Francisco de Asis Profile picture
Se puede cambiar el mundo | RT, follow & quote ≠ endorsement
Κασσάνδρα Παρί پری Profile picture Medical Science and Technology #earlytreatments Profile picture Billy Bostickson 🏴👁&👁 🆓 Profile picture Michael Birmann Profile picture Nicholas Coulson Profile picture 6 added to My Authors
26 Aug
"DRASTIC is on the rise" according to CCP-affiliated media
Hey, @BillyBostickson, I have not seen a $ yet!
"CNN published one piece of their works in June, which shows that the group ramped up efforts to expand its voices via these influencing media outlets." -->
Read 5 tweets
25 Aug
Addendum / Disclaimer of Joint China-WHO report…
"currently available data" is highly biased (at best). If you conclude something from biased data, your conclusions will be biased.
A good scientist assesses quality and biases of data first. That is how Science work Image
If you do not study something enough, you do not make an absolute judgment, much less give extreme probabilities. There you exceeded your mandate and did something unprofessional. Image
Read 7 tweets
24 Jul
[Thread] New unforced error. GIABR, the lab of the pangolins, has just uploaded sequences (MW600658:MW600715) that shows a trip to the Mojiang mineshaft or nearby on 22-Aug-2017, well after the last known trip of WIV in 2015.
Libiao Zhang explicitly credited as collector.
Some context: Very few CoVs published with collection date after 2016 by Chinese institutions

WIV used two main series of sample IDs (NNNN, e.g. 4991; and YYNNNN, e.g. 162387) plus some ad-hoc series.
We discovered yesterday that one of them was from GIABR.
Read 13 tweets
17 Jul
[Thread] Who is the first known patient?
There is a lot of confusion, so let's review all possible patients according published onset dates [of symptoms] up to 15-Dec-19.
Patients are anonymized, so they are identified as <AgeSex> (e.g. 49F is a 49-year-old female). In case there are many patients with same age & sex, suffixes are used (e.g. 65M1, 65M2, ...).
U = Unknown.
Problem: people can have birthday during illness
XX Su (61F), XX Wang (62M) & XX X (UU) onset 14, 21 & c. 30-Nov-19.
Info unnoticingly leaked in Health Times and uncovered by DRASTIC and @ianbirrell
Read 15 tweets
16 Jul
[Thread] Necessary corrections to the China-WHO report.
What they will probably fix and what they will not.
TLDR: circular swap of 3 IPCAMS genomes + tampered onset of Wuchang accountant; First patients and first cluster; Some falsehoods in articles…
As we said, the problems were with S01, S05 & S11. Absolutely chaotic, but with a little table it is all more clear. Part of the problem is inherited from Ren et al. (2020) who followed different orders in the text and in the genomes for the patients.
16-Dec-19 is the correct onset day for the Wuchang accountant. It was artificially advanced 8 days by CCP officials.
Read 11 tweets
20 Jun
"It shows how an authoritarian government can successfully shape the narrative of a disease outbreak and how it can take years — and, perhaps, regime change — to get to the truth"
"“You can concoct a completely crazy story and make it plausible by the way you design it,” Dr. Meselson said, explaining why the Soviets had succeeded in dispelling suspicions about a lab leak"
“Those who don’t want to accept the truth will always find ways not to accept it.”
Read 5 tweets
20 Jun
[Thread] Bat tissue collection and cell lines from the 3rd trip to Tongguan (TG) mine in Mojiang in Apr-2013
The 3rd trip is still my first guess for being the trip of live isolate WIV15 (and backbone). I guess it is more probable to isolate a virus from tissue itself... What do the experts say?
