COVID-19 Outbreak (Update: More than 2.9M cases and 132,313 deaths in US) (29 Viewers)

Previous Next
Status
Not open for further replies.
Posted this in the Mary Jane thread but since this is a new study on Covid risks for smokers thought I post it here for the non 420 smokers.
www.ucsf.edu

Smoking Nearly Doubles the Rate of COVID-19 Progression

Smoking significantly worsens COVID-19, according to a new analysis by UCSF of the association between smoking and progression of the infectious disease.
www.ucsf.edu www.ucsf.edu
 
DaveXA said:
So...essentially, there's absolutely no evidence it came from an intermediary host at the wet markets...interesting to say the least.
Click to expand...

Well basically yes. With the caveat about the quality of the Wuhan market zoological samples, from 585 samples, only four were found to contain virus that could be analyzed - but their phylogeny was most similar to that already in humans at that point.
 
superchuck500 said:
Well basically yes. With the caveat about the quality of the Wuhan market zoological samples, from 585 samples, only four were found to contain virus that could be analyzed - but their phylogeny was most similar to that already in humans at that point.
Click to expand...

Well, I do wonder about the reliability of the data, since from what I remember reading a while back was that China was limiting access and what researchers can do in an around Wuhan. I don't know if that's changed since then, but I was thinking those limitations might impact how the researchers are going about their work. Just a thought anyway.
 
James Spader said:
Thought you guys might find this interesting:

au.news.yahoo.com

Outrage as controversial book reveals hidden details of virus outbreak in Wuhan

A Chinese author has been labelled a traitor over her diary from within Wuhan which is due to be published in English this month.
au.news.yahoo.com au.news.yahoo.com

and another:

www.scmp.com

Masks work in lowering Covid-19 transmission rates: Hong Kong researchers

Hamsters placed in adjoining cages with infected subjects were infected at a 66.7 per cent rate; the introduction of a barrier saw the percentage drop to 16.7.
www.scmp.com www.scmp.com
Click to expand...
Fortunately, the hamsters protected by the barriers are unlikely to protest. Good articles, though.
 
superchuck500 said:
A new paper from a North American team (CA and US) draws some concerning conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 was already "highly adapted" to human transmission by the time the outbreak began in Wuhan. That adaption is (surprisingly to the team) remarkably like "late phase SARS(1)", and when analyzed against environmental samples (including zoological) from the Wuhan market, no compelling matches were found.

:covri:





p. 9



p. 9




p.12
Click to expand...
So will any of this help fuel the "it's a bioweapon made a lab" crowd?
 
0rion said:
I don't see that ever happening....if anything it will make China cover up even more.
Click to expand...

A unified world demand would be hard to resist. Australia is leading the effort right now. I think that the US should strongly support it but avoid casting it as a US/China thing. It needs to be a human-race thing.

The Australian move at the World Health Assembly (a body of the WHO) already has 122 nations on signature. I think it needs to be elevated to the full UN, with sanctions for non-participation.


www.theguardian.com

Australia hails global support for independent coronavirus investigation

Draft resolution to the World Health Assembly calling for impartial evaluation of responses to the pandemic does not mention China, but is backed by 122 countries
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
superchuck500 said:
A new paper from a North American team (CA and US) draws some concerning conclusions: SARS-CoV-2 was already "highly adapted" to human transmission by the time the outbreak began in Wuhan. That adaption is (surprisingly to the team) remarkably like "late phase SARS(1)", and when analyzed against environmental samples (including zoological) from the Wuhan market, no compelling matches were found.

:covri:





p. 9



p. 9




p.12
Click to expand...

So... it probably wasn't the market? So.. where did it come from? Looks like they don't know and want to look at a whole wider area and go back to pull older samples...
 
bonnjer said:
So will any of this help fuel the "it's a bioweapon made a lab" crowd?
Click to expand...

Probably. Just because it's natural doesn't mean it isn't a bioweapon.

I think an intelligent person should let the virology tell us about this virus. Circumstantial evidence and geopolitical suspicion isn't enough to support a belief that the virus was "engineered in the Wuhan lab" when the virologists (worldwide) aren't seeing any evidence of human engineering the virus's genome that has now been fully analyzed. We can be fairly confident that it wasn't engineered in an artificial sense.

But we have always said that isn't the end of the story. A natural virus still could have been isolated and studied in the lab (or in some other lab) and from there it either "escaped" (by jumping to humans in the lab or from some other accidental release) or was "unleashed" with sinister motive. But we still have to let the virology tell us the answers.

This is only a pre-print paper from one study, but what it concludes is that:

1. The human adaptation shown, basically right away, by the virus is surprising. Certainly much more stable than SARS was (it took SARS many months to get to that level of stability).
2. This means that either it happened naturally and we have to consider that zoonotic viruses may exist in animal reservoirs in a state that is already highly adapted to human transmission . . . this is contrary to the current state of thinking about zoonotic viruses that infect humans
- OR -
It means that this virus underwent the period of adaptation while being exposed to humans but prior to the outbreak in 2019 . . . with a possible scenario being laboratory work.
 
Last edited:
Saint_Ward said:
So... it probably wasn't the market? So.. where did it come from? Looks like they don't know and want to look at a whole wider area and go back to pull older samples...
Click to expand...

There was already significant evidence that the market outbreak was secondary - an early survey of initial patients in Wuhan (published in Lancet) found that less than half of them had exposure to the market, even through contact tracing. The first patient that western un-classified scientific analysis knows about had no market contact.

So this phylogenic analysis supports that history. But again, the authors caveat the "market" presentation with a note about the limited nature of the samples.
 
Saint_Ward said:
So... it probably wasn't the market? So.. where did it come from? Looks like they don't know and want to look at a whole wider area and go back to pull older samples...
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't know if it was from the lab, but it's looking more and more like the Chinese explanation was fabricated. At this point, who knows?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Previous Next

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 27 (members: 0, guests: 27)

    Share this page

     

    Twitter

    Back
    Top Bottom