Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I am far more inclined to believe the lab theory than the rogue bat theory. That is my opinion and based on no evidence, whatsoever. I am still allowed to have one :-)
“None of us know what’s going on,” said Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.see more in video [url] https://stfly.me/COEd. [/url] after seeing ad you got an informative video about covid -19
The whole "Wuhan lab" thing is kinda hiding the ball. It has connotations of being "Lab-made". There is absolutely no evidence of that. This is a bat coronavirus. We just don't know how a bat virus got to humans. Viruses don't typically jump from bat to human; they need an intermediary. With SARS, the intermediary was a civet (looks like a cross between a cat and a ferret). With COVID, the guess was that the intermediary was a pangolin, but we might not know for years.
Maybe an infected bat broke out of the lab? I dunno, it's possible, but it doesn't explain the jump to humans. And there's no evidence that the virus was engineered.
Another driveby comment from someone not knowing what they're talking about.
It's not a bat coronavirus. It's up to 80% similar to other coronaviruses found in bats, but that 20% difference is significant.
Scientists actually infected bats with [Sars-Cov-2] and found it didn't spread easily between bats at all. It spread more easily in humans than bats. That strongly suggests it was not evolutionary adapted for bat populations.
The Wuhan virology lab was literally running tests on bat coronaviruses by recombining them with other viruses then infecting human tissue - the batch that was most infective would be selected, and then they'd repeat and rinse this many times. They were doing this since 2005.
One of the odd things about our Sars-Cov-2 virus was it had many distinct protein markers from other viruses. I even read one protein was unique to HIV up until this point. It was always a frankenstein virus.
Another driveby comment from someone not knowing what they're talking about.
It's not a bat coronavirus. It's up to 80% similar to other coronaviruses found in bats, but that 20% difference is significant.
Scientists actually infected bats with [Sars-Cov-2] and found it didn't spread easily between bats at all. It spread more easily in humans than bats. That strongly suggests it was not evolutionary adapted for bat populations.
The Wuhan virology lab was literally running tests on bat coronaviruses by recombining them with other viruses then infecting human tissue - the batch that was most infective would be selected, and then they'd repeat and rinse this many times. They were doing this since 2005.
One of the odd things about our Sars-Cov-2 virus was it had many distinct protein markers from other viruses. I even read one protein was unique to HIV up until this point. It was always a frankenstein virus.
Thread necromancy aside, this is conspiracy nonsense. Knowing what we know now, "lab-leak" hypothesis might be more likely, because, as I noted before, we haven't found an intermediary animal yet. That makes it more likely (maybe not most likely, but more likely) that someone was infected while studying bat coronaviruses in a lab.
EDIT: Looking at your posts, you seem to subscribe to every single conspiracy theory all at once. It was engineered in a lab, but it's less deadly than the flu, but the vaccines don't work. Goodness.
Last edited by midnight_thunder; 06-04-2021 at 07:50 AM..
Reason: Added something
Thread necromancy aside, this is conspiracy nonsense. Knowing what we know now, "lab-leak" hypothesis might be more likely, because, as I noted before, we haven't found an intermediary animal yet. That makes it more likely (maybe not most likely, but more likely) that someone was infected while studying bat coronaviruses in a lab.
EDIT: Looking at your posts, you seem to subscribe to every single conspiracy theory all at once. It was engineered in a lab, but it's less deadly than the flu, but the vaccines don't work. Goodness.
1) It's a known fact Wuhan lab was engineering bat coronaviruses since 2005. The only thing needs to be proven is if one of their engineered viruses was the one that leaked.
2)Yes, for certain age groups, it's less deadly than the flu. This is not a 'conspiracy theory'. In fact, even if it was incorrect, it's not a conspiracy theory. You really need to look up words before using them.
It either came from a market or the big ass compound that says in Chinese characters “We make viruses”. Which seems more likely?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
