Lab-Made Coronavirus Triggers Debate

The Scientist ^ | 11/16/15 | Jef Akst

[Enlightened1]

The creation of a chimeric SARS-like virus has scientists discussing the risks of gain-of-function research.

Ralph Baric, an infectious-disease researcher at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, last week (November 9) published a study on his team’s efforts to engineer a virus with the surface protein of the SHC014 coronavirus, found in horseshoe bats in China, and the backbone of one that causes human-like severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in mice. The hybrid virus could infect human airway cells and caused disease in mice, according to the team’s results, which were published in Nature Medicine.

The results demonstrate the ability of the SHC014 surface protein to bind and infect human cells, validating concerns that this virus—or other coronaviruses found in bat species—may be capable of making the leap to people without first evolving in an intermediate host, Nature reported. They also reignite a debate about whether that information justifies the risk of such work, known as gain-of-function research. “If the [new] virus escaped, nobody could predict the trajectory,” Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, told Nature.

In October 2013, the US government put a stop to all federal funding for gain-of-function studies, with particular concern rising about influenza, SARS, and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS). “NIH [National Institutes of Health] has funded such studies because they help define the fundamental nature of human-pathogen interactions, enable the assessment of the pandemic potential of emerging infectious agents, and inform public health and preparedness efforts,” NIH Director Francis Collins said in a statement at the time. “These studies, however, also entail biosafety and biosecurity risks, which need to be understood better.”

[Enlightened1]

Baric’s study on the SHC014-chimeric coronavirus began before the moratorium was announced, and the NIH allowed it to proceed during a review process, which eventually led to the conclusion that the work did not fall under the new restrictions, Baric told Nature. But some researchers, like Wain-Hobson, disagree with that decision.

The debate comes down to how informative the results are. “The only impact of this work is the creation, in a lab, of a new, non-natural risk,” Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist and biodefence expert at Rutgers University, told Nature.

But Baric and others argued the study’s importance. “[The results] move this virus from a candidate emerging pathogen to a clear and present danger,” Peter Daszak, president of the EcoHealth Alliance, which samples viruses from animals and people in emerging-diseases hotspots across the globe, told Nature.

[relictele]

Lab-Made Coronavirus Triggers Debate

'Hell any good brand of scotch will do that' - Montgomery Scott, Chief Engineer

[Jewbacca]

Especially when in the hands of Me So Clumsy and Ho Lee Fuk.

100% guarantee this was an accidental lab release.

[Skywise]

Or intentional.

[Enlightened1]

This article is from November 16, 2015 about Coronavirus.

It is man made bio weapon, and came from a lab in the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill.

Check out the debate about this in 2012 and 2014.

https://www.the-scientist.com/features/deliberating-over-danger-41174

and

https://www.the-scientist.com/the-nutshell/moratorium-on-gain-of-function-research-36564

[Rockingham]

This is quite a find. Thank you.

[Jewbacca]

Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity.

[IndispensableDestiny]

IN 2017, Tonix Pharmaceuticals synthesised horsepox form DNA strands and published their work. Horsepox is eradicated in the wild. The same technique could have been used to synthesize smallpox.

[null and void]

“These studies, however, also entail biosafety and biosecurity risks, which need to be understood better.”

Ya THINK?!??!

Bring Out Your Dead

Post to me or FReep mail to be on/off the Bring Out Your Dead ping list.

The purpose of the “Bring Out Your Dead” ping list (formerly the “Ebola” ping list) is very early warning of emerging pandemics, as such it has a high false positive rate.

So far the false positive rate is 100%.

At some point we may well have a high mortality pandemic, and likely as not the “Bring Out Your Dead” threads will miss the beginning entirely.

*sigh* Such is life, and death...

If a quarantine saves just one child's life, it's worth it.

[null and void]

There is an adage that reads “never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity... but don’t rule out malice.” This is known as Heinlein’s or Hanlon’s Razor (there is only a slight difference between the two). Unfortunately many people only go by the first part of Heinlein’s Razor, leaving out the “but don’t rule out malice” part...

[RummyChick]

I posted this a long time ago. The living organism was a mouse.
It did not die at least at the time of what I found.

The scientist has been quoted about this new virus but I don’t remember
what he said.

[PGalt]

Thanks for posting. Very interesting at the link.

[Rockingham]

The experiment was modest but ominous in its implications as a proof of concept. My guess is that what China is hiding is that the Wuhan outbreak was of a lab-created virus strain that escaped due to major, chronic violations of containment protocols.

Supposedly, instead of disposing of expended test animals by incineration as required, the staff of the lab sometimes took the carcasses for food or for sale as food. This would have provided a distressingly easy route for unintentional transmission of a novel engineered pathogen.

This scenario is made more credible by China's closing of the Wuhan virus lab and the firing of the staff pending reopening after "rectification." This indicates that the Chinese leadership was alarmed at what their internal investigation found and decided on a thorough house-cleaning.

A coverup is necessary because otherwise, China would experience a near-comprehensive, world-wide suspension of cooperation by the pathogen labs of developed nations. China would then be required to submit to detailed, humiliating inspections and verification of their lab containment practices.

My guess is that much of that will more or less happen anyway, if with less drama and public embarassment for China. The world's virologists and public health experts are not fools and probably have a good idea of what happened at Wuhan. China's slipshod and dishonest ways are a global menace and cannot continue to be accommodated.

[4Liberty]

[VTenigma]

So the chi-coms were mucking around with “gain of function” experiments on SARS/nCoV and it got away from them. Now no researcher can assess the trajectory the virus may take. It may mutate to a more benign form or it may become far more virulent. Thanks China. This is what happens when totalitarians think they should run the world.

[9YearLurker]

Apparently there’s a record of China having essentially bought this virus from the lab at the University of North Carolina.

[Ozark Tom]

The Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre first shared the Coronavirus genome on 12 January. The facility was ordered shut down for this transgression, as all information in China is effectively classified until the Government deems to allow a release.

Rectification refers to making changes to management. Someone is in the gulag for their poor choices.

https://globalbiodefense.com/headlines/chinese-lab-that-first-shared-novel-coronavirus-genome-shut-down/

[Rockingham]

Any ideas on the source of the outbreak?