https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.10.18.512756v1.full.pdf To prevent future pandemics, it is important that we understand whether SARS-CoV-2 spilled over directly from animals to people, or indirectly in a laboratory accident. The genome of SARSCOV-2 contains a peculiar pattern of unique restriction endonuclease recognition sites allowing efficient dis- and re-assembly of the viral genome characteristic of synthetic viruses. Here, we report the likelihood of observing such a pattern in coronaviruses with no history of bioengineering. We find that SARS-CoV-2 is an anomaly, more likely a product of synthetic genome assembly than natural evolution. The restriction map of SARS-CoV-2 is consistent with many previously reported synthetic coronavirus genomes, meets all the criteria required for an efficient reverse genetic system, differs from closest relatives by a significantly higher rate of synonymous mutations in these synthetic-looking recognitions sites, and has a synthetic fingerprint unlikely to have evolved from its close relatives. We report a high likelihood that SARSCoV-2 may have originated as an infectious clone assembled in vitro.
100% from a lab, virus may have acted as a vaccine against worse possibilities. Omicron may have been lab grown to displace the original virus.
I'm not sure if you're only stating that Covid-19 may have been synthetic or that it was intentionally naturally created and then intentionally released. Consider this...the history of human coronaviruses began in 1965 when Tyrrell and Bynoe found that they could passage a virus named B814. It was found in human embryonic tracheal organ cultures obtained from the respiratory tract of an adult with a common cold. With that said, now think of today's growing (escalating problem) called RSV that's hitting mainly children and the elderly although it can infect any age group that has a weakened immune system. Simply, I strongly doubt Dr. Fauci has anything to do with the creation of Covid-19 considering any lab in the global research market that was studying coronavirus could have created a synthetic virus or easily set up conditions so that it can naturally form on its own. Yet, then releasing it onto the public without the public knowing is an entirely different issue. ---------- Coronavirus Evolution Scientists first identified a human coronavirus in 1965. It caused a common cold. Later that decade, researchers found a group of similar human and animal viruses and named them after their crown-like appearance. Seven coronaviruses can infect humans. The one that causes SARS emerged in southern China in 2002 and quickly spread to 28 other countries. More than 8,000 people were infected by July 2003, and 774 died. A small outbreak in 2004 involved only four more cases. This coronavirus causes fever, headache, and respiratory problems such as cough and shortness of breath. MERS started in Saudi Arabia in 2012. Almost all of the nearly 2,500 cases have been in people who live in or travel to the Middle East. This coronavirus is less contagious than its SARS cousin but more deadly, killing 858 people. It has the same respiratory symptoms but can also cause kidney failure. https://www.webmd.com/lung/coronavirus-history https://journals.lww.com/pidj/fulltext/2005/11001/history_and_recent_advances_in_coronavirus.12.aspx wrbtrader
And in a matter of hours this paper is already widely rebutted. It likely to be retracted since it is effectively just a re-hash of the biorxiv paper that was retracted in 2020 near the beginning of the pandemic. Lengthy thread
You found a Twitter discussion with a rebuttal and voila - it is unscientific. How easy! About a million of researchers have a vested interest in this story.
"It came from these backward farmers eating bats in this little fishing village in China named Wuhan. Basically, a 3rd world farming community and they don't have enough food so they have to eat bats duhhh" "Who committed 9/11? Ehh does it really matter?