As readers will recall from the earlier article (above), Japanese and Taiwanese epidemiologists and pharmacologists have determined that the new coronavirus could have originated in the US since that country is the only one known to have all five types â from which all others must have descended. Wuhan in China has only one of those types, rendering it in analogy as a kind of âbranchâ which cannot exist by itself but must have grown from a âtreeâ.
The Taiwanese physician noted that in August of 2019 the US had a flurry of lung pneumonias or similar, which the Americans blamed on âvapingâ from e-cigarettes, but which, according to the scientist, the symptoms and conditions could not be explained by e-cigarettes. He said he wrote to the US officials telling them he suspected those deaths were likely due to the coronavirus. He claims his warnings were ignored.
Immediately prior to that, the CDC totally shut down the US Militaryâs main bio-lab at Fort Detrick, Maryland, due to an absence of safeguards against pathogen leakages, issuing a complete âcease and desistâ order to the military. It was immediately after this event that the âe-cigaretteâ epidemic arose.
We also had the Japanese citizens infected in September of 2019, in Hawaii, people who had never been to China, these infections occurring on US soil long before the outbreak in Wuhan but only shortly after the locking down of Fort Detrick.
Then, on Chinese social media, another article appeared, aware of the above but presenting further details. It stated in part that five âforeignâ athletes or other personnel visiting Wuhan for the World Military Games (October 18-27, 2019) were hospitalised in Wuhan for an undetermined infection.
The article explains more clearly that the Wuhan version of the virus could have come only from the US because it is what they call a âbranchâ which could not have been created first because it would have no âseedâ. It would have to have been a new variety spun off the original âtrunkâ, and that trunk exists only in the US.
There has been much public speculation that the coronavirus had been deliberately transmitted to China but, according to the Chinese article, a less sinister alternative is possible.
If some members of the US team at the World Military Games (18-27 October) had become infected by the virus from an accidental outbreak at Fort Detrick it is possible that, with a long initial incubation period, their symptoms might have been minor, and those individuals could easily have âtouredâ the city of Wuhan during their stay, infecting potentially thousands of local residents in various locations, many of whom would later travel to the seafood market from which the virus would spread like wildfire (as it did).
That would account also for the practical impossibility of locating the legendary âpatient zeroâ â which in this case has never been found since there would have been many of them.
Next, Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease expert at Georgetown University in Washington, said in an article in Science magazine that the first human infection has been confirmed as occurring in November 2019, (not in Wuhan), suggesting the virus originated elsewhere and then spread to the seafood markets. âOne group put the origin of the outbreak as early as 18 September 2019.â
Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally.
Description of earliest cases suggests the outbreak began elsewhere.
The article states:
âAs confirmed cases of a novel virus surge around the world with worrisome speed, all eyes have so far focused on a seafood market in Wuhan, China, as the origin of the outbreak. But a description of the first clinical cases published in The Lancet on Friday challenges that hypothesis.â
The paper, written by a group of Chinese researchers from several institutions, offers details about the first 41 hospitalized patients who had confirmed infections with what has been dubbed 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).
In the earliest case, the patient became ill on 1 December 2019 and had no reported link to the seafood market, the authors report. âNo epidemiological link was found between the first patient and later casesâ, they state. Their data also show that, in total, 13 of the 41 cases had no link to the marketplace. âThatâs a big number, 13, with no linkâ, says Daniel Lucey . . .
Earlier reports from Chinese health authorities and the World Health Organization had said the first patient had onset of symptoms on 8 December 2019 â and those reports simply said âmostâ cases had links to the seafood market, which was closed on 1 January.
âLucey says if the new data are accurate, the first human infections must have occurred in November 2019 â if not earlier â because there is an incubation time between infection and symptoms surfacing. If so, the virus possibly spread silently between people in Wuhan â and perhaps elsewhere â before the cluster of cases from the cityâs now-infamous Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was discovered in late December. âThe virus came into that marketplace before it came out of that marketplaceâ, Lucey asserts.
âChina must have realized the epidemic did not originate in that Wuhan Huanan seafood marketâ, Lucey told Science Insider.
I thought it was developed in N. Carolna. Sold to China complete, not a branch .