Jan 7, 2021, AVC Panel Discussion Origins of SARS-CoV-2 (from @KatherineEban's article)
“the incredible difficulty of isolating live virus from bat samples, which are usually fecal samples, and that this is extremely unreliable and usually not successful”…
Read 14 tweets
19 Jun
"The mounting evidence that the COVID-19 coronavirus escaped from the WIV, rather than spontaneously emerging from nature, had become the hottest topic in journalism and potentially the most consequential science story in a generation"…
"The COVID-19 pandemic revealed a profound corruption at the heart of our expert class. The impact of that revelation will reverberate for years to come"
"“The DRASTIC people are doing better research than the U.S. government,” a State Department investigator told Vanity Fair"
Read 6 tweets
30 May
The previous mainstream narrative of "anything outside of a zoonosis is a conspiracy theory" was built upon two letters (not articles), among most cited papers of the year. Even Dr. Shi used them. They are both sinking now.
1/ The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2
The corresponding author is self-debunking, and a co-author was de-facto retracting
2/ Lancet's letter (or Daszak's letter)
It did not fare any better. It was proved orchestrated by @PeterDaszak and, AFAIK, at least three co-authors de-facto retracted publicly declaring that the question of the origin was open
Read 4 tweets
22 May
New pre-print from WIV:
RaTG15, which it seems it is former Ra7909…
They finally concede after more than a year: "Here, we report the identification of a novel lineage of SARSr-CoVs, including RaTG15 and seven other viruses, from bats at the same location where we found RaTG13 in 2015"
No mention to the miners or the mine. Just this: "in Tongguan town, Mojiang county, Yunnan province in China in 2015, the same location where we found bat
RaTG13 in 2013"
Read 23 tweets
12 May
[Thread] New WIV theses found by @TheSeeker268. Let's make some comments on very important findings
1/ MSc thesis of Wang, 2nd co-author of the article of the first 4 trips to the mine (Ge et al., 2016), and dated 2 years before this article and can be considered as some of the first steps of this research
She states that "fever patient sera were obtained from a hospital in Yunnan Province". Very vague description! But later, in the Fig 2.6 there is an important clue: samples are named as "MJ123", using one of WIV standard naming formats...
Read 15 tweets
19 Apr
[Thread] Missing / unpublished sequences
WANTED: Live isolates WIV15 & WIV6; Ra7896 (complete genome); EPI_ISL_402122; MT394201
Two live isolates missing. Serious issue!
WIV6 and WIV15
We need full disclosure of Ra7896 & clade. NOW!
Read 7 tweets
16 Apr
[Thread] In-silico molecular overclocking of RaTG13.
TLDR: 191-nt RdRp segments of SARS-CoV-2, RaTG13 and Ra7896 show an unexpected molecular clock behavior. In-silico synonym mutations is one probable explanation. ImageImage
Assuming SARS-CoV-2 is an ancestor of Ra7896 (used in RaTG13) does not fully explain it. Implied evolutionary rate would be in the order of 10^-2 substitutions/site/year in a well-conserved part of the genome, far from a normal ~10^-3 for a complete genome
So, it is not only SARS-CoV-2 having its molecular clock frozen, but also RaTG13 molecular clock running more than expected.
@nerdhaspower and @quay_dr have already noted strange patterns of synonym mutations along the genome of RaTG13
Read 12 tweets
18 Mar
@MonaRahalkar @Daoyu15 @babarlelephant @Drinkwater5Reed @idomyownexpts @AntGDuarte @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @daoyu But we would know a few things:
- ancestor of Ra7896, so, before May-15
- very close to Ra4991, but not Ra4991 (has 5 mutations in 370)
- not the miner's virus
It could be what you mentioned long time ago: other samples. But not initially hidden, but detected very late. Maybe
@MonaRahalkar @Daoyu15 @babarlelephant @Drinkwater5Reed @idomyownexpts @AntGDuarte @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @daoyu OTOH, the RBD should come from the mine too. We already know there was one there in April 2012. They eventually found a descendant
@MonaRahalkar @Daoyu15 @babarlelephant @Drinkwater5Reed @idomyownexpts @AntGDuarte @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @daoyu A good candidate for WIV15 could be 1 of the 43 samples of Ra from the 3rd trip in April 2013
Read 14 tweets
4 Mar
[Thread of threads] #originsofSARSCoV2 #DRASTIC
Compilation of relevant findings. Live thread.
