Indications; Covid was present as early as October 2019... China asked data deleted

Chinese asks US health officials to delete Covid data

This is just one of emerging articles. Apparently Twitter is also blowing up over this.

I'd like to revive an old thread from 2020, where I highlight the fact that Italians saw Covid appearing in blood samples as early as august / september 2019.

Like I said then... wouldn't a perfect place to ignite a pandemic with a virus that targets the lungs, be at a research facility that studies lung cancer?

Jesse Bloom goes lengths to explain his work on Twitter, citing both his pre-print, the data, and what it means.

Therefore, we’d expect the first #SARSCoV2 sequences would be more similar to bat coronaviruses, and as #SARSCoV2 continued to evolve it would become more divergent from these ancestors. But that is *not* the case!

Instead, early Huanan Seafood Market #SARSCoV2 viruses are more different from bat coronaviruses than #SARSCoV2 viruses collected later in China and even other countries.
@lpipes

@ras_nielsen
give nice technical analysis

Chinese hospitals and clinics ordered to destroy early Covid samples

This makes no sense!

a reply to: flice

Ugh, I thought it was common knowledge there was a Covid outbreak in 2019.

It was on my glowing screen the last quarter of 2019, MSM covered it.

If you think about it, it would have had to been, because Murica saw the first case here in March 2020, if I recall correctly.

So I don't think it was ever hidden that China had a virus spreading. It was the source of the virus that was being hushed.

The severity of the virus is up to the individual to decide. I don't think the virus was all MSM hyped it up to be, but I believe there were those infected that suffered greatly and some even died. I won't make light of that but I do think America once again took advantage of chaos to bring about order.

I'll leave it at that.

a reply to: flice

In September of 2019, hong kong taxi drivers did not want to go to Wuhan because of a mysterious illness.

a reply to: anonentity

Thats pretty early... that puts covid in both China and Italy back then.

originally posted by: flice
a reply to: anonentity

Thats pretty early... that puts covid in both China and Italy back then.

Italy has always had a very large population of workers imported from Wuhan working in the textile industry there.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: flice
a reply to: anonentity

Thats pretty early... that puts covid in both China and Italy back then.

Italy has always had a very large population of workers imported from Wuhan working in the textile industry there.

Except those areas didn't have big covid outbreaks, it was expensive ski resorts popular with western tourists.

originally posted by: flice
a reply to: anonentity

Thats pretty early... that puts covid in both China and Italy back then.

The outbreak in China is only suspected that early on, but it's confirmed in the case of Italy. The found it in sewage samples.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: flice
a reply to: anonentity

Thats pretty early... that puts covid in both China and Italy back then.

The outbreak in China is only suspected that early on, but it's confirmed in the case of Italy. The found it in sewage samples.

YES! That's right. It was the Italian's fault. Got it.

originally posted by: flice
a reply to: anonentity

Thats pretty early... that puts covid in both China and Italy back then.

The first evidence in Italy is Dec 2019. Several months after it was in China.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: flice
a reply to: anonentity

Thats pretty early... that puts covid in both China and Italy back then.

The outbreak in China is only suspected that early on, but it's confirmed in the case of Italy. The found it in sewage samples.

No, not suspected, covered up. China has refused access and destroyed all records relating to it. It would be like me shooting someone, my prints are everywhere, and when you come for the gun I have I destroy it so you can't prove it was my gun. It was China beyond all reasonable doubt. Their destruction of evidence and cover up is further proof.

originally posted by: AaarghZombies

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: flice
a reply to: anonentity

Thats pretty early... that puts covid in both China and Italy back then.

Italy has always had a very large population of workers imported from Wuhan working in the textile industry there.

Except those areas didn't have big covid outbreaks, it was expensive ski resorts popular with western tourists.

Untrue. Milan is the first known place with covid detection, Dec 2019, and imports workers from Wuhan for it's textile factories. They would have spread it to others, who would have brought it to the ski resort trips they took on the weekends.

It all traces back to Wuhan still.

a reply to: flice

Have you considered what these early dates of origin of the pathogen says about the lab leak theory? Demolishes it if the disease was spreading before the experiments were done and before anyone at the lab became sick.

Also what about the Wuhan Market origin theory? Also messes with it's timeline, too.

And now we have research that indicates the virus is strongly human adapted and may not have had a recent zoonotic transfer. In silico comparison of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-ACE2 binding affinities across species and implications for virus origin

It is starting to look like my 'wild theory' of origin (which is specifically that zoonotic transfer from bats to domestic cats occurred hundreds of years, or more, ago, and then further zoonotic transfer from domestic cats to humans, decades ago, and then in-species adaptation and mutation, in humans, until, in 2018, the pathogenic version arose, and that Wuhan was just the place where it was identified as being epidemic) is more plausible.

a reply to: flice

I understand the request to remove data that wasn't representative of final form of the disease, at that early stage, where so much of our response to the pathogen relied on an accurate genomic definition. That just makes sense to me.

Consider the problem if testing of the populations was looking for something else and not seeing the actual pathogen at all. All those false negatives would have been a disaster.

Or if they built vaccines that were only effective against some ancestor strain?

However, in that case, the data should have been marked as non-representative ancestor strains, and not simply deleted.

But was the early data accurate? Perhaps the error margins were too large and the early genomic maps were just incorrect? Then it would be rational to delete them.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: flice

In September of 2019, hong kong taxi drivers did not want to go to Wuhan because of a mysterious illness.

Are we sure it wasn't the 916KM drive?

