Boston University researchers claim to have developed new, more lethal COVID strain in lab
https://www.foxnews.com/us/boston-unive ... strain-lab
Researchers at Boston University added a spike protein from the Omicron variant with the original Wuhan strain, which has an 80% kill rate
I guess they didn't get enough deaths with the last version of COVID
Re: I guess they didn't get enough deaths with the last version of COVID
Why would they do that?Bmyers wrote: ↑Tue Oct 18, 2022 7:28 am Boston University researchers claim to have developed new, more lethal COVID strain in lab
https://www.foxnews.com/us/boston-unive ... strain-lab
Researchers at Boston University added a spike protein from the Omicron variant with the original Wuhan strain, which has an 80% kill rate
Re: I guess they didn't get enough deaths with the last version of COVID
You got me. You would of thought they would of learned, but instead, they are still hard at it.
Re: I guess they didn't get enough deaths with the last version of COVID
If I was paranoid I would think there is a conspiracy by govt's (NWO?) to reduce the environmental/social impact of humans on the planet. Let's introduce a pandemic that kills a couple million people just to get people used to the idea of pandemics and that they will have to live with them from now on. I.e, new restrictions on work, travel, socialization etc, etc. Then we slowly increase the lethality every couple of years until it kills tens of millions and people just accept that and new restrictions on personal freedoms as the new reality. Pretty soon we're controlling the population and the people.
Fortunately, i'm not paranoid and don't think govt's are that smart but hey, what do I know?
Fortunately, i'm not paranoid and don't think govt's are that smart but hey, what do I know?
Re: I guess they didn't get enough deaths with the last version of COVID
https://www.help.senate.gov/imo/media/d ... 102722.pdf
Senate subcommittee has released their report on SARS-COVID-2 origin (report linked above).
Here is a couple of quotes from the report:
Basis for Assessment that Research-Related Incident is More Likely Origin of SARS-CoV-2
Nearly three years after the COVID-19 pandemic began, substantial evidence demonstrating that the COVID-19 pandemic was the result of a research-related incident has emerged. A research-related incident is consistent with the early epidemiology showing rapid spread of the virus in Wuhan, with the earliest calls for assistance being located in the near the WIV’s original campus in central Wuhan.207 It also explains the low genetic diversity of the earliest known SARS-CoV-2 human infections in Wuhan, because the likely index case, would be an infected researcher, is the likely primary source of the virus in Wuhan.208 A research-related incident also explains the failure to find an intermediate host as well as the failure to find any animal infections pre-dating human COVID-19 cases.209
Conclusion
As noted by the WHO Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens, the COVID19 Lancet Commission, and the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence 90-Day Assessment on the COVID-19 Origins, more information is needed to arrive at a more precise, if not a definitive, understanding of the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and how the COVID-19 pandemic began.225 Governments, leaders, public health officials, and scientists involved in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic and working to prevent future pandemics, must commit to greater transparency, engagement, and responsibility in their efforts. Based on the analysis of the publicly available information, it appears reasonable to conclude that the COVID-19 pandemic was, more likely than not, the result of a research-related incident. New information, made publicly available and independently verifiable, could change this assessment. However, the hypothesis of a natural zoonotic origin no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt, or the presumption of accuracy. The following are critical outstanding questions that would need to be addressed to be able to more definitively conclude the origins of SARS-CoV-2: • What is the intermediate host species for SARS-CoV-2? Where did it first infect humans? • Where is SARS-CoV-2’s viral reservoir? • How did SARS-CoV-2 acquire its unique genetic features, such as its furin cleavage site? Advocates of a zoonotic origin theory must provide clear and convincing evidence that a natural zoonotic spillover is the source of the pandemic, as was demonstrated for the 2002-2004 SARS outbreak. In other words, there needs to be verifiable evidence that a natural zoonotic spillover actually occurred, not simply that such a spillover could have occurred.
Senate subcommittee has released their report on SARS-COVID-2 origin (report linked above).
Here is a couple of quotes from the report:
Basis for Assessment that Research-Related Incident is More Likely Origin of SARS-CoV-2
Nearly three years after the COVID-19 pandemic began, substantial evidence demonstrating that the COVID-19 pandemic was the result of a research-related incident has emerged. A research-related incident is consistent with the early epidemiology showing rapid spread of the virus in Wuhan, with the earliest calls for assistance being located in the near the WIV’s original campus in central Wuhan.207 It also explains the low genetic diversity of the earliest known SARS-CoV-2 human infections in Wuhan, because the likely index case, would be an infected researcher, is the likely primary source of the virus in Wuhan.208 A research-related incident also explains the failure to find an intermediate host as well as the failure to find any animal infections pre-dating human COVID-19 cases.209
Conclusion
As noted by the WHO Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens, the COVID19 Lancet Commission, and the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence 90-Day Assessment on the COVID-19 Origins, more information is needed to arrive at a more precise, if not a definitive, understanding of the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and how the COVID-19 pandemic began.225 Governments, leaders, public health officials, and scientists involved in addressing the COVID-19 pandemic and working to prevent future pandemics, must commit to greater transparency, engagement, and responsibility in their efforts. Based on the analysis of the publicly available information, it appears reasonable to conclude that the COVID-19 pandemic was, more likely than not, the result of a research-related incident. New information, made publicly available and independently verifiable, could change this assessment. However, the hypothesis of a natural zoonotic origin no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt, or the presumption of accuracy. The following are critical outstanding questions that would need to be addressed to be able to more definitively conclude the origins of SARS-CoV-2: • What is the intermediate host species for SARS-CoV-2? Where did it first infect humans? • Where is SARS-CoV-2’s viral reservoir? • How did SARS-CoV-2 acquire its unique genetic features, such as its furin cleavage site? Advocates of a zoonotic origin theory must provide clear and convincing evidence that a natural zoonotic spillover is the source of the pandemic, as was demonstrated for the 2002-2004 SARS outbreak. In other words, there needs to be verifiable evidence that a natural zoonotic spillover actually occurred, not simply that such a spillover could have occurred.
Re: I guess they didn't get enough deaths with the last version of COVID
In other words...China ain't cooperating