Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Conspiracy Theories & Claims

michael59

Justified & Incandecent
Joined
Aug 10, 2017
Messages
1,851
For the last few years, I have heard discussions here of exactly this - that this virus, and specifically the vaccines for it, are damaging to our future health. And that we will not know the full extent of all this damage until years into the future.
The extremists are saying that we are being weakened and vulnerable to all sorts of health problems - heart attacks, cancer, etc.
And some people with health professionals in their family are insisting this is true.
I don't know what to think, except that power is evil.

I think that it's wonderful that you are thinking about it and not just following blindly, believing that those in charge always have our best interest at heart. Power does corrupt.

We have rights as free citizens and we should be able to decide what we do with our own bodies without being judged/bullied by the people around us. IMHO, mandates are BS. :)
 

michael59

Justified & Incandecent
Joined
Aug 10, 2017
Messages
1,851
Wonder if any studies have been done on that 'Spanish Flu' of 1918, which killed millions, and supposedly lasted for 2 years and had 4 separate waves before it was finished, as to lasting effects?
And there have been so many others, such as the 'bird flu' and I recall the 'swine flu' as well. Why was this one so dangerous?
If it is a man-made disease, such as this one supposedly is, does that make a difference?

Wikipedia has a whole write-up on the 'Spanish Flu', with a whole variety of information:

"The 1918 influenza pandemic, commonly known by the misnomer Spanish flu or as the Great Influenza epidemic, was an exceptionally deadly global influenza pandemic caused by the H1N1 influenza A virus. The earliest documented case was March 1918 in Kansas, United States, with further cases recorded in France, Germany and the United Kingdom in April. Two years later, nearly a third of the global population, or an estimated 500 million people, had been infected in four successive waves. Estimates of deaths range from 17 million to 50 million, and possibly as high as 100 million, making it the second deadliest pandemic in human history after the Black Death bubonic plague of 1346–1353.

The pandemic broke out near the end of World War I, when wartime censors suppressed bad news in the belligerent countries to maintain morale, but newspapers freely reported the outbreak in neutral Spain, creating a false impression of Spain as the epicenter and leading to the "Spanish flu" misnomer.[6] Limited historical epidemiological data make the pandemic's geographic origin indeterminate, with competing hypotheses on the initial spread.[2]

The 1918 Spanish flu was the first of three flu pandemics caused by H1N1 influenza A virus; the most recent one was the 2009 swine flu pandemic.[14][15] The 1977 Russian flu was also caused by H1N1 virus.[14][16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu

I doubt very much that I will still be around when all this is written up in Wikipedia. The fact that it is man made tells me all I need to know.
 

Ronnie Jersey

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 22, 2021
Messages
2,095
I think that it's wonderful that you are thinking about it and not just following blindly, believing that those in charge always have our best interest at heart. Power does corrupt.

We have rights as free citizens and we should be able to decide what we do with our own bodies without being judged/bullied by the people around us. IMHO, mandates are BS. :)
Who wants to be one of the sheep.
And as time goes along, it seems we have less and less rights, I refused to take a second booster shot after hearing the effects on others.
And is it definitely a man made virus? I believe also that it is, now they seem to be back-tracking on that.
We should be told the truth.
 

michael59

Justified & Incandecent
Joined
Aug 10, 2017
Messages
1,851
Who wants to be one of the sheep.
And as time goes along, it seems we have less and less rights, I refused to take a second booster shot after hearing the effects on others.
And is it definitely a man made virus? I believe also that it is, now they seem to be back-tracking on that.
We should be told the truth.
I probably should have said, IMO it had been tweaked before it escaped. Wording is everything when you're on the internet. :)
 

JahaRa

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
504
Location
Albuquerque, NM,U.S.A.
For the last few years, I have heard discussions here of exactly this - that this virus, and specifically the vaccines for it, are damaging to our future health. And that we will not know the full extent of all this damage until years into the future.
The extremists are saying that we are being weakened and vulnerable to all sorts of health problems - heart attacks, cancer, etc.
And some people with health professionals in their family are insisting this is true.
I don't know what to think, except that power is evil.
Considering that we have already weakened our health with our poor diets (fast food, processed food, grocery store produce, soda pop, high fructose corn syryp and fake butter in everything) there is no way anyone can convince me that the vaccine or the virus was manufactured to make us have even more health problems or kill a specific group of us. Conspiracies do exist, but this is one that is just made up.
 