Because, that's a long way to take a taxi.

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: flice

Have you considered what these early dates of origin of the pathogen says about the lab leak theory? Demolishes it if the disease was spreading before the experiments were done and before anyone at the lab became sick.

Also what about the Wuhan Market origin theory? Also messes with it's timeline, too.

And now we have research that indicates the virus is strongly human adapted and may not have had a recent zoonotic transfer. In silico comparison of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-ACE2 binding affinities across species and implications for virus origin

It is starting to look like my 'wild theory' of origin (which is specifically that zoonotic transfer from bats to domestic cats occurred hundreds of years, or more, ago, and then further zoonotic transfer from domestic cats to humans, decades ago, and then in-species adaptation and mutation, in humans, until, in 2018, the pathogenic version arose, and that Wuhan was just the place where it was identified as being epidemic) is more plausible.

Interestingly, I'm fairly sure we had Covid before Christmas 2019 I think. We had like flu symptoms and Mrs Carpy has still lost her sense of smell and taste. At the time we were both working in Salisbury, Wiltshire, and there were hordes of Chinese tourists that got very close to us. Hmmmm, eh?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: flice

Have you considered what these early dates of origin of the pathogen says about the lab leak theory? Demolishes it if the disease was spreading before the experiments were done and before anyone at the lab became sick.

Also what about the Wuhan Market origin theory? Also messes with it's timeline, too.

And now we have research that indicates the virus is strongly human adapted and may not have had a recent zoonotic transfer. In silico comparison of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-ACE2 binding affinities across species and implications for virus origin

It is starting to look like my 'wild theory' of origin (which is specifically that zoonotic transfer from bats to domestic cats occurred hundreds of years, or more, ago, and then further zoonotic transfer from domestic cats to humans, decades ago, and then in-species adaptation and mutation, in humans, until, in 2018, the pathogenic version arose, and that Wuhan was just the place where it was identified as being epidemic) is more plausible.

Interestingly, I'm fairly sure we had Covid before Christmas 2019 I think. We had like flu symptoms and Mrs Carpy has still lost her sense of smell and taste. At the time we were both working in Salisbury, Wiltshire, and there were hordes of Chinese tourists that got very close to us. Hmmmm, eh?

Where there are Chinese tourists, there are other tourists too.

While it is likely that the virus came from China, it isn't a definite thing, and less so as we learn more.

The supposed Chinese origin is due to it first being epidemic in Wuhan. But Wuhan was an ideal location for an epidemic outbreak (large population, high density, massive trade & transport).

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2

originally posted by: chr0naut
a reply to: flice

Have you considered what these early dates of origin of the pathogen says about the lab leak theory? Demolishes it if the disease was spreading before the experiments were done and before anyone at the lab became sick.

Also what about the Wuhan Market origin theory? Also messes with it's timeline, too.

And now we have research that indicates the virus is strongly human adapted and may not have had a recent zoonotic transfer. In silico comparison of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein-ACE2 binding affinities across species and implications for virus origin

It is starting to look like my 'wild theory' of origin (which is specifically that zoonotic transfer from bats to domestic cats occurred hundreds of years, or more, ago, and then further zoonotic transfer from domestic cats to humans, decades ago, and then in-species adaptation and mutation, in humans, until, in 2018, the pathogenic version arose, and that Wuhan was just the place where it was identified as being epidemic) is more plausible.

Interestingly, I'm fairly sure we had Covid before Christmas 2019 I think. We had like flu symptoms and Mrs Carpy has still lost her sense of smell and taste. At the time we were both working in Salisbury, Wiltshire, and there were hordes of Chinese tourists that got very close to us. Hmmmm, eh?

Where there are Chinese tourists, there are other tourists too.

While it is likely that the virus came from China, it isn't a definite thing, and less so as we learn more.

The supposed Chinese origin is due to it first being epidemic in Wuhan. But Wuhan was an ideal location for an epidemic outbreak (large population, high density, massive trade & transport).

I know Chinese tourists when I see them!

And there was lots of them.

a reply to: chr0naut

People in the lab were sick in November, which would be perfect for the timeline. From what we know, China should have infections in October/November if they are the origin. And lo and behold we have mystery illnesses being covered up by China in Oct/Nov and them destroying evidence about it.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: chr0naut

People in the lab were sick in November, which would be perfect for the timeline. From what we know, China should have infections in October/November if they are the origin. And lo and behold we have mystery illnesses being covered up by China in Oct/Nov and them destroying evidence about it.

First known Chinese case of COVID-19, Hubei province, 55 year old male - presented to officials with symptoms on 17 November 2019.

Incubation period for COVID-19 before symptoms show - usually 14 days (but can be as short as 2.5 days in rare circumstances).

If the researchers got sick in late November, and were isolated in hospital, how was someone who was a loner hundreds of miles away sick with COVID-19 in the middle of that same month?

In other suspected European cases, also, the earliest date is in October.

I am trying to find out the exact date/s when the researchers became sick, but so far, to no avail.

And I have read unsupported suggestion that the the three who fell sick at the lab in November 2019 did not have antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, or any form of SARS related result on PCR. As they were working with bats and on SARS related viruses, it seemed reasonable to assume that it would have been standard practice to isolate and test potentially exposed workers.

I'm pretty sure that in December of 2019 I contracted covid. While I was very sick, it was the lack of ability to breathe that stunned me the most. It got to the point it felt like I had asthma and could barely suck any air in. I even passed out briefly from a lack of oxygen.

My lungs have never been the same.