# Stuff and Things > HISTORY, veterans & science >  More proof.

## UKSmartypants

*No known animal host and 'almost perfect' human adaption: Top Australian vaccine scientist reveals how COVID-19's unique structure means it's either man-made - or a 'complete fluke' of nature*


*Professor Nikolai Petrovsky said virus was better at attaching itself to human cells than to any other animal**It is so 'perfectly adapted' to infect humans that the possibility it was made in a Chinese lab can't be ignored**Wuhan Institute of Virology studied bat coronaviruses and is theorised to have accidentally leaked COVID-19**Virus could have been formed naturally by mixing bat and pangolin versions, but this is statistically unlikely**Professor Petrovsky said the inquiry into virus origins needed urgently and should have started months ago*
How COVID-19's unique structure means it could be man-made | Daily Mail Online



Coronavirus binds itself to the ACE2 receptor molecule in lung cells using a spike protein - the tighter it can attach itself, the less likely it is to be washed away and the sicker it makes its host.


Professor Petrovsky expected to find an animal that was most susceptible to this, such as bats, and was likely the original source of the virus - but was shocked when humans came out on top.


Furthermore, viruses tend to get better at infecting new species as they adapt over time, but COVID-19 started 'completely optimised from day one without the need to evolve'.


'This is a new virus that has never been in humans before, but it has an extraordinarily high binding to human receptors, which is very surprising,' he told Daily Mail Australia. 


'It is almost perfectly human adapted, it couldn't do any better.

----------

Big Dummy (05-26-2020),dinosaur (05-26-2020),Foghorn (05-26-2020),Lone Gunman (05-26-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

This fool again?

Since when does coulda shoulda woulda pass for science?

Since when does SPECULATION pass for proof?

----------

Captain Kirk! (05-26-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

> *No known animal host and 'almost perfect' human adaption: Top Australian vaccine scientist reveals how COVID-19's unique structure means it's either man-made - or a 'complete fluke' of nature*
> 
> 
> *Professor Nikolai Petrovsky said virus was better at attaching itself to human cells than to any other animal**It is so 'perfectly adapted' to infect humans that the possibility it was made in a Chinese lab can't be ignored**Wuhan Institute of Virology studied bat coronaviruses and is theorised to have accidentally leaked COVID-19**Virus could have been formed naturally by mixing bat and pangolin versions, but this is statistically unlikely**Professor Petrovsky said the inquiry into virus origins needed urgently and should have started months ago*
> How COVID-19's unique structure means it could be man-made | Daily Mail Online
> 
> 
> 
> Coronavirus binds itself to the ACE2 receptor molecule in lung cells using a spike protein - the tighter it can attach itself, the less likely it is to be washed away and the sicker it makes its host.
> ...


Perfectly adapted?

Horseshit!

In whose opinion?

This asshole Petrovsky looked at it and said "gee it's perfect"?

WHY ARE YOU EVEN WASTING OUR TIME WITH THIS CRAP?

I thought you were a scientist?

----------


## nonsqtr

These people here actually did a quantitative study on the genome.

They say your boy Petrovsky is wrong. So do I.

The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 | Nature Medicine

----------

dinosaur (05-26-2020)

----------


## UKSmartypants

> This fool again?
> 
> Since when does coulda shoulda woulda pass for science?
> 
> Since when does SPECULATION pass for proof?


Well hes a Professor of Virology. You're just a windbag on a forum.  And hes repeating what me and many other people  been saying from day one.  and we know  they will cover it up . Your source is american. Americans were funding the Wuhan Lab to the tune of $3.2M . So americans have a vested interest in covering it up. Americans also invented the cure (Remsdwsivir), before the virus escaped. And the Lab tried to patent Remsdesivir as soon as they knew the virus could be transmitted between humans. Thers a lot of coincidences there. I know who im voting for. And its not for your american/chinese  cover up.

----------

Big Dummy (05-26-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

> Well hes a Professor of Virology. You're just a windbag on a forum.  And hes repeating what ive been saying from day one.  I know who im voting for.


Let's talk science, not credentials. ,(I can hold my own either way, your choice).

Let's put Petrovsky's bullshit to rest once and for all. Since people like you seem to have a hard time distinguishing it from actual science.

First of all, this is the international repository for all known Covid sequences:

GISAID - Initiative

You can get ACTUAL RAW DATA here (and nowhere else).

Then - you want to know the major unique features of Covid. There are two: one gene substitution and a 12-bp modified cleavage site. (These are detailed in the Andersen link).

Then you want to know about the viral behavior, stuff like this

Emerging SARS-CoV-2 mutation hot spots include a novel RNA-dependent-RNA polymerase variant | Journal of Translational Medicine | Full Text

Then you want to get a feel for how volatile the virus is.