JahaRa

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
504
Location
Albuquerque, NM,U.S.A.
Wonder if any studies have been done on that 'Spanish Flu' of 1918, which killed millions, and supposedly lasted for 2 years and had 4 separate waves before it was finished, as to lasting effects?
And there have been so many others, such as the 'bird flu' and I recall the 'swine flu' as well. Why was this one so dangerous?
If it is a man-made disease, such as this one supposedly is, does that make a difference?
You didn't mention the Hong Kong flu, that one was as bad as the 1918 spanish flu and it happened before there was a flu vaccine. A lot of people refuse the flu vaccine to this day because they almost died or someone they knew almost died from that vaccine, or from their immune system being so depleted that the vaccine triggered a severe reaction. Over the years the kinks have been worked out and those people could probably take a flu vaccine. My mother had the Hong Kong flu (along with everyone in our family) and 2 years later when the flu vaccine was available a doctor told her to get it. She was one of those that was so sick the doctor said you should never have a flu vaccine. 46 years later we still have people afraid of a new vaccine, and this one it makes sense as it was created with a completely different method. Not a new method, just new for vaccines. If people don't understand something they choose one of two attitudes, 1. unquestioning compliance; 2. fear and a lot of noise. Then there are those fear bunnies who scream to unvaxinated people accusing them of killing others due to not being vaccinated. It is a crazy world we live in.

I never heard of the 1977 Russian flu. I thought the 1967-1968 Hong Kong flu was the worst we had seen until 2009.
 

JahaRa

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
504
Location
Albuquerque, NM,U.S.A.
I doubt very much that I will still be around when all this is written up in Wikipedia. The fact that it is man made tells me all I need to know.
Where did you find that "fact"? I still have not seen any reputable evidence that the covid 19 virus was man made.
 

Endlessly Amazed

Endlessly, you know, amazed
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Messages
1,110
Location
Arizona, USA
Wonder if any studies have been done on that 'Spanish Flu' of 1918, which killed millions, and supposedly lasted for 2 years and had 4 separate waves before it was finished, as to lasting effects?
And there have been so many others, such as the 'bird flu' and I recall the 'swine flu' as well. Why was this one so dangerous?
If it is a man-made disease, such as this one supposedly is, does that make a difference?

Wikipedia has a whole write-up on the 'Spanish Flu', with a whole variety of information:

"The 1918 influenza pandemic, commonly known by the misnomer Spanish flu or as the Great Influenza epidemic, was an exceptionally deadly global influenza pandemic caused by the H1N1 influenza A virus. The earliest documented case was March 1918 in Kansas, United States, with further cases recorded in France, Germany and the United Kingdom in April. Two years later, nearly a third of the global population, or an estimated 500 million people, had been infected in four successive waves. Estimates of deaths range from 17 million to 50 million, and possibly as high as 100 million, making it the second deadliest pandemic in human history after the Black Death bubonic plague of 1346–1353.