Let's start with the Addendum and the 7896 clade recently confirmed to come from the Mojiang mineshaft
Read 14 tweets
14 Feb
[Thread] Pangolin CoV... or Bat CoV in pangolins samples?
TLDR: A researcher of the team that sequenced the pangolins samples had taken samples in the mine of RaTG13 and in the place where RmYN02 was collected, also catched bats in Yunnan. Probably contaminated pangolin samples
@Daoyu15 was the first to note that the raw sequence reads of the pangolins “contained unexpected reads and was in serious risk of contamination” in early June 2020. But now we can explain how it was possible to happen this in Guangdong…
Jin-Ping Chen, the corresponding author of the first paper of the pangolins, and LiBiao Zhang, who has been sampling the mine of RaTG13 and the place in Mengla where RmYN02 was collected, are close colleagues in GIABR & GIZ…
Read 10 tweets
14 Feb
[Thread] Unnoticed Lab contamination in the samples of first COVID-19 infected patients.
1/ Article: “There was a simultaneous undetected outbreak of Nipah in Wuhan”

2/ Article: “Non-SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences identified in clinical samples from COVID-19 infected patients”

Read 4 tweets
4 Feb
Read 12 tweets
2 Feb
@Daoyu15 @Undergroundsar3 @Real_Adam_B @BillyBostickson @Rossana38510044 @luigi_warren @babarlelephant @AntGDuarte @MonaRahalkar @flavinkins @KevinMcH3 @DrAntoniSerraT1 @_coltseavers @rowanjacobsen @uacjess @RolandBakerIII @TheSeeker268 @still_a_nerd @jjcouey @Harvard2H @ydeigin @CarltheChippy @ico_dna @nerdhaspower @scottburke777 @JJ2000426 @BahulikarRahul @alimhaider @antonioregalado @Ayjchan @R_H_Ebright @BretWeinstein @sanchak74 @JCalvertST @PeterDaszak @TheSeeker @nature @threadreaderapp Max Genbank ID (GI) by Modification date in nuccore:
Jan 07th: 1,790,159,865
Jan 08th: 1,791,050,251
Jan 09th: 1,791,354,567
Jan 10th: 1,794,858,040
Jan 11th: 1,795,744,542
Jan 12th: 1,796,141,132

MN908947 (Wuhan-Hu-1): 1,791,269,088
So, created on Jan 9th, or even on Jan 8th
Read 7 tweets
27 Jan
@nature cc reviewer @c_drosten, this article must be corrected to acknowledge that SADSr-CoV 3755 was from the same mine of Mojiang (Yunnan) as RaTG13. Any reader of the paper thinks it came from Guangdong, and that is not true…
As you see, its ID is in the middle of the IDs of the 1st trip of WIV to the mine (Ge et al, 2016).
Obviously, disclosing its full sequence is also a must, not only the N. Image
Wang et al. (2019) stated it was from Yunnan in their Fig 1.
Ra7347 most probably from the mine too. And 140351 too (they messed samples of May-14)
With so many errors, lack of info, cheatings and covers, the phylogenetic trees are totally useless! Shame… Image
Read 4 tweets
28 Nov 20
@Rossana38510044 @luigi_warren @babarlelephant @AntGDuarte @MonaRahalkar @BillyBostickson @flavinkins @KevinMcH3 @DrAntoniSerraT1 @_coltseavers @rowanjacobsen @uacjess @RolandBakerIII @TheSeeker268 @Daoyu15 @still_a_nerd @jjcouey @Harvard2H @ydeigin @CarltheChippy @ico_dna @Nomdeplumi1 @Real_Adam_B @nerdhaspower @scottburke777 @JJ2000426 @BahulikarRahul @alimhaider @antonioregalado @Ayjchan @R_H_Ebright @BretWeinstein @sanchak74 @JCalvertST [Thread] Addendum of WIV in Nature.
What we know about the samples and the visits to the mineshaft of TG?
TLDR: 7 trips: 4 already known (Ge et al., 2016), plus other 3 with massive sampling until 2015, including 7896-clade. All already in Latinne et al. (2020)
Read 38 tweets