Genetic Variation of SARS Coronavirus in Beijing Hospital

Am I getting through to you yet?

----------

dinosaur (05-26-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

Yeah - here's Petrovsky:

Gee look, it likes ACE2. It must be engineered.

 :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------


## UKSmartypants

oh and your source is 2 months old, its out of date.

----------


## UKSmartypants

btw, if you post stuff like "WHY ARE YOU EVEN WASTING OUR TIME WITH THIS CRAP?"  dont be suprised when you get disrespect and abuse back? ok ?

----------


## nonsqtr

> btw, if you post stuff like "WHY ARE YOU EVEN WASTING OUR TIME WITH THIS CRAP?"  dont be suprised when you get disrespect and abuse back? ok ?


Let's keep it simple.

Petrovsky is an ignorant fear mongering prick.

Kay?

Happy now?

----------


## Captain Kirk!

> btw, if you post stuff like "WHY ARE YOU EVEN WASTING OUR TIME WITH THIS CRAP?"  dont be suprised when you get disrespect and abuse back? ok ?

----------


## nonsqtr

> btw, if you post stuff like "WHY ARE YOU EVEN WASTING OUR TIME WITH THIS CRAP?"  dont be suprised when you get disrespect and abuse back? ok ?


I'm tired of the bullshit.

Since you're the one bringing it to the table, you're the one who gets clobbered.

See how that works?

----------


## UKSmartypants

> I'm tired of the bullshit.
> 
> Since you're the one bringing it to the table, you're the one who gets clobbered.
> 
> See how that works?



Thats fine. You carry on posting cover up propaganda. And i return the complement about the bullshit you post. You might be able to blind half this forum with supposed proof  (and fake CV), I might be bothered to debate with you, but since your argue at the level of an Internet  Neanderthal, ill not bother. 

See you use a classic troll technique, as I explained to your friend Neo, another failed troll/ Your  strategy is to post as many complex papers as you can find in the hope the person your are desperate to 'win' against cant be bothered to read it or cant understand it. But ofc Its a tactic that doesnt work when youve been sussed.


The delicious irony is ofc is you rattle on about democrats and how intolerant they are of other peoples opinions, and you are BY FAR AND AWAY ten times worse than any baying lefty mob when you disagree with someone.  If you are the alternative to the Democrats, the USA is fucked.

----------


## jirqoadai

bye. take care now

----------


## nonsqtr

> Thats fine. You carry on posting cover up propaganda. And i return the complement about the bullshit you post. You might be able to blind half this forum with supposed proof  (and fake CV), I might be bothered to debate with you, but since your argue at the level of an Internet  Neanderthal, ill not bother. 
> 
> See you use a classic troll technique, as I explained to your friend Neo, another failed troll/ Your  strategy is to post as many complex papers as you can find in the hope the person your are desperate to 'win' against cant be bothered to read it or cant understand it. But ofc Its a tactic that doesnt work when youve been sussed.


In other words, you can't contest the science.

I'm very sorry, I can NOT have my fellow conservatives believing the same bullshit that's being peddled by the liberals.

We are BETTER than that.

Hopefully you've learned your lesson here today.

Nothing personal, we're having an engineering discussion.

Hopefully next time you'll be more rigorous when presenting your beliefs.

----------


## nonsqtr

Here look - for those who are interested -

THIS is important:

A Highly Unusual Palindromic Transmembrane Helical Hairpin Formed by SARS Coronavirus E Protein - PubMed

It has to do with the way the viral RNA replicates inside the host cell.

These "hairpins" allow single genes to code for multiple proteins.

Here's more detail on the viral polymerase -

Structure of the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase from COVID-19 virus | Science

This is furious pace of research, it's only been 6 months since the virus was identified.

----------

dinosaur (05-26-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

And, here's how fast it mutates - this is the third piece of proof about a bloodborne vector.

https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-...rus-feces.html

----------

dinosaur (05-26-2020),jirqoadai (05-26-2020)

----------


## UKSmartypants

> In other words, you can't contest the science.
> 
> I'm very sorry, I can NOT have my fellow conservatives believing the same bullshit that's being peddled by the liberals.
> 
> We are BETTER than that.
> 
> Hopefully you've learned your lesson here today.
> 
> Nothing personal, we're having an engineering discussion.
> ...



No, im not bothering. like i said, you get respect and debate when you earn it. And im not bothered about 'winning ' against you, because you arent genuine. Ill wait for some real posters to come by.  Even this post you made is condescending and  patronising,  so dont bother  in the future. Try the readers letters in the Washington Post, that probably the sort of abusefest you prefer.

----------


## nonsqtr

The importance of hairpins?