The pandemic broke out near the end of World War I, when wartime censors suppressed bad news in the belligerent countries to maintain morale, but newspapers freely reported the outbreak in neutral Spain, creating a false impression of Spain as the epicenter and leading to the "Spanish flu" misnomer.[6] Limited historical epidemiological data make the pandemic's geographic origin indeterminate, with competing hypotheses on the initial spread.[2]

The 1918 Spanish flu was the first of three flu pandemics caused by H1N1 influenza A virus; the most recent one was the 2009 swine flu pandemic.[14][15] The 1977 Russian flu was also caused by H1N1 virus.[14][16]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu
@Ronnie Jersey:

You asked: Wonder if any studies have been done on that 'Spanish Flu' of 1918, which killed millions, and supposedly lasted for 2 years and had 4 separate waves before it was finished, as to lasting effects?
Answer: yes of course. Probably hundreds if not thousands of studies in different countries, looking at different aspects of the disease and the different public responses to it. Probably in current Ph.D. theses comparing to Covid. If you have access to a university's research library, you can do the research. If you don't have access, and are very interested in the topic, you can pay to gain access. You are in New Jersey, so I would suggest Rutgers University.

You asked: Why was this one so dangerous?
Answer: because it killed so many people, and damaged others. Do you think it was not dangerous?

You asked: If it is a man-made disease, such as this one supposedly is, does that make a difference?
Answer: why do you assume it is a man-made disease? Can you share any evidence for this from a reputable source? I have no great leanings towards man-made vs natural, but a moderate leaning toward it being natural. I acknowledge the limitations of my understanding, as I am not a doctor, a public health professional, or a virologist. The chain of logic and evidence which Michael59 advocates here is based on accepting premises which I do not accept. Do you? Do you even know what those premises are?

You seem to be complaining about public health responses to a novel global viral infection. With a little conspiracy thrown in (regarding the man-made aspect of Covid).

So, questions for you: how much would you be willing to have your taxes increased for the rest of your life to avoid another covid situation? No fair wriggling out of it by stating that your taxes should not have to increase to pay for better public health response to a novel global viral infection... If not your taxes, whose taxes? somebody else's? rich people's? The Chinese? pharmaceutical companies? Asians? First world nations? etc.

Edit: here is some quick research I did on the death rate of covid, for another covid thread:
https://forums.forteana.org/index.p...its-spread-per-se.66968/page-184#post-2168987
 

kesavaross

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Messages
555
Location
Brighton, UK
You didn't mention the Hong Kong flu, that one was as bad as the 1918 spanish flu and it happened before there was a flu vaccine. A lot of people refuse the flu vaccine to this day because they almost died or someone they knew almost died from that vaccine, or from their immune system being so depleted that the vaccine triggered a severe reaction. Over the years the kinks have been worked out and those people could probably take a flu vaccine. My mother had the Hong Kong flu (along with everyone in our family) and 2 years later when the flu vaccine was available a doctor told her to get it. She was one of those that was so sick the doctor said you should never have a flu vaccine. 46 years later we still have people afraid of a new vaccine, and this one it makes sense as it was created with a completely different method. Not a new method, just new for vaccines. If people don't understand something they choose one of two attitudes, 1. unquestioning compliance; 2. fear and a lot of noise. Then there are those fear bunnies who scream to unvaxinated people accusing them of killing others due to not being vaccinated. It is a crazy world we live in.

I never heard of the 1977 Russian flu. I thought the 1967-1968 Hong Kong flu was the worst we had seen until 2009.
As far as I understand it and I'm willing to be corrected.

Hong Kong flu was caused by a coronavirus. The flu vaccine developed did not offer protection against coronaviruses just mainly rhinoviruses, etc.

The first vaccine that claims to protect against a coronavirus is the sars covid 2 vaccine and even then it's supposed protection against just one particular virus.
 

kesavaross

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Oct 18, 2015
Messages
555
Location
Brighton, UK
My own take on man made versus wild virus.

The outbreak began in a 'wet market' next to a military bio lab that was doing research into coronaviruses. This must be one of the most incredible coincidences ever and as far as I'm concerned, it's not a coincident.

The alleged source of the virus was a bats in a cave 200 miles away. The wet market is said to have sold those bats, dead of course, which is how bird to human transmission took place. Except for one detail, the wet market didn't sell bats and never has.
 

