[conspire] (forw) Re: (forw) Re: [skeptic] The origin of COVID: Did people or nature open Pandora???s box at Wuhan?

[Rick Moen]

Quoting Les Faby:

> It may have been a natural occurring coronavirus sent to Wuhan for research.
> Perhaps It then escaped.

Possible -- but this seems unlikely because cases turned up (somewhere)
in the countryside in Hubei Province, as early as November 2019.  Dr.
James Duehr covers this as point "4.4) The best evidence we have points
to SARS-CoV-2 originating outside Wuhan" on page 18 of his FAQ.

That's not near WIV, and (it's said to have been) outside the city of
Wuhan.  It was, by the way, recorded on Nov. 17, 2019.
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/society/article/3074991/coronavirus-chinas-first-confirmed-covid-19-case-traced-back



> Probably better to research this in an isolated lab, not in a crowded area.

First, it's not _in_ the urban area.  Here's a picture:
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/report-says-cellphone-data-suggests-october-shutdown-wuhan-lab-experts-n1202716


About BSL-4 (biosafety level 4) labs generally:

Wuhan Institute of Virology has had a BSL-4 virology lab -- albeit only
since 2016.  WIV technically was founded in 1956.

There are a grand total of 46 BSL-4 facilities in the entire world
(according to one online list I found, so there may be and almost
certainly are omissions).  I'm not sure all of these study viruses, but
probably many do:


1.  Virology Laboratory of the Queensland Department of Health,
    Coopers Plains, Queensland, Aus.

2.  University of Queensland - Sir Albert Sakzewski Virus Research
    Centre, Herston, Queensland, Aus.

3.  Australian Animal Health Laboratory, Geelong, Victoria, Aus.

4.  National High Security Laboratory, North Melbourne, Victoria, Aus.

5.  Republican Research and Practical Center for Epidemiology and
    Microbiology, Minsk, Belarus.

6.  National Microbiology Laboratory, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

7.  Wuhan Institute of Virology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences,
    Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.

8.  Biological Defense Center, Těchonín, Pardubice, Czech Republic,

9.  Laboratoire P4 Jean Mérieux, Lyon, Rhône-Alpes, France.

10. Centre International de Recherches Médicales de Franceville, Gabon.

11. Robert Koch Institute, Berlin, Germany.

12. Bernhard Nocht Institute for Tropical Medicine, Hamburg, Germany.

13. Friedrich Loeffler Institute on the Isle of Riems, Germany.  
    (Specialises in virology.)

14. Philipps University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany.

15. High Security Animal Disease Laboratory, Bhopal, India.

16. Centre for Cellular and Molecular Biology, Hyderabad, India.

17. All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India.

18. Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedale Luigi Sacco, Milan, Lombardy, Italy.

19. Istituto Nazionale Malattie Infettive, Rome, Italy.

20. Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment
    (RIVM), Bilthoven, Netherlands.

21. Cantacuzino Microbiological Research Institute, Bucharest, Romania.

22. "Dr. Carol Davila" Central Military Hospital, Bucharest, Romania.

23. State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology, Koltsovo,
    Novosibirsk Oblast, Russia.

24. National Institute for Communicable Diseases, Johannesburg, SA.

25. Swedish Institute for Communicable Disease Control, Solna, Sweden.

26. Institute of Virology and Immunoprophylaxis, Mittelhäusern,
    Switzerland.

27. High Containment Laboratory DDPS, Spiez, Switzerland.

28. Kwen-yang Laboratory Center of Disease Control, Taiwan.

29. Preventive Medical Institute of ROC Ministry of National Defense,
    Taiwan.

30. Health Protection Agency's Centre for Infections, Colindale, UK

31. National Institute for Medical Research, London, UK.

32. Institute for Animal Health, Pirbright, UK.

33. Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, Porton Down, UK.

34. Health Protection Agency, Porton Down, UK.

35. CDC, Atlanta, GA, USA.

36. Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA, USA.

37. National Bio and Agro-Defense Facility, Manhattan, KS, USA.

38. Integrated Research Facility, Fort Detrick, MD, USA.

39. National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center, Fort
    Detrick, MD, USA.

40. USAMRIID, Fort Detrick, MD, USA.

41. National Emerging Infectious Diseases Laboratory, Boston, MA, USA.

42. NIAID Rocky Mountain Laboratories, Hamilton, MT, USA.

43. Galveston National Laboratory, National Biocontainment Facility,
    Galveston, TX, USA.

44. Shope Laboratory, Galveston, TX, USA.

45. Texas Biomedical Research Institute, San Antonio, TX, USA.

46. Division of Consolidated Laboratory Services, Richmond, VA, USA.


So, I can't say I've looked at landscape pictures of all 46, but I've
looked at a few, and in general they're pretty isolated physically from
surrounding urban areas.  Like, see the pictures of CDC HQ in Atlanta,
with all of that lawn space around it.  It's not exactly in the middle
of Peachtree Plaza.

Anyway, if you want to have top virologists working at a lab, you
probably cannot have it 50 miles from civilisation, mostly.



Dr. Duehr says, if we're going to be worrying about BSL-4 labs, we
should worry about the ones that have been going underfunded and
unsupplied in the former Soviet Union -- like one in Kazahkstan he says
the US government occasionally funds so it doesn't turn to developing
bioweapons just to keep the lights on -- and new ones being constructed
in South American and Africa.  At least, the WIV facility is thoroughly
known and respected, including by Western scientists, and is co-managed
by China and France.

> Have researchers go through 2 week isolation before leaving. It is strange
> the government won't let the WHO see their lab records.

That is correct.  They have not been willing to share yet with outsiders
WIV's raw data, safety logs, and lab records.  Also, quoting a _WSJ_
story:  

"Members of the WHO-led team said Chinese counterparts had identified 92
potential Covid-19 cases among some 76,000 people who fell sick between
October and early December 2019, but turned down requests to share raw
data on the larger group.  That data would help the WHO-led team
understand why China sought to only test those 92 people for antibodies.

Team members also said they asked for access to a Wuhan blood bank to
test samples from before December 2019 for antibodies.  Chinese
authorities declined at first, citing privacy concerns, then agreed, but
have yet to provide that access, team members say."


> 3 researchers were hospitalized with symptoms matching COVID right
> before the outbreak. They were initially trying to hide the outbreak,
> arresting a doctor reporting it.

What you're talking about:  The US intelligence community issued a
secret (and still unreleased) report some while back, that was then
referred to yesterday in a just-released Jan. 15, 2021 [1] State
Department fact sheet, that three WIV researchers were ill enough in
November 2019 to be sent for hospital care.  That is provocative, but
notably included _no_ information on what they were ill from.

It's certainly provocative enough to warrant further scrutiny.  I note,
however, that WHO researchers, on their prior visit earlier this year to
WIV, tested all the staff there for COVID-19 antibodies and they tested
negative.  The PRC could not have simply swappped out a bunch of
infected staff, or the world's virologist community would have noticed,
because, y'know, people in this field know each other across national
boundaries.

Also, three staffers in the Northern Hemisphere getting ill in November
could have just been the flu.  Or something else entirely.


[1] I note without comment that this was, thus, the prior Presidential
administration's State Department speaking.