Welcome to Detroit Sports Forum!

By joining our community, you'll be able to connect with fellow fans that live and breathe Detroit sports just like you!

Get Started
  • If you are no longer able to access your account since our recent switch from vBulletin to XenForo, you may need to reset your password via email. If you no longer have access to the email attached to your account, please fill out our contact form and we will assist you ASAP. Thanks for your continued support of DSF.

Coronainsanity

There are several dots that need to be connected to say that's what happened. Where's the part where this study of bat diseases is gain of function research? Just collecting and testing bat samples isn't a smoking gun.

This, from the Newsweek article:

"A second phase of the project, beginning that year, [2019] included additional surveillance work but also gain-of-function research for the purpose of understanding how bat coronaviruses could mutate to attack humans. The project was run by EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit research group, under the direction of President Peter Daszak, an expert on disease ecology. NIH canceled the project just this past Friday, April 24th, Politico reported. Daszak did not immediately respond to Newsweek requests for comment. (NIH sub-contracted EcoHealth, has which has a "long-standing" relationship with the Wuhan lab. Link (WaPo also had a link that is behind a subscriber wall)

According to Richard Ebright, an infectious disease expert at Rutgers University, the project description refers to experiments that would enhance the ability of bat coronavirus to infect human cells and laboratory animals using techniques of genetic engineering. In the wake of the pandemic, that is a noteworthy detail.

The project proposal states: "We will use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential." (This is essentially what GoF research is.)

In layman's terms, "spillover potential" refers to the ability of a virus to jump from animals to humans, which requires that the virus be able to attach to receptors in the cells of humans. SARS-CoV-2, for instance, is adept at binding to the ACE2 receptor in human lungs and other organs.

Ebright, along with many other scientists, has been a vocal opponent of gain-of-function research because of the risk it presents of creating a pandemic through accidental release from a lab.

Here's another article that is worth the slog. Link

"Dr. Ebright cited a just-published pre-print scientific report by the Wuhan scientists who describe how they ?spiked proteins from bat SARS-related CoV (SARSr-CoV), among other coronaviruses, to bind to bat and human ACE2 receptors ? in other words, how efficiently they infect humans.? He points out that the paper states, ?All work with the infectious virus was performed under biosafety level 2 conditions? which is not suitable for such high risk experimentation. This level is suitable for work involving agents of only ?moderate potential hazard to personnel and the environment?.​

"Daszak, who has a multi-million dollar stake in Chinese bat research, dismissed the possibility outright: ?I have never heard anything suspicious from this lab. It?s a preposterous idea?.

I'm also noticing that at least two articles that are distancing themselves from people using it as evidence that Wuhan/NIH/EcoHealth manipulated/engineered the Coronavirus. I call cell-splitting.

Link

Link

NPR to the rescue. "Our Fine Doctors.
 
This, from the Newsweek article:
"A second phase of the project, beginning that year, [2019] included additional surveillance work but also gain-of-function research for the purpose of understanding how bat coronaviruses could mutate to attack humans.
That's after the pause was lifted.
 
That's after the pause was lifted.

1. Unsafe is unsafe whether allowed or not.

2. "?All work with the infectious virus was performed under biosafety level 2 conditions? ... this from a paper published by the Wuhan scientists that conducted the research, which is not suitable for such high risk experimentation."
 
1. Unsafe is unsafe whether allowed or not.

2. "?All work with the infectious virus was performed under biosafety level 2 conditions? ... this from a paper published by the Wuhan scientists that conducted the research, which is not suitable for such high risk experimentation."


I thought the claim was that specifically Fauci was circumventing the GoF pause.
 
I thought the claim was that specifically Fauci was circumventing the GoF pause.

The thread has mutated. Fauci did circumvent the GoF pause, and his NIH also funded this 2019 research that was GoF-focused.
 
awesome. unlike the 200,000+ Americans that have gotten it and died, both of them deserve it.
 
lol...Trump and his wife have the Rona!


He'll be fine....he probably ordered his team of doctors to inject him with sunlight and Lysol, and tripled his daily intake of Hydroxychloroquine.

He then commanded his doctor to to tell him he's cured.
 
As with anyone who contracts COVID 19, I hope that the President and First Lady are not affected too seriously and make a complete recovery.
 
Notre Dame's "Father Jenkins" tests positive; that school got a lot of bad press when they opened up, then had to confine students to their rooms with security guards
 
My 1-second knee jerk reaction was to be skeptical. He could claim he took hydroxy and beat it with his superior genetics or whatever. Is it Trump derangement syndrome if your first thought any time he says anything is to wonder if he's lying? I feel like he's earned that reaction.
 
I don't know much about him, but I'd vote for him before I voted for Don (who won't get my vote)

It gets more complex if president Trump is re-elected and then cannot serve prior to the electrical college vote. The vice-president does not succeed to the presidency. Another nominee is chosen and that is who the EC can vote for. Some states mandate that electors choose the candidate that their state elected; some do not.

If the president-elect dies or is incapable of service between the ECV (Dec 14, 2020) and the the ECV vote count on Jan 6, then congress decides whether the votes for the PE are valid or not.

If not valid, and no living candidate has the majority of the total votes, then the house elects the president. There’s more to it, but, given this year, nothing will surprise me.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top