JahaRa

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
504
Location
Albuquerque, NM,U.S.A.
As far as I understand it and I'm willing to be corrected.

Hong Kong flu was caused by a coronavirus. The flu vaccine developed did not offer protection against coronaviruses just mainly rhinoviruses, etc.

The first vaccine that claims to protect against a coronavirus is the sars covid 2 vaccine and even then it's supposed protection against just one particular virus.
No, the hong kong was influenza. I had it and it was why they developed the flu shot in the early 70's.
 

hunck

Antediluvian
Joined
Jul 13, 2011
Messages
7,993
Location
Hobbs End
Where did you find that "fact"? I still have not seen any reputable evidence that the covid 19 virus was man made.
Nor have I. Here’s a report on the National Center for Biotechnology Information site - a US government funded body:

SARS-COV-2 as an artificial creation: scientific arguments and counterarguments

It’s mostly above my head frankly but here’s the conclusion:

In conclusion, all these specific features observed in SARS-COV-2 helps scientists to rule out the idea that this pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus is the result of a man-made action that could be either engineered in the laboratory or further created as a bioweapon out of conspiracy. Recent discoveries revealed evidence of the presence of the virus around the world before it emerged in Asia. There is growing evidence of its true origin as a global organism that was waiting for favorable conditions to emerge instead of originating in China. Recent testing of sewage in Barcelona had suggested that the virus may have been present in the Spanish city in March 2019, many months before China identified the pathogen in the city of Wuhan in December 2019. Based on the results available, it is most probably that this is a natural-born virus that emerged from an animal host, most likely a bat, without any direct pieces of evidence about its intermediate host. Nevertheless, researchers are yet to find a definitive answer to which animal serves as an intermediate host for this virus and disease.
 

michael59

Justified & Incandecent
Joined
Aug 10, 2017
Messages
1,851
@Ronnie Jersey:

You asked: Wonder if any studies have been done on that 'Spanish Flu' of 1918, which killed millions, and supposedly lasted for 2 years and had 4 separate waves before it was finished, as to lasting effects?
Answer: yes of course. Probably hundreds if not thousands of studies in different countries, looking at different aspects of the disease and the different public responses to it. Probably in current Ph.D. theses comparing to Covid. If you have access to a university's research library, you can do the research. If you don't have access, and are very interested in the topic, you can pay to gain access. You are in New Jersey, so I would suggest Rutgers University.

You asked: Why was this one so dangerous?
Answer: because it killed so many people, and damaged others. Do you think it was not dangerous?

You asked: If it is a man-made disease, such as this one supposedly is, does that make a difference?
Answer: why do you assume it is a man-made disease? Can you share any evidence for this from a reputable source? I have no great leanings towards man-made vs natural, but a moderate leaning toward it being natural. I acknowledge the limitations of my understanding, as I am not a doctor, a public health professional, or a virologist. The chain of logic and evidence which Michael59 advocates here is based on accepting premises which I do not accept. Do you? Do you even know what those premises are?

You seem to be complaining about public health responses to a novel global viral infection. With a little conspiracy thrown in (regarding the man-made aspect of Covid).

So, questions for you: how much would you be willing to have your taxes increased for the rest of your life to avoid another covid situation? No fair wriggling out of it by stating that your taxes should not have to increase to pay for better public health response to a novel global viral infection... If not your taxes, whose taxes? somebody else's? rich people's? The Chinese? pharmaceutical companies? Asians? First world nations? etc.

Edit: here is some quick research I did on the death rate of covid, for another covid thread:
https://forums.forteana.org/index.p...its-spread-per-se.66968/page-184#post-2168987
You ask, "Can you share any evidence for this from a reputable source?" regarding whether or not the virus is man made. Therein lies the rub....what constitutes a reputable source in your mind? For example this report scares the crap out of me but all it really does is waffle back and forth. If you go by what info is given, the odds are about 50-50 between scientists and doctors and virologists... https://abcnews.go.com/US/nature-based-man-made-unraveling-debate-origins-covid/story?id=78268577

Can you put my mind at rest and prove that it isn't man made. Because that's what they do...

