Daoyu Profile picture
Genetic research and seeker of truth. gab: @Flavinkins
Russian bot Profile picture The Millennial VC Profile picture Grump Profile picture Kim Profile picture Dawn Dack Profile picture 15 added to My Authors
May 25 13 tweets 6 min read
@scotub These are actually not class II MHC epitopes—they are so-called “CTL epitopes” (or MHC class I epitopes) which are in fact dominated by pentapeptide and hexapeptide fragments. The long peptide view only hold for CD4 T cell epitopes, and even with that partial homology still @scotub Dominate reactivity—only the central part of the peptide which is usually 8 to 12 AA in length contact the TCR from a CD4+ T cells. As for CD8+ T cells, their epitopes are much shorter—same as the linear B cell epitopes which are also on average 6-7AA in length and are
May 21 4 tweets 5 min read
May 21 7 tweets 3 min read
May 20 21 tweets 11 min read
@Biorealism Also RC-O319 is more distant than ZC45, and RahSTT182/200 have A singly deleted RBD making them unrelated to SARS-CoV-2 by the RBD. drive.google.com/drive/folders/…
And thus incapable of becoming an ancestor (not hACE2-RBD. Variable loop 1 deleted). @Biorealism Rc-O319 is a loop 2 deleted RBD.
May 18 6 tweets 2 min read
May 18 5 tweets 2 min read
archive.ph/VXtu9
And a single case before and outside the market disproves the market. There are at least 2 cases in Italy and 1000 cases in Brazil (minimal number required to turn wastewater PCR positive) in November 2019 a month before the market.
Market origin is Completely incompatible with any presence of SARS-CoV-2 before the initial cluster at the market in a place other than the market—and we get at least 3 independent confirmations of such presence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in samples predating the outbreak at the market, outside the
May 18 14 tweets 7 min read
@Ayjchan And the ones who was manufacturing a consensus publicly was also voicing privately opinions and concerns that were completely opposite of what they claim to be “scientific consensus”. @Ayjchan
May 18 10 tweets 3 min read
archive.ph/VXtu9
We actually have evidence of this. Lineages that are extinct and were circulating widespread across the world before Huanan. archive.ph/dmOXT
And don’t like that sometimes like this did happen before. See the E.Coli O104:H4 outbreak in Germany, which was falsely attributed to contaminated tomatoes on the organic produce market and the farms that supplied them. Only after further investigation of
May 17 13 tweets 21 min read
@DrLiMengYAN1 @JamieMetzl @angie_rasmussen @jbloom_lab @Biol4Ever @DecrolyE archive.ph/DJwOj

archive.ph/oaN16

archive.ph/Ia1t4

biblioasis.com/elaine-dewar-w…

zenodo.org/record/5517659…

She had grave COI with GOF lipkins (the proximal signee, served the CCP’s propaganda interest before 2020) on the proximal origins paper, and none of these @DrLiMengYAN1 @JamieMetzl @angie_rasmussen @jbloom_lab @Biol4Ever @DecrolyE COIs were declared.
She was also in close tie with the CCP and served as their propaganda outlet.
May 16 4 tweets 2 min read
Also, archive.ph/Zlss7 nomatter RRRARR or ARRAR (the latter is the ENaC Alpha cleavage site, Highly specific to human cells), passage turn it into PRRAR. archive.ph/VXtu9
If you want to trace back cases, the very first batch of cases (positive environmental samples and positive swab samples) are completely unrelated to the Huanan market—in fact, they were outside China and were on different continents than where bats with
May 14 17 tweets 10 min read
threadreaderapp.com/thread/1523989… archive.ph/GME5L

archive.ph/dsJ15

archive.ph/dmOXT

archive.ph/8thla

archive.ph/VXtu9
Markolin ignored selectively every genome that have just 8782C, which is plenty in Wuhan, Beijing and constitute 1/6 of all genomes In Sichuan, Ignored cases before Huanan which exist even outside of China since 10/11/2019. archive.ph/0RLCs
Markolins failed to consider the existence of severe Bias in the way the first cases were reported to the WHO. archive.ph/MCqMS

archive.ph/6B1Og
May 14 10 tweets 9 min read
@breakfast_dogs @jbloom_lab @ydeigin datasets can be contaminated, and unless the exact cause for deletion have been public and the exact info (metadata, origin, institution, study type, country) have been released and verified to be not related to SARS-CoV-2 or have a potential of being contaminated with it before @breakfast_dogs @jbloom_lab @ydeigin the pandemic (e.g. in the same location as high-risk labs studying coronaviruses and GOF), the datasets can not be simply casted aside as "not SARS-CoV-2". remember that contamination by SARS-CoV-2 of data, even unrelated data, can be the cause of retraction especially for
May 13 12 tweets 9 min read
@mattwridley @mattwridley archive.ph/VXtu9
The most inconvenient fact is that there are cases of SARs-CoV-2 verified infections and verified positive wastewater samples before the market and 6000+ km away from the market. In a real scientific debate it rules out the market completely.
May 12 4 tweets 3 min read
archive.ph/dyBAJ
Similar tree shrews and mice(rats)? ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P… (BalB/C is mice……) archive.ph/71Di3
SARS-CoV-2 is broadly immunogenic and provide protection against severe disease to SARS-CoV and other Sarbecoviruses. More recent isolates like Omicron (no longer cleaved on the S1-S2) seems to begun recovering ADE capacity……