It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

An Interesting little paper on 2019-nCov (aka the Wuhan corona virus)

page: 1
18

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Publishing papers in journals has become expensive. The submitters often get charged. The journals are obscenely expensive to subscribe to. Buying individual articles often costs in the $50 to $100 range. Yet, scientists are /required/ to subscribe to keep up and stay informed and knowledgable. The whole process has become a racket.

The astronomy and physics fields rebelled and started posting their preprints and making them available for free (arxiv.org). These are articles that are not yet submitted for peer review and placed out there for folks in the field to read and give feedback on before formal peer review. Often times these /are/ the final papers: the scientists want them freely available. Other fields such as mathematics quickly followed. Other sciences have started doing the same. This includes medical and biology research papers.

I am subscribed to a feed with bio science for preprints. An interesting one came across my feed. I have a feeling ATS will find it right up their alley. The authors are from the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi.




Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag

Authors:


Pradhan et al

Abstract:

We are currently witnessing a major epidemic caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019- nCoV). The evolution of 2019-nCoV remains elusive. We found 4 insertions in the spike glycoprotein (S) which are unique to the 2019-nCoV and are not present in other coronaviruses. Importantly, amino acid residues in all the 4 inserts have identity or similarity to those in the HIV-1 gp120 or HIV-1 Gag. Interestingly, despite the inserts being discontinuous on the primary amino acid sequence, 3D-modelling of the 2019-nCoV suggests that they converge to constitute the receptor binding site. The finding of 4 unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV, all of which have identity /similarity to amino acid residues in key structural proteins of HIV-1 is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature. This work provides yet unknown insights on 2019-nCoV and sheds light on the evolution and pathogenicity of this virus with important implications for diagnosis of this virus.


www.biorxiv.org...

This is not peer reviewed. IDK the background of these researchers and if they are noted quacks. They could be.

OTOH, enjoy.




posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

This is what I was saying in another thread. It has a gene that’s basically like a protease gene in hiv!!!! I didn’t want to get too technical at the time but I think that because I didn’t people really didn’t get what I was trying to say!

There is a epidemiologist that’s been all over this and puts it in better to understand terms than I can let me try to find the link.



Ok look at this guys 1-19 tweets
twitter.com...

Harvard professor and researcher.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 01:07 PM
link   
wow...
I didn't expect a paper to say it out loud so quickly....

Thanks for the links and the twitter, definitely following those two now!



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 01:25 PM
link   
S+F!

HIV 1 gp120 is "out layer" to HIV itself (so says one paper) and I see "glycoprotein" which is a surface lipid of cell membranes. This is all about the immune response and how HIV enters the biological system.

All that being said, there is a bunch of research upon the subject which probably means there are labs working on it.

This all rather brings back that nagging suspicion over the BL-4 in Wuhan as a possible source. Yeah, it is probably fake news and internet gossip, but when a paper comes out and says that the likelihood of it being a random mutation seem not likely, well, then, like Sherlock Holmes says, we are left with fewer answers that make sense. I for one do not buy into the "snake in market" narrative at all.

Good find! Way to keep everyone on their toes about this! And our minds open to other possibilities rather than the official narrative.




posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 01:37 PM
link   
This does feel like it is on the scale of the Jones paper that found nanothermite in the WTC dust.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Following this on twitter, a lot of scientist and Drs are jumping on this,
they are saying that "The authors (of the paper) hypothesize the inserts increase infectivity and survivability of the virus."

Also that this could be the reason why China started treatment with HIV meds very early in this outbreak, which were effective in some cases.

If that is true then China knew about this from the start... and wondering if, IF!, it is an attack 'on' China, or explored 'by' China in their labs...



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 01:50 PM
link   
a reply to: KindraLaBelle

Well it did conveniently "break out" in Wuhan, the only city to have a level 4 biological containment and experimental facility, which was approved last week. Things that make you go hmmmm



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 01:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
S+F!

HIV 1 gp120 is "out layer" to HIV itself (so says one paper) and I see "glycoprotein" which is a surface lipid of cell membranes. This is all about the immune response and how HIV enters the biological system.

All that being said, there is a bunch of research upon the subject which probably means there are labs working on it.

This all rather brings back that nagging suspicion over the BL-4 in Wuhan as a possible source. Yeah, it is probably fake news and internet gossip, but when a paper comes out and says that the likelihood of it being a random mutation seem not likely, well, then, like Sherlock Holmes says, we are left with fewer answers that make sense. I for one do not buy into the "snake in market" narrative at all.

Good find! Way to keep everyone on their toes about this! And our minds open to other possibilities rather than the official narrative.



There were other scientists who disagreed with the snake explanation, as it was just one small group of scientists who claimed it. But they still don't know exactly where it came from.

There is another thread on ATS about the Harvard professor who had a contract with WUHAN Institute of Technology and ran a group with contracts with Dept of Defense and National Institutes of Health. A Chinese national that Harvard sponsored was caught trying to smuggle bio material out of the US.

It seems China was paying this professor money for research to China's gain.

When you put it all together it makes the BSL-4 lab in the center of Wuhan all the more suspect.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

Thanks for this thread Anzha.
Shared your link in the WuWuFlu™ mega-thread..



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 02:08 PM
link   
I does help explain why this virus is so dangerous having HIV code in it. Does it attack our immune system along with other parts in our bodies?

I am not surprised to hear this was an engineered virus, seeing the evidence build up for it sucks bad. Considering how many other big crimes people have gotten away with I guess it is only natural people will continue to push those boundaries.

Angry, Sad, ####... What a crazy planet... Bill Gates must be proud seeing his depopulation agenda come into affect.



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 02:24 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha
Awesome find anzha!



SNF!!!!



posted on Jan, 31 2020 @ 07:44 PM
link   
a reply to: anzha

If you BLASTp the 4 sequences you'll quickly discover this unvetted paper is a load of rubbish.



posted on Feb, 1 2020 @ 08:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: weirdguy
a reply to: anzha

If you BLASTp the 4 sequences you'll quickly discover this unvetted paper is a load of rubbish.


What does this mean? How does one BLASTp the 4 sequences? If it can be quickly disproven, please give us more so we can denyify some ignorance!



posted on Feb, 2 2020 @ 07:07 AM
link   
a reply to: dogstar23. The 4 protein sequences were so small they could be from a wide range of animals. The paper has since been withdrawn by the authors now. If you look in the comments section of the paper you will see, they explain that it has been misrepresented. BLAST is the gene database search engine.




new topics

top topics



 
18

log in

join