Why Scientists Tweak Lab Viruses to Make Them More Contagious​

Some “gain of function” studies explore how a dangerous pathogen might cross species barriers to start an outbreak. They are not without controversy

In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, the authors of the editorial wrote, the source of a pathogen—whether from nature or a lab—does not change how the world should prepare to respond to it. But gain-of-function experiments should be governed by transparency in planning the research, a “rededication” to biosafety and a strong surveillance program to capture breaches.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...ak-lab-viruses-to-make-them-more-contagious1/
 

EnolaGaia

I knew the job was dangerous when I took it ...
Staff member
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
29,578
Location
Out of Bounds
Hong Kong flu was caused by a coronavirus. ...

Nope ... The Hong Kong Flu (of the 1968 / 1969 pandemic) was an RNA virus (H3N2 strain of the influenza A virus). It is a member of an entirely different family (indeed, an entirely different phylum) of viruses than coronaviruss. Like many viruses, the H3N2 influenza A virus has a round(-ish) form with projecting "spikes", but its spikes are different from those associated with the coronaviruses.
 

stu neville

Commissioner.
Staff member
Joined
Mar 9, 2002
Messages
13,386
So, questions for you: how much would you be willing to have your taxes increased for the rest of your life to avoid another covid situation? No fair wriggling out of it by stating that your taxes should not have to increase to pay for better public health response to a novel global viral infection... If not your taxes, whose taxes? somebody else's? rich people's? The Chinese? pharmaceutical companies? Asians? First world nations? etc
The most straightforward, neutrally philanthropic answer would be everybody. It was - still is, at time of writing - a global issue that impacted pretty much everyone. The blue-sky thinking reply would therefore be that which benefits us all should be funded by us all.

In theory.

In practice of course, a number of us now live in societies largely predicated on finding someone else to blame and making them pay for it. There's an ever increasing obsession with assigning responsibility, even when objectively the incident or situation in question was inevitable (as the pandemic was). The inquests and investigations will rumble on, and maybe one day we'll know the facts, but in the meantime we still have a pandemic with which to deal, and according to the medicos I personally know we've learnt more about disease control and response from this one than any before. We're better equipped for the next one, because there will be a next one, and the scientific community (and much of the political one) are keen to not repeat mistakes.

Whatever the cause, the effect is the same, and that's what impacts all of us.
 
Last edited:

Endlessly Amazed

Endlessly, you know, amazed
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Messages
1,110
Location
Arizona, USA
The most straightforward, neutrally philanthropic answer would be everybody. It was - still is, at time of writing - a global issue that impacted pretty much everyone. The blue-sky thinking reply would therefore be that which benefits us all should be funded by us all.

In theory.

In practice of course, a number of us now live in societies largely predicated on finding someone else to blame and making them pay for it. There's an ever increasing obsession with assigning responsibility, even when objectively the incident or situation in question was inevitable (as the pandemic was). The inquests and investigations will rumble on, and maybe one day we'll know the facts, but in the meantime we still have a pandemic with which to deal, and according to the medicos I personally know we've learnt more about disease control and response from this one than any before. We're better equipped for the next one, because there will be a next one, and the scientific community (and much of the political one) are keen to not repeat mistakes.

Whatever the cause, the effect is the same, and that's what impacts all of us.

Yes, I agree. As a retired US Federal employee who participated in planning for large disasters, including pandemics, I viewed the whole covid pandemic, economic consequences, and medical response with great interest.

I am the only person I know who thinks that taxes should be increased as much as sustainable (not enough to greatly slow down the economic engines) to improve conditions for the public. Many members of that very same public do not want their taxes increased, but want the benefits of some sort of better conditions. That this does not happen is easily blamed on the government, rich people, industry leaders (pharmaceuticals, basic manufacturing, residential real estate, etc.), the media, etc. etc.

