The Mystery of COVID-19 Origin: Yunnan Miners

0
135

The origin of the Sars-Cov-2 virus has long been politicized. Dr. Shi, Zhengli 1 appeared on Science interview to demand apologies from President Trump. She asserted the validity of natural origin theory. However, critics believe the development of this theory remains consistent with the Communist Party’s interests. Allegedly, miners’ infections in Yunnan(China) in 2012 posted a potential lead to support the natural origin of the COVID-19 virus. It was first brought up in the Times 2. It has been widely circulated across media outlets under communists’ influence. 

The Times referred to a master thesis paper from Li Xu. In 2012, six miners from Mojiang of Yunnan caught pneumonia symptoms. Three died from the infections3. Blood and other biological samples were collected. Some pieces ended up at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). Dr. Shi confirmed that the SARS-like virus contributed to their death. Shi took a team into Yunnan to collect viral samples. From a total of 267 samples, they identified over 150 coronavirus samples. There was only one SARS-like strain: the BtCoV/4991 virus.

Therefore, many researchers proposed the Mojiang Miners Passaging hypothesis 4 based on this incident. They believe that the miners acquired a coronavirus from the bats in the mine. This bat virus evolved extensively inside their bodies and adapted to human physiology. In their consensus, BtCoV/4991 eventually became the SARS-Cov-2.

BtCoV/4991 could NOT be SARS-COV-2. 

Dr. Yan Li-Meng is a virologist who fled the Hong Kong P3 laboratory to reveal her findings to the world. She believed this hypothesis was another attempt from the Chinese Communist Party to evade their culpabilities. She pointed out:

The Times article fabricated false information with facts to induce further misconceptions. It was factual that six miners were infected. However, “the blood samples tested positive for SARS-like virus” was speculation rather than confirmation. Li Xu’s paper stated3, Yunnan miners did not undergo an autopsy. Biol samples were never taken from the lungs before or after the workers’ death.

Furthermore, the recovered miners no longer carried the virus in their bodies. By no means would they become hosts of this virus. The virus was believed to trigger SARS-like symptoms of pneumonia. But these symptoms would manifest from other diseases.

  1. Hypothetically, the bat virus underwent an extensive evolutionary process inside human bodies. It would have been detected at a very early stage. The Sars-Cov-2 outbreak occurred seven years later in late 2019 with a unique affinity to the human body. Its signatory high fatality rate would have triggered a preventative screening response. China’s CDC at all levels had developed a throughout reaction mechanism after the nationwide SARS pandemic. The China CDC has not found any relevant data on similar clusters from 2012 to 2018. 
  1. The “readily transmission from bats to humans” would make other animals susceptible to infections as well. A large number of rodents live in the same cave within the confined space with bats. However, there was no detection of the bat virus from these rodents from Shi’s team. This finding does not explain the high human affinity of the Sars-Cov-2 virus. Eight months after the COVID19 outbreak, international communities have yet to identify a secondary host. No other animals have been detected with similar infection models.

On September 3, Mr. Lu De hosted a discussion panel with a group of researchers. One guest speaker also pointed out: BtCoV/4991 was 1.5% homologous to RaTg13. The other 98.5% remained a myth due to Dr.Shi’s claim on lacking viable samples. Nonetheless, Shi attracted more skepticism after voluntarily altering the identity of BtCoV/4991 into RaTG13 without due disclosures. Her motives remained questionable. 

Dr. Yan also pointed out scientists had strong incentives to support the natural origin theory:

  • Firstly, researchers desired access to communists influenced academia networks for secured funding. 
  • Secondly, academic censorship prioritized publication on natural origin theory. 
  • Thirdly, natural origin theory diverted attention from gain-of-function studies. 

In conclusion, the natural origin hypothesis developed around Yunnan miners lacks sufficient evidence. A newly published article 6 on Wiley library echoed the skepticism from the discussion panel. The authors collectively questioned the significant discrepancies of host tropism/adaptation patterns between natural bat coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2. 

【Development】

On September 4, Dr. Yan published her first journal articulating her conviction on the lab origin theory. Click here to access this 27-pages-long report. 

All in all, “No CPC, No COVID.” 

【Author】Justice Lee【Editor】Brandon Michales, Dylan King

【Sources】

1.  Lee, Michales, and King, The “Bat-woman” Demands an Apology from Trump.” GNews, 2020-08-02 https://gnews.org/283579/

2.   Calvert, Jonathan, and Philip Sherwell. “Revealed: Seven Year Coronavirus Trail from Mine Deaths to a Wuhan Lab.” News | The Sunday Times, The Sunday Times, 4 July 2020, www.thetimes.co.uk/article/seven-year-covid-trail-revealed-l5vxt7jqp.

3. Xu, Li (2013) “The analysis of 6 patients with severe pneumonia caused by unknown viruses. MSc thesis (Original in Chinese)”. Emergency Department and EICU, The 1st Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University, Kunming. http://eng.oversea.cnki.net/Kcms/detail/detail.aspx?filename=1013327523.nh&dbcode=CMFD&dbname=CMF D2014

4.   Latham, PhD and Allison Wilson, PhD,  “A Proposed Origin for SARS-CoV-2 and the COVID-19 Pandemic” https://www.independentsciencenews.org/commentaries/a-proposed-origin-for-sars-cov-2-and-the-covid-19-pandemic/

5.  路德时评:英雄科学家闫丽梦博士突然出现直播中英文双语率领博士军团彻底打假云南矿洞事件!https://youtu.be/QokZ392yxLc?t=3225

6.  Seyran, Pizzol, Adadi, etc. “Questions concerning the proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2”

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jmv.26478

1
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments