Sunday, November 01, 2020

I recall there was discussion about November 2019 as the discovery of SARS-COV-2.

2020 March 17
By Kristian G. Anderson, Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin, Edward C. Holmes and Robert F. Garry

...SARS-CoV-2 is the seventh coronavirus known to infect humans; (click here) SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 can cause severe disease, whereas HKU1, NL63, OC43 and 229E are associated with mild symptoms6. Here we review what can be deduced about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 from comparative analysis of genomic data. We offer a perspective on the notable features of the SARS-CoV-2 genome and discuss scenarios by which they could have arisen. Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus....

The timeline of SARS-CoV-2 officially dates December 2019 the beginning of global awareness.

31 Dec 2019

Wuhan Municipal Health Commission, China, (click here) reported a cluster of cases of pneumonia in Wuhan, Hubei Province. A novel coronavirus was eventually identified.

1 January 2020

WHO had set up the IMST (Incident Management Support Team) across the three levels of the organization: headquarters, regional headquarters and country level, putting the organization on an emergency footing for dealing with the outbreak.

4  January 2020

WHO reported on social media that there was a cluster of pneumonia cases – with no deaths – in Wuhan, Hubei province.

5 January 2020

WHO published our first Disease Outbreak News on the new virus. This is a flagship technical publication to the scientific and public health community as well as global media. It contained a risk assessment and advice, and reported on what China had told the organization about the status of patients and the public health response on the cluster of pneumonia cases in Wuhan....

What is obvious to me is that WHO wanted to date this pneumonia in 2019. It's name is COVID-19. The 19 places the beginning of the virus in 2019. While the official timeline hasn't been updated, the fact December 31, 2019 appears as first discovery is very telling.

What is more the truth is the intense tracing back occurring after the virus was officially genetically declared "novel." It takes at least three separate reporting of the virus to determine it is "novel." If the pneumonia was moving wildly that genetic fingerprint would be less important so much as symptomatology that was deadly.

...It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of a related SARS-CoV-like coronavirus. As noted above, the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is optimized for binding to human ACE2 with an efficient solution different from those previously predicted. Furthermore, if genetic manipulation had been performed, one of the several reverse-genetic systems available for betacoronaviruses would probably have been used. However, the genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone. Instead, we propose two scenarios that can plausibly explain the origin of SARS-CoV-2: (i) natural selection in an animal host before zoonotic transfer; and (ii) natural selection in humans following zoonotic transfer. We also discuss whether selection during passage could have given rise to SARS-CoV-2....

26 March 2020