About twenty years ago, I spent some time reading up on the national responses of Belgium, Netherlands, and Denmark to improve flood control in the era after WWII. These amazing actions were taken, and largely supported by the citizens, even though this effectively lowered their standard of living and their GDP for over a decade. For many reasons, this type of action for the public good does not happen in the US.
 

Lb8535

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Sep 2, 2015
Messages
2,612
You didn't mention the Hong Kong flu, that one was as bad as the 1918 spanish flu and it happened before there was a flu vaccine. A lot of people refuse the flu vaccine to this day because they almost died or someone they knew almost died from that vaccine, or from their immune system being so depleted that the vaccine triggered a severe reaction. Over the years the kinks have been worked out and those people could probably take a flu vaccine. My mother had the Hong Kong flu (along with everyone in our family) and 2 years later when the flu vaccine was available a doctor told her to get it. She was one of those that was so sick the doctor said you should never have a flu vaccine. 46 years later we still have people afraid of a new vaccine, and this one it makes sense as it was created with a completely different method. Not a new method, just new for vaccines. If people don't understand something they choose one of two attitudes, 1. unquestioning compliance; 2. fear and a lot of noise. Then there are those fear bunnies who scream to unvaxinated people accusing them of killing others due to not being vaccinated. It is a crazy world we live in.

I never heard of the 1977 Russian flu. I thought the 1967-1968 Hong Kong flu was the worst we had seen until 2009.
And there's option 3: careful consideration of the risks and making as informed a decision as possible.
 

marhawkman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
1,088
Where did you find that "fact"? I still have not seen any reputable evidence that the covid 19 virus was man made.
Like Michael59 said... how do you define "reputable"?

Independent research has sequenced the virus and come to the conclusion that it has features never seen in any natural virus.

"But that study wasn't CDC approved!" well.. if you think the CDC is part of the problem then trusting them to verify their own work is stupid. It'd be like having wolves act as shepherds.

Anyways... did you read the "BLAST your way to the truth" paper? Quite enlightening.
https://arkmedic.substack.com/p/how-to-blast-your-way-to-the-truth
 

Endlessly Amazed

Endlessly, you know, amazed
Joined
Aug 6, 2020
Messages
1,110
Location
Arizona, USA
Like Michael59 said... how do you define "reputable"?

Independent research has sequenced the virus and come to the conclusion that it has features never seen in any natural virus.

"But that study wasn't CDC approved!" well.. if you think the CDC is part of the problem then trusting them to verify their own work is stupid. It'd be like having wolves act as shepherds.

Anyways... did you read the "BLAST your way to the truth" paper? Quite enlightening.
https://arkmedic.substack.com/p/how-to-blast-your-way-to-the-truth

Yes, this BLAST was quite "enlightening." Until you - or someone else - anyone else - can explain why these research problems are trivial, please quit posting this as valid, proven, real, the truth, etc.

https://forums.forteana.org/index.p...cy-theories-claims.66849/page-90#post-2166319
 

marhawkman

Justified & Ancient
Joined
Nov 2, 2019
Messages
1,088
Yes, this BLAST was quite "enlightening." Until you - or someone else - anyone else - can explain why these research problems are trivial, please quit posting this as valid, proven, real, the truth, etc.

https://forums.forteana.org/index.p...cy-theories-claims.66849/page-90#post-2166319
You want a list by item? fine.

"Dr. An Kahn Syed" is a pseudonym he used when publishing the blog. I don't see why you'd expect to see that name outside the blog (or his now defunct twitter).

"7 coauthors"? What article are you talking about?

And the rest is about the "peer review" process.... being applied to a blog post. Nothing about the actual research at all.

