|
REPORT ABUSIVE REPLY
|
|
Message Subject
|
Dr. Li-Meng Yan on Tucker right now, virus is a bioweapon, and released intentionally by CCP military. Update-Tucker doubling down tonight,
|
|
Poster Handle
|
Anonymous Coward |
|
Post Content
|
The paper she wrote titled “Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route" is a little bizarre for a scientific paper. [ link to zenodo.org (secure)] Check this part out where they suggest the RaTG13 sequence often discussed as related to this COVID19 virus is a FAKE SEQUENCE!!!(page 5): Importantly, ZC45 and ZXC21 are bat coronaviruses that were discovered (between July 2015 and February 2017), isolated, and characterized by military research laboratories in the Third Military Medical University (Chongqing, China) and the Research Institute for Medicine of Nanjing Command (Nanjing, China).The data and associated work were published in 2018. Clearly, this backbone/template, which is essential for the creation of SARS-CoV-2, exists in these and other related research laboratories. What strengthens our contention further is the published RaTG13 virus, the genomic sequence of which is reportedly 96% identical to that of SARS-CoV-2. While suggesting a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2, the RaTG13 virus also diverted the attention of both the scientific field and the general public away from ZC45/ZXC21. In fact, a Chinese BSL-3 lab (the Shanghai Public Health Clinical Centre), which published a Nature article reporting a conflicting close phylogenetic relationship between SARS-CoV-2 and ZC45/ZXC21 rather than with RaTG13, was quickly shut down for “rectification”. It is believed that the researchers of that laboratory were being punished for having disclosed the SARS-CoV-2—ZC45/ZXC21 connection. On the other hand, substantial evidence has accumulated, pointing to severe problems associated with the reported sequence of RaTG13 as well as questioning the actual existence of this bat virus in nature. A very recent publication also indicated that the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the RaTG13’s Spike protein could not bind ACE2 of two different types of horseshoe bats (they closely relate to the horseshoe bat R. affinis, RaTG13’s alleged natural host), implicating the inability of RaTG13 to infect horseshoe bats. This finding further substantiates the suspicion that the reported sequence of RaTG13 could have been fabricated as the Spike protein encoded by this sequence does not seem to carry the claimed function. The fact that a virus has been fabricated to shift the attention away from ZC45/ZXC21 speaks for an actual role of ZC45/ZXC21 in the creation of SARS-CoV-2.She is kicking China in the nuts with this thriller style research paper, and they deserve it if she is right. This would make a great movie. In addition to the allegations of RaTG13 being a FAKE SEQUENCE she appears to suggest that Pangolin research papers released after the COVID outbreak began were also part of a coverup. 'Restriction sites' are sites that can be specifically cleaved (cut) with a restriction enzyme. They look for a certain sequence of nucleotides in DNA/RNA and will make a specific cut. You can then insert a segment of DNA with nucleotides that match up to that cut and the DNA will fit together like a sort of interlocking puzzle piece. Page 11: Strikingly, consistent with the RBM engineering theory, we have identified two unique restriction sites, EcoRI and BstEII, at either end of the RBM of the SARS-CoV-2 genome, respectively (Figure 5A). These two sites, which are popular choices of everyday molecular cloning, do not exist in the rest of this spike gene. This particular setting makes it extremely convenient to swap the RBM within spike, providing a quick way to test different RBMs and the corresponding Spike proteins. Such EcoRI and BstEII sites do not exist in the spike genes of other β coronaviruses, which strongly indicates that they were unnatural and were specifically introduced into this spike gene of SARS-CoV-2 for the convenience of manipulating the critical RBM. Although ZC45 spike also does not have these two sites (Figure 5B), they can be introduced very easily as described in part 2 of this report. It is noteworthy that introduction of the EcoRI site here would change the corresponding amino acids from -WNT-to -WNS-(Figure 5AB). As far as we know, all SARS and SARS-like bat coronaviruses exclusively carry a T(threonine) residue at this location. SARS-CoV-2 is the only exception in that this T has mutated to an S(serine), save the suspicious RaTG13 and pangolin coronaviruses published after the outbreak.She is NAMING NAMES! ...IN A RESEARCH PAPER!!!  Given that RBM fully dictates hACE2-binding and that the SARS RBM-hACE2 binding was fully characterized by high-resolution structures (Figure 3), this RBM-only swap would not be any riskier than the full Spike swap. In fact, the feasibility of this RBM-swap strategy has been proven. In 2008, Dr. Zhengli Shi’s group swapped a SARS RBM into the Spike proteins of several SARS-like bat coronaviruses after introducing a restriction site into a codon-optimized spike gene (Figure 5C). They then validated the binding of the resulted chimeric Spike proteins with hACE2. Furthermore, in a recent publication, the RBM of SARS-CoV-2 was swapped into the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of SARS-CoV, resulting in a chimeric RBD fully functional in binding hACE2 (Figure 5C). Strikingly, in both cases, the manipulated RBM segments resemble almost exactly the RBM defined by the positions of the EcoRI and BstEII sites (Figure 5C). Although cloning details are lacking in both publications, it is conceivable that the actual restriction sites may vary depending on the spike gene receiving the RBM insertion as well as the convenience in introducing unique restriction site(s) in regions of interest. It is noteworthy that the corresponding author of this recent publication39, Dr. Fang Li, has been an active collaborator of Dr. Zheng li Shi since 2010. Dr. Li was the first person in the world to have structurally elucidated the binding between SARS-CoV RBD and hACE2 and has been the leading expert in the structural understanding of Spike-ACE2 interactions. The striking finding of EcoRI and BstEII restriction sites at either end of the SARS-CoV-2 RBM, respectively, and the fact that the same RBM region has been swapped both by Dr. Shi and by her long-term collaborator, respectively, using restriction enzyme digestion methods are unlikely a coincidence. Rather, it is the smoking gun proving that the RBM/Spike of SARS-CoV-2 is a product of genetic manipulation.
|
|
|
Please verify you're human:
|
|
|
Reason for reporting:
|