A better CRISPR? RNA  could improve gene editing | FierceBiotech

----------

dinosaur (05-26-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

> No, im not bothering. like i said, you get respect and debate when you earn it. And im not bothered about 'winning ' against you, because you arent genuine. Ill wait for some real posters to come by.  Even this post you made is condescending and  patronising,  so dont bother  in the future. Try the readers letters in the Washington Post, that probably the sort of abusefest you prefer.


The science speaks for itself.

Talk less, read more.

----------


## dinosaur

I think it is early in the research, even if it happening at a furious pace.

As a stupid lay person, when I read these reports, I tend to gloss over the science and concentrate on the assumptions or conclusions the researchers propose.

In this link, The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 | Nature Medicine from post #4, the virus is described as most similar to the bat virus (section 1, paragraph 1) but the binding spike proteins are most similar to the virus found in pangolins (section 1, paragraph 2).  The researchers then say this is proof of natural origin and natural mutations in either the host animal or humans.  Section 2 then goes to describe how the mutation might have occurred in human to human transfer.

To a stupid lay person reading this, like me, I am thinking ... hmmm, the bat virus looks closest to this new virus, but the binding spike proteins look like those in the virus of a pangolin?  Obviously it is a combining of the two, in a lab!

Now, as I said, I'm stupid, but when I read these reports, my expectation is these conclusion areas are where the peer review comes into play and people smarter than me can judge those assumptions and conclusions in more "scientific" language and response.  

As I started, my thinking is that this is too early in the game to declare natural origin.  Way too early to throw out opposing viewpoints.  Could natural mutations occur in a lab setting?  Mechanical gene splicing is not the only manipulation possible.  I would imagine, if you are trying to develop a virus that attaches better to human cells, a researcher could "naturally" select and separate mutated viruses until they had developed the perfect attachment.  The researchers know what they are looking for in binding proteins, from research with the pangolin virus.   Lots of human tissue available from aborted fetuses, or organs harvested from political dissidents to experiment with.  

The evil scientist in me would say, in order to create a monster:  Pick the most bad ass virus your have in your arsenal, and if the binding proteins are where most of the mutations are, keep playing with it until the right binding protein mutations are as close as you can get to perfect.   It must not take much time, if the mutations occur early in the human to human transmission before "surveillance"  recognizes there is new problem virus. 

Thanks to everyone posting links.  I only understand part of what I read, but it is all very interesting.

----------

nonsqtr (05-26-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

> I think it is early in the research, even if it happening at a furious pace.
> 
> As a stupid lay person, when I read these reports, I tend to gloss over the science and concentrate on the assumptions or conclusions the researchers propose.
> 
> In this link, The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 | Nature Medicine from post #4, the virus is described as most similar to the bat virus (section 1, paragraph 1) but the binding spike proteins are most similar to the virus found in pangolins (section 1, paragraph 2).  The researchers then say this is proof of natural origin and natural mutations in either the host animal or humans.  Section 2 then goes to describe how the mutation might have occurred in human to human transfer.
> 
> To a stupid lay person reading this, like me, I am thinking ... hmmm, the bat virus looks closest to this new virus, but the binding spike proteins look like those in the virus of a pangolin?  Obviously it is a combining of the two, in a lab!
> 
> Now, as I said, I'm stupid, but when I read these reports, my expectation is these conclusion areas are where the peer review comes into play and people smarter than me can judge those assumptions and conclusions in more "scientific" language and response.  
> ...


What you say is logical. "As a lay person".

But this is exactly what I was trying to point out to Smarty, you can NOT be a lay person if you're trying to understand this. You actually have to know HOW they do what they do, when you're reading these papers - and what it means.

In the example you cite, they are discussing the "recombinant event" which could have caused the substitution in question.

Well - what EXACTLY is a "recombinant event"?

In an RNA virus, which is TOTALLY different from a DNA scenario, it uses different mechanisms, different enzymes, different cellular machinery.

To understand the LIKELIHOOD of a recombinant event in a human to human scenario, versus a recombinant event in animal transmission, you have to know how the RNA polymerase works, which is the link I showed you, and it's WHY they took all the time to study this PART of the virus behavior in detail.

Remember, Covid is not the first ACE2 coronavirus. There are ACE2 coronaviruses that don't infect humans. There is ABSOLUTELY NO WAY you can look at ACE2 presence and say "this proves the virus was engineered".

No, the evidence says exactly the opposite. If it were engineered we would see certain MARKERS that the scientists use to position the cleavage sites. That's why I showed you the link about CRISPR.

And we don't see them.

And not even the Chinese are that good, where they could do something like that without leaving evidence

----------

dinosaur (05-26-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

Let's look at this another way too, @dinosaur.

Let's say for the sake of discussion, there are two possibilities: either the virus was engineered, or it started in a pangolin.