Like I said before.... in a scenario where the "establishment" is suspect... expecting the establishment to verify truth is.... naive.
 

kamalktk

Antediluvian
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
6,638
I spent several hours looking into Syed’s article and especially the link he gives to the peer-reviewed journal he gives. The short answer is that this is false and misleading. All that he claims about covid is likely wrong. It is possible that he is right, but he has not proved it.

I give more detailed discussion points below, but these may not make much sense to someone who is not versed in academic research and publications.

In the substack.com self-published BLAST article, Syed gave a link to the article he suggested he himself had co-authored. However, the article has seven coauthors, but he is not one of them.

Journal: frontiers (sic) in Virology
. This seems to be an electronic journal, which is fine and does not constitute a legitimate concern about integrity of the scientific review process nor of the backgrounds of the reviewers. However, the journal does not have any printed publications in a traditional sense, and all the listed members of the editorial board are unconventional. By unconventional, I mean that: they are young, many do not come from traditional institutions, and most do not come from reputable research institutions. The journal does not give any curricula vita for them, and there are no links to any vitae. WTF.

Again, not an automatic disqualifier, but a cause for concern. In some academic institutions in the US, publishing in this type of low-level journal would not count towards publication history submitted in a bid to obtain tenure. It is not respectable.

How long has this journal been around? The earliest publication I could find was June 4, 2021. In other words, less than one year. This is a newborn journal. It may be I am misinterpreting this, but the journal has the unconventional sequencing system of date of publication, and not the more common – and useful – system of volume, number, and date. Only 13 articles published to date.

Is the journal organized with recognized, respectable editors and reviewers, especially as it is a new journal? Short answer: no.

A single “specialty chief editor,” David Schwartz, with no current institutional affiliations. It seems as if he is a retired professor from “Department of Pathology, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta University, Augusta, GA, United States.” This by itself is fine, but unconventional.

A single editor for the article, Xin Yin, with the listed institutional affiliation of “Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences.” This listing of a single editor, by itself, is unconventional but not a cause for concern. However, coupled with a single reviewer, see below, this is a warning sign of poor quality.

For the article itself: a single reviewer, Jitao Chang, from a veterinary research institute. No other reviewer is listed. Normally, a group of reviewers is listed. A single reviewer is not qualified to evaluate any article submitted for publication, because he or she cannot possibly be expert in all areas covered by the article and there is no mechanism to guard against an individual’s bias. This is a definite and irrecoverable flaw.

The history of the review process, with reviewers, dates, issues, and resolutions, is not given. Perhaps there wasn’t one. This is a definite and irrecoverable flaw. Normally, with a respected journal, a history is included so the readers can see the history of problems flagged by the reviewers, and the authors’ responses, leading to both a better article and a better understanding of the conceptual organization of the authors and the article.

In the bottom of the article, in the comments section, are some very pertinent comments by specialists which indicate that the article is not robust on several fronts: 1. unclear citation, 2. misuse of the basic BLAST algorithm, 3. misuse of probability set-up, 4. mistakes in independent and dependent variables categorizations, 5. lack of alternative explanations, etc.
Also, multiple people of chinese name and origin, working for the Chinese government via research organizations, say it couldnt possibly be of Chinese origin, which is the chinese government position. I'd be skeptical from that alone.
 

JahaRa

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Aug 23, 2021
Messages
504
Location
Albuquerque, NM,U.S.A.
Also, multiple people of chinese name and origin, working for the Chinese government via research organizations, say it couldnt possibly be of Chinese origin, which is the chinese government position. I'd be skeptical from that alone.
Skeptical that it is man made and from China or skeptical that the Chinese didn't create it? I would be more suspicious of the U.S. than China the way our people who should have known better handled the whole thing. Lying about when it hit the states to begin with, then pussyfooting around until March to declare it was a pandemic. No, that to me is suspicious but I have not seen any proof that it was a man made virus escaping from a lab or purposely let loose.
 

kamalktk

Antediluvian
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
6,638
Skeptical that it is man made and from China or skeptical that the Chinese didn't create it? I would be more suspicious of the U.S. than China the way our people who should have known better handled the whole thing. Lying about when it hit the states to begin with, then pussyfooting around until March to declare it was a pandemic. No, that to me is suspicious but I have not seen any proof that it was a man made virus escaping from a lab or purposely let loose.
Its a denial of authority, but devotion to an alternate one (China).
 

