Every day there is more evidence that the SARS-2 outbreak began months before the earliest documented Wuhan infections. Why does nobody care?
Brief remarks on a sensational study from Lombardy, which finds conclusive evidence of SARS-2 infection in a patient sample from 12 September 2019.
I finally got to read that new Italian study on pre-pandemic SARS-2 infections in Lombardy that has been making the rounds. It comes out of an Italian reference laboratory for measles and rubella surveillance, where scientists noticed an increase in the portion of suspected measles cases that were testing negative, all the way back in August 2019. Since skin rashes are a well-documented Corona symptom, they recently decided to test old archival samples for SARS-2, to see if they couldn’t solve this small mystery. They looked at samples going back to 2018, and their tests came up positive for SARS-2 RNA in thirteen cases. Eleven of these samples were collected before anybody declared a pandemic. Four of the eleven also had anti-SARS-2 antibodies – including the earliest sample, taken from an eight-month-old infant on 12 September 2019. None of these patients had any relevant travel history.
What’s most interesting, is the genetic sequences of these early samples from Fall 2019:
In total, we obtained 15 sequences, including 12 from pre-pandemic cases. All three major mutations (C3037T, C14408T, and A23403G), which had first been detected weeks after the outbreak in China, were observed whenever these regions were sequenced, indicating that sequences from October 2019 already carried mutations that had been absent in the first sampled strains (e.g., Wuhan-Hu-1) reported from China …
It’s like this: By comparing early SARS-2 sequences with closely related pangolin and bat viruses, we can infer that the progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 lacked a series of so-called alpha mutations, seen in the earliest sequences from Wuhan. By late January 2020, these alpha mutations were increasingly joined by a series of beta mutations in the sequenced Wuhan viruses. There is a good relative chronology here: Viruses with alpha and beta mutations probably postdate viruses with alpha mutations alone.
What the Italians have discovered, is that these beta mutations are far older, going back as far as October 2019. We can still say that Wuhan looks to be the origins of the outbreak, because the older lineages with only alpha mutations were detected there first of all, and in the greatest numbers. But, it’s clear that the chronological picture we’ve been fed about the origins of the SARS-2 outbreak, and that all establishment sources continue to propagate, is totally false.
As Michael Senger noted recently, “there’s something rotten in the state of virology.” That crucial findings like these should attract such little interest speaks volumes about the heavily manipulated nature of Corona discourse. There are specific parties you’d think would directly benefit from more studies like this one; for the Wuhan Institute of Virology, finding alpha-but-not-beta viruses in 2019 samples outside China would be a powerful argument for exoneration. But, nobody wants to dig up further evidence on when and where SARS-2 entered humans – perhaps because everybody knows that more chronological clarity would do anything but support the case for natural origins.
eugyppius: a plague chronicle is a reader-supported publication. maybe you subscribe?
Oh this is a fun post!
Covid (AKA the bad cold) was in New England by at least November 2019. I know a elder care worker who had it and had to go to the Hospital with breathing issues in that Month. They also reported more deaths at the elder care facility they work that Month than in March 2020. My sons school had half the kids out in January 2020 sick with it and I caught it in February of that month. I've talked tons of people and they also had it early on.
They took the 2019/20 seasonal flu and rebranded it Covid on March 2020. .
“everybody knows that more chronological clarity would do anything but support the case for natural origins”
Nor would it support the claim that lockdowns were necessary or lifesaving