Content uploaded by Roland Wiesendanger
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Roland Wiesendanger on Feb 14, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Studie zum Ursprung der Coronavirus-Pandemie
Preprints and early-stage research may not have been peer reviewed yet.
Abstract
Die vorliegende Studie zum Ursprung der Coronavirus-Pandemie wurde im Zeitraum vom 01.01.2020 bis 31.12.2020 an der Universität Hamburg durchgeführt. Erste Zwischenergebnisse dieser Studie wurden am 5. Mai 2020 im Rahmen einer Pressemitteilung bekannt gegeben. Seitdem sind durch internationalen Informationsaustausch weitere wesentliche Erkenntnisse und Dokumente zusammengetragen worden.
Das vorliegende Dokument wurde am 6. Januar 2021 fertig gestellt. Es wurde zunächst ausschließlich in Wissenschaftskreisen verteilt und diskutiert. Am 12. Februar 2021 erfolgte die Freigabe für die Veröffentlichung als Basis einer breit angelegten Diskussion in der Bevölkerung, die angesichts der Bedeutung der Thematik faktenbasiert informiert werden soll und in zukünftige Entscheidungsprozesse einzubeziehen ist.
... Many researchers have suspected that the original strain of SARS-CoV-2 might have leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) [1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8]. Though some virologists claimed SARS-CoV-2 had originated in the Huanan Seafood Market based on early mutations and sampling locations at the onset of the outbreak [9,10], allegations of sampling bias were made against them in the following publications [11,12]. ...
Surface glycoprotein sequences of the Omicron BA.1 lineage that included only reverse mutations were searched for in NCBI GenBank, where the dates and locations of collection were retrieved for each mutant. Data from BA.1.x lineages that emerged during the same period of time were used as a control, and the early spread of these mutants was compared. The number of states where the first 20 samples were found was compared between the group of reversion mutants and the control group. The result reveals that the reversion mutants were widespread from the early days of their emergence, showing statistically significant differences compared to the control group. Whether the origin of the reversion mutants is natural infection from abroad, domestic natural mutation, or leakage from a laboratory, it is usually possible to make a rough estimation of the epicenter by tracing its spread. The wide prevalence of reversion mutants of BA.1 from the beginning of their emergence is highly anomalous, which cannot be explained by any theories of molecular biology, virology, or infectiology currently known.
Seit dem Ausbruch der Coronavirus-Krankheit 2019 (COVID-19), die mit dem neuartigen SARS- CoV-2 assoziiert ist, sind die Infektionszahlen regelrecht explodiert. Wir zeigen, dass die Spezifität der Geschwindigkeit des Anstiegs der COVID-19-Fälle über Norditalien, einer der am stärksten betroffenen Regionen, stark mit der vorherrschenden bodennahen Luftverschmutzung korreliert, insbesondere während der Jahreszeit. Auffällig sind Grenzwert-überschreitende Konzentrationen von PM10/PM2.5, und NO2. Defizite als auch ein auf Schadensbegrenzung und nicht auf Prävention ausgerichtetes Gesundheitssystem, eine überalternde Bevölkerung, sowie durch eine erhöhte virale Anfälligkeit die aufkeimende Gesundheitskrise verschärften. In weiterer Folge heben wir hervor, dass SARS-CoV-2 nur einen kleinen Beitrag in einem bereits überlasteten System leistete, welche speziell die Bewohner der Po-Ebene in einen völlig neuen, unvorbereiteten Gleichgewichtszustandes katapultierte. Die in der Not verordneten erratischen Gegenmassnahmen, als auch die übereilten Anstrengungen in der Entwicklung von COVID-Impfstoffen deuten eher auf eine «Krise der Wahrnehmung» hin als auf eine durchdachte Strategie, welche ein breites Spektrum möglicher Optionen hätte umfassen können. Dieser Beitrag befasst sich folglich kritisch mit der Problematik aus verschieden Blickwindeln: verabsäumte Implementierung der Luftreinhaltung; Ausbreitungsdynamik von Bioaerosolen einschliesslich der damit verbundenen atmosphärischen Faktoren sowie die langfristig induzierten Sekundär-Effekte als Folge des medial geschürten Alarmismus und der gesetzten Massnahmen seitens der Regierung.
