside investigations in general, and even more so accusations of major mistakes. I don't have difficulties coming up with explanations.

We'll have to see what FBI and DoE have, now that they are apparently ordered to release that information.
Well, you are absolutely right, but they did allow the meat market investigation. So there's some inconsistency there.

As the BMJ article I quoted said, all it takes for a lab leak is a technician collecting samples in a bat cave coming back infected. Not impossible to imagine, especially since we know people can have the virus and not be aware or sick.

We may learn something from FBI and DoE. As far as I know, they haven't yet, so they may be redacting parts of it. We may just generate more questions.

I have a feeling that it would be nearly impossible to go back now and do a proper lab leak investigation, unless the information is hidden somewhere. Not completely impossible.
 
https://www.usnews.com/news/health-...ion-cuts-risk-of-long-covid-19-nearly-in-half

"The research, which reviewed 41 studies involving more than 860,000 people, found that vaccination reduced the risk of long COVID by nearly half. Other factors like older age, increased body mass index, smoking and being female increased the risk of long COVID. Health issues like asthma, diabetes, coronary heart disease, anxiety and depression were also associated with a higher risk of the condition.
Patients who were hospitalized during their initial illness were also more likely to experience long COVID
...
Another study published Thursday in JAMA Internal Medicine found that the use of Paxlovid within five days of testing positive for the coronavirus reduced the risk of long COVID among people with at least one risk factor for severe disease. The findings held true regardless of vaccination status and history of prior infection."
 
Best it has been in a long time and deaths below/at/near the lowest point of the pandemic. Have to keep an eye on the CDC excess mortality pages previously detailed here though.

It may be time soon for the Biden administration to restart a Zero COVID policy. 😂

I think this thing may be over. Not a lot of seasonality going on here. Maybe one of these XBB ones will take off. We’ll see. Positivity flattening, a bad sign.

Still waiting for my booster booster. Need to go for my sixth (not fifth!) jab. Annoyingly looks like I will be forced to wait until fall.

Booster uptake is awful. Unfortunate - probably works really well but no one knows (also unfortunate!).

People who have survived so far who I know are falling one by one. (Diseased not dead.)

75E9380D-6686-466D-89BB-D7209651ACC8.jpeg
 
Best it has been in a long time and deaths below/at/near the lowest point of the pandemic. Have to keep an eye on the CDC excess mortality pages previously detailed here though.

It may be time soon for the Biden administration to restart a Zero COVID policy. 😂

I think this thing may be over. Not a lot of seasonality going on here. Maybe one of these XBB ones will take off. We’ll see. Positivity flattening, a bad sign.

Still waiting for my booster booster. Need to go for my sixth (not fifth!) jab. Annoyingly looks like I will be forced to wait until fall.

Booster uptake is awful. Unfortunate - probably works really well but no one knows (also unfortunate!).

People who have survived so far who I know are falling one by one. (Diseased not dead.)

View attachment 925521
I did receive my sixth booster, and no Covid yet.
 
Cool! Curious...was your 6th dose your first updated (original+Omicron) booster? I just read on CDC’s website that if you’ve had the updated one you don’t need another booster currently.
From what the pharmacist said, If your last booster was bi-variant, then it's not recommended to get another one. I assume that's because there will be no new T-cells created with an additional dose. The pharmacist checked and the fifth dose was mono-variant so no issue with the sixth dose. (Took him about 20 minutes on the phone to check, even though I obtained the last three from the same pharmacy.)
 
Cool! Curious...was your 6th dose your first updated (original+Omicron) booster? I just read on CDC’s website that if you’ve had the updated one you don’t need another booster currently.

From what the pharmacist said, If your last booster was bi-variant, then it's not recommended to get another one. I assume that's because there will be no new T-cells created with an additional dose. The pharmacist checked and the fifth dose was mono-variant so no issue with the sixth dose. (Took him about 20 minutes on the phone to check, even though I obtained the last three from the same pharmacy.)

Search for bivalent in the news in the past month.

They all say a couple of groups would benefit.
The Food and Drug Administration has decided to allow some people to get a second booster with one of the COVID-19 vaccines that have been updated to target the omicron variant, NPR has learned.

The second shots will be limited to those age 65 and older who got their first shot of the bivalent vaccine made by Moderna or Pfizer-BioNTech at least four months ago, and to those with weakened immune systems who got one of those shots at least two months ago, according to a federal official who was not authorized to speak publicly.


Age 50 suggested by some [ Dr. Peter Hotez, co-director of the Texas Children's Hospital Center for Vaccine Development and dean of the National School of Tropical Medicine at Baylor College of Medicine.]


The main concern is that the protection people got from their last shot has been fading, not just against getting infected but also possibly against getting seriously ill. So Hotez says people as young as 50 should be able to get a second bivalent booster if they want one.

"It's better than nothing," Hotez wrote in an email to NPR about the FDA's decision. "I think 65 could be lowered to 50 or 55 unless they have specific data that only supports that age cutoff."

He added: "Historically, when you look at the monovalent vaccines, the protection starts to wane after four or five months. We don't know if that's the case with bivalent boosters. But you don't want to find out the hard way."