If it was engineered, some scientist in a lab somewhere, would have needed a pure sample of the new gene. S/he would either have had to isolate it from an existing source (which can be quite difficult), or synthesize it in the laboratory.

Then, s/he has to identify and be able to control the insertion point in such a way that the rest of the virus still works! THAT is a big deal! Because of those little hairpin things I showed you, among other reasons.

And, starting from scratch, there is a lot of trial and error involved in this process. Typically the first few times don't work. The idea that someone could go collect a sample from a bat cave and then synthesize a virus a few weeks later is astounding.

On the other hand - in a pangolin you already have a pure existing sample of the substitution segment, AND, nature will take care of the trial and error for you. RNA viruses mutate very quickly, a million times faster than their hosts.

If you were a biowarfare person trying to synthesize a new virus, you'd probably do BETTER taking advantage of nature's built in mechanisms, you'd get your result quicker that way.

Then - you can look at the substitution sequence, it's on gsaid, there are many ACE2 binding sequences but this one happens to look exactly like a pangolin.

Y'know... if someone wanted to engineer a deadly virus they surely wouldn't start with a pangolin. There are more efficient binding sequences available.

For that matter, they wouldn't have used a coronavirus in the first place, they would have used Ebola.

----------

dinosaur (05-26-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

So, ACE2 -

ACE2 is ubiquitous in the animal kingdom, but it comes in "versions". Human ACE2 is similar but not identical to Pangolin ACE2.

But the virus, doesn't know from human or pangolin. It binds to molecule A with a 60% affinity and molecule B with 80%, and likely there's a molecule C and D somewhere with yet other affinities.

In other words, the ACE2 mechanism is not exclusive to humans.

But if you were a biowarfare engineer you put the sequence in there with the greatest affinity.

Which in this case, is not a pangolin.

This is why we get h1n1 one year and h2n5 the next. There are changes in the sequence, which lead to changes in binding affinity, do one can be more virulent than the other.

----------

dinosaur (05-26-2020),jirqoadai (05-26-2020)

----------


## dinosaur

Thanks, I appreciate the patience and teaching and links.  I'm learning, but at this point in my life, I think am I learning just enough to be even MORE dangerous!   :Smiley ROFLMAO: 

Right now, I have more questions than answers, but that's good I guess if I am learning.

Question 1:  Do all humans share the same ACE2 or are there subtle differences.  Like, do Asians, Africans, and Europeans all share the same ACE2?  Are some people asymptomatic because of slight differences in ACE2?  Or does the RNA virus mutate so rapidly that it fails to bind to the same ACE2 of some people?

Question 2:  Is it possible for mad scientist dinosaur to take a rapidly mutating "volatile" virus and feed it some human fetal cells to attach to, then rinse it off, then let nature work for a few hours/days and rinse it off again, and rinse and repeat until I am left with only mutated viruses with superb affinity for human cells?  (rinse is only a word, I might use a centrifuge or some other suitable separation method)  Or is the RNA mutation much different than the "natural selection" process we are taught with DNA?  Or do the RNA viruses just mutate both ways sort of randomly, and really don't get more efficient as killers?  Adaptive Value of High Mutation Rates of RNA Viruses: Separating Causes from Consequences | Journal of Virology 

Please don't shoot me as I get more dangerous.   :Smiley ROFLMAO:

----------

nonsqtr (05-27-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

Question 1 - there are definitely variations in human ACE2. The below study is pretty good, they've already identified specific areas of the Covid spike protein that interact with various parts of ACE2.

Coronavirus Binding to ACE2


Genetic Variations in Human ACE2 Receptor

Question 2 - you can absolutely breed a virus, it's a little wierder than bacteria because the recombinant events occur inside the host cell but they act on the viral genomes (ie the sex is between a dog and a virus instead of two dogs) - but basically yeah, entirely possible.

If I were gonna put on an evil biowarfare hat and try to create some viruses without anyone knowing about it, one of my best strategies would be to go on-site to a bat cave and engage in this type of breeding. It would be an exceedingly dangerous exercise though.

----------

dinosaur (05-27-2020)

----------


## nonsqtr

We still don't know exactly how this virus started.

Pangolins are the only known infected species "in the wild", other than bats, and the substitution portion of Covid is very close to the Malaysian pangolin, but the S protein is still a little different, and it doesn't look likely the virus mutated directly from a pangolin sometime between Aug and Sept of last year.

What seems more likely is that the lab in Wuhan had an accident - because it stores frozen historical samples going back 50 years.

We can do all the testing we want in the wild, but the real answer might be sitting on a laboratory shelf somewhere. (Or gone forever, having been spilled).

This is why the mutation rates are important. The likelihood of a large event is low, but the likelihood of two large events at once is even lower. There should be an intermediary somewhere, we just have to find it.

----------