Nudging, a controversial technique for modifying people's behavior in a predictable way, is claimed to preserve freedom of choice while simultaneously influencing it. Nudging had been largely confined to situations such as promoting healthy eating choices but has been employed in the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) crisis in a shift towards measures that involve significantly less choice, such as shoves and behavioral prods. Shared decision making (SDM), a method for direct involvement and autonomy, is an alternative approach to communicate risk. Predominantly peer-reviewed scientific publications from standard literature databases like PubMed, PsycInfo, and Psyndex were evaluated in a narrative review. The so-called fear nudges, as well as the dissemination of strongly emotionalizing or moralizing messages can lead to intense psycho-physical stress. The use of these nudges by specialized units during the COVID-19 pandemic generated a societal atmosphere of fear that precipitated a deterioration of the mental and physical health of the population. Major recommendations of the German COVID-19 Snapshot Monitoring (COSMO) study, which are based on elements of nudging and coercive measures, do not comply with ethical principles, basic psychological principles, or evidence-based data. SDM was misused in the COVID-19 crisis, which helped to achieve one-sided goals of governments. The emphasis on utilitarian thinking is criticized and the unethical behavior of decision makers is explained by both using the concept of moral disengagement and the maturity level of coping strategies. There should be a return to an open-ended, democratic, and pluralistic scientific debate without using nudges. It is therefore necessary to return to the origins of SDM.
Die Ausgangsthese dieses Debattenbeitrags ist, dass die Governance der Wissenschaft in Deutschland mit Denkfehlern behaftet ist, die die gesellschaftliche Re-levanz von Forschung hemmen. Diese sind erstens die Verwechslung von Aufmerksamkeit mit Relevanz, zwei-tens die Vorstellung, dass Wissensvermittlung Chefsa-che ist, und drittens der Wunsch, gesellschaftliche Rele-vanz zu planen. Entlang dieser drei Denkfehler wird die These ausgeführt. Am Ende des Artikels wird das wenig bekannte Konzept der Serendipität als Prinzip der Go-vernance von Forschung vorgestellt, das einen Ausweg aus dem Dilemma bieten könnte.
For the record: this comment was sent to the Nature magazine on February 27, 2021, but ignored.
It was submitted, providing the following explanation:
Dear Madame/Sir,
An increasing number of scientists from diverse disciplines is worried that investigations on the origin of the new coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 are highly biased. These investigations might thus fail to find the true origin of this dangerous virus.
Please be so kind and consider to publish my letter in the Correspondence section of your journal, as a loud appeal to the scientific community to investigate the origin of SARS-CoV-2 in all directions, in an unbiased way, and with a criminalistic attitude, in order to avoid similar disasters in the future.
Many thanks in advance for your kind consideration of my submission!
With best wishes
Günter Theißen
The devastating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic caused by SARS–coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has raised important questions about its origins and the mechanism of its transfer to humans. A further question was whether companion or commercial animals could act as SARS-CoV-2 vectors, with early data suggesting susceptibility is species specific. To better understand SARS-CoV-2 species susceptibility, we undertook an in silico structural homology modelling, protein–protein docking, and molecular dynamics simulation study of SARS-CoV-2 spike protein’s ability to bind angiotensin converting enzyme 2 (ACE2) from relevant species. Spike protein exhibited the highest binding to human (h)ACE2 of all the species tested, forming the highest number of hydrogen bonds with hACE2. Interestingly, pangolin ACE2 showed the next highest binding affinity despite having a relatively low sequence homology, whereas the affinity of monkey ACE2 was much lower despite its high sequence similarity to hACE2. These differences highlight the power of a structural versus a sequence-based approach to cross-species analyses. ACE2 species in the upper half of the predicted affinity range (monkey, hamster, dog, ferret, cat) have been shown to be permissive to SARS-CoV-2 infection, supporting a correlation between binding affinity and infection susceptibility. These findings show that the earliest known SARS-CoV-2 isolates were surprisingly well adapted to bind strongly to human ACE2, helping explain its efficient human to human respiratory transmission. This study highlights how in silico structural modelling methods can be used to rapidly generate information on novel viruses to help predict their behaviour and aid in countermeasure development.
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 has led to over 910,000 deaths worldwide and unprecedented decimation of the global economy. Despite its tremendous impact, the origin of SARS-CoV-2 has remained mysterious and controversial. The natural origin theory, although widely accepted, lacks substantial support. The alternative theory that the virus may have come from a research laboratory is, however, strictly censored on peer-reviewed scientific journals. Nonetheless, SARS-CoV-2 shows biological characteristics that are inconsistent with a naturally occurring, zoonotic virus. In this report, we describe the genomic, structural, medical, and literature evidence, which, when considered together, strongly contradicts the natural origin theory. The evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 should be a laboratory product created by using bat coronaviruses ZC45 and/or ZXC21 as a template and/or backbone. Building upon the evidence, we further postulate a synthetic route for SARS-CoV-2, demonstrating that the laboratory-creation of this coronavirus is convenient and can be accomplished in approximately six months. Our work emphasizes the need for an independent investigation into the relevant research laboratories. It also argues for a critical look into certain recently published data, which, albeit problematic, was used to support and claim a natural origin of SARS-CoV-2. From a public health perspective, these actions are necessary as knowledge of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 and of how the virus entered the human population are of pivotal importance in the fundamental control of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as in preventing similar, future pandemics.