Ascalon

Abominable Snowman
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
901
Via BBC News:

Covid origin studies say evidence points to market​

Researchers say there is "compelling evidence" that Wuhan's Huanan seafood and wildlife market was at the centre of the Covid-19 outbreak.
In two peer-reviewed studies published on Tuesday they re-examined scientific information from the initial outbreak of Covid-19 in the Chinese city.
One of the studies shows that the earliest known cases were clustered around that market.
The other uses genetic information to track the timing of the outbreak.
It suggests there were two variants introduced into humans in November or early December 2019.
Together, the researchers say this evidence paints a picture that Sars-Cov-2 was present in live mammals that were sold at Huanan market in late 2019. They say it was transmitted into people who were working or shopping there in two separate "spillover events", where a human contracted the virus from an animal.

One of the researchers involved, virologist Prof David Robertson from the University of Glasgow, told BBC News that he hoped the studies would "correct the false record that the virus came from a lab".

Full story.
 

blessmycottonsocks

Antediluvian
Joined
Dec 22, 2014
Messages
7,693
Location
Wessex and Mercia
Via BBC News:

Covid origin studies say evidence points to market​

Researchers say there is "compelling evidence" that Wuhan's Huanan seafood and wildlife market was at the centre of the Covid-19 outbreak.
In two peer-reviewed studies published on Tuesday they re-examined scientific information from the initial outbreak of Covid-19 in the Chinese city.
One of the studies shows that the earliest known cases were clustered around that market.
The other uses genetic information to track the timing of the outbreak.
It suggests there were two variants introduced into humans in November or early December 2019.
Together, the researchers say this evidence paints a picture that Sars-Cov-2 was present in live mammals that were sold at Huanan market in late 2019. They say it was transmitted into people who were working or shopping there in two separate "spillover events", where a human contracted the virus from an animal.

One of the researchers involved, virologist Prof David Robertson from the University of Glasgow, told BBC News that he hoped the studies would "correct the false record that the virus came from a lab".

Full story.

But importantly, the report concludes that "the pandemic was very likely to have been a consequence of an unhealthy, cruel and unhygienic practice that Chinese authorities had been warned about".
 

Ringo

I like to not get involved in these matters
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
2,957
Location
Stockholm
Via BBC News:

Covid origin studies say evidence points to market​

Researchers say there is "compelling evidence" that Wuhan's Huanan seafood and wildlife market was at the centre of the Covid-19 outbreak.
In two peer-reviewed studies published on Tuesday they re-examined scientific information from the initial outbreak of Covid-19 in the Chinese city.
One of the studies shows that the earliest known cases were clustered around that market.
The other uses genetic information to track the timing of the outbreak.
It suggests there were two variants introduced into humans in November or early December 2019.
Together, the researchers say this evidence paints a picture that Sars-Cov-2 was present in live mammals that were sold at Huanan market in late 2019. They say it was transmitted into people who were working or shopping there in two separate "spillover events", where a human contracted the virus from an animal.

One of the researchers involved, virologist Prof David Robertson from the University of Glasgow, told BBC News that he hoped the studies would "correct the false record that the virus came from a lab".

Full story.
But several countries have now found Sars-Cov-2 antibodies in blood samples from before the Wuhan outbreak, meaning that the virus was active and spreading in Europe before November 2019, maybe even as early as September 2019 in Italy. https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-italy-timing-idUSKBN27W1J2
 
Top