Publication Note (July 17th, 2021):
The three Yan reports used scientific evidence and analyses to prove that SARS-CoV-2 is an Unrestricted Bioweaponcreated by military scientists of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime. These reports have played a pivotal role in revealing the true identity of the ongoing Unrestricted Biowarfare. For this reason, the CCP and its allies have been constantly launching attacks at the Yan Reports. Very recently, the Rule of Law Foundation (ROLF) and Rule of Law Society (ROLS), which we have listed as our honorary affiliation in our reports, requested Zenodo to have the original uploads of our reports closed. This was done by the ROLF & ROLS without informing us authors or seeking our agreement. This is unacceptable because the work was done by us authors independently with no financial assistance provided by the ROLF & ROLS or any other organization. Their action here has no scientific basis and is against the rules of scientific publications. To restore the availability of our reports to the world, we have therefore re-uploaded the three Yan reports. Our affiliation has been changed to Yan Research – An Independent Research Team.
The current report was originally published on September 14th, 2020. As of July 16th, 2021, the original Zenodoupload of it has been viewed 1,339,786 times and downloaded 797,325 times. Upon mutual agreement, Dr. Jie Guan opted out of this publication and his contributions have instead been specified in the acknowledgements.
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.
A large number of SARS-related coronaviruses (SARSr-CoV) have been detected in horseshoe bats since 2005 in different areas of China. However, these bat SARSr-CoVs show sequence differences from SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV) in different genes (S, ORF8, ORF3, etc) and are considered unlikely to represent the direct progenitor of SARS-CoV. Herein, we report the findings of our 5-year surveillance of SARSr-CoVs in a cave inhabited by multiple species of horseshoe bats in Yunnan Province, China. The full-length genomes of 11 newly discovered SARSr-CoV strains, together with our previous findings, reveals that the SARSr-CoVs circulating in this single location are highly diverse in the S gene, ORF3 and ORF8. Importantly, strains with high genetic similarity to SARS-CoV in the hypervariable N-terminal domain (NTD) and receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the S1 gene, the ORF3 and ORF8 region, respectively, were all discovered in this cave. In addition, we report the first discovery of bat SARSr-CoVs highly similar to human SARS-CoV in ORF3b and in the split ORF8a and 8b. Moreover, SARSr-CoV strains from this cave were more closely related to SARS-CoV in the non-structural protein genes ORF1a and 1b compared with those detected elsewhere. Recombination analysis shows evidence of frequent recombination events within the S gene and around the ORF8 between these SARSr-CoVs. We hypothesize that the direct progenitor of SARS-CoV may have originated after sequential recombination events between the precursors of these SARSr-CoVs. Cell entry studies demonstrated that three newly identified SARSr-CoVs with different S protein sequences are all able to use human ACE2 as the receptor, further exhibiting the close relationship between strains in this cave and SARS-CoV. This work provides new insights into the origin and evolution of SARS-CoV and highlights the necessity of preparedness for future emergence of SARS-like diseases.
An intense scientific debate is ongoing as to the origin of SARS-CoV-2. An oft-cited piece of information in this debate is the genome sequence of a bat coronavirus strain referred to as RaTG13 1 mentioned in a recent Nature paper 2 showing 96.2% genome homology with SARS-CoV-2. This is discussed as a fossil record of a strain whose current existence is unknown. The said strain is conjectured by many to have been part of the ancestral pool from which SARS-CoV-2 may have evolved 7, 8, 9. Multiple groups have been discussing the features of the genome sequence of the said strain. In this paper, we report that the currently specified level of details are grossly insufficient to draw inferences about the origin of SARS-CoV-2. De-novo assembly, KRONA analysis for metagenomic and re-examining data quality highlights the key issues with the RaTG13 genome and the need for a dispassionate review of this data. This work is a call to action for the scientific community to better collate scientific evidence about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 so that future incidence of such pandemics may be effectively mitigated.
Recent SARS-CoV-2 epidemiological origin studies have made their conclusion based-in-part by analyzing a bat coronavirus strain that most closely matches SARS-CoV-2 called RaTG13. However, the origins of this strain are obfuscated and therefore the genomics of the strain cannot be trusted, especially in context of determining the origin of SARS-CoV-2.
Government to cease funding gain-of-function studies that make viruses more dangerous, pending a safety assessment.