Coronavirus, cosa ha scoperto la scienza

Dopo 7 mesi siamo ancora qui a parlare dello stesso problema senza che sia cambiato niente. E io che pensavo che nel 2020 la scienza e la medicina fossero avanti anni luce....dopo 7 mesi vedo solo improvvisazione come a febbraio...
 
Contro tutti i virus è così, mai sentito di una cura contro raffreddori o influenze? Al max si curano i sintomi
 
Mia personale esperienza con l'influenza:

fino al 2013 tutti gli anni a novembre facevo il vaccino, e regolarmente a fine inverno me la prendevo bella tosta....
i medici interpellati mi spiegavano che il vaccino si fabbricava sulla base dei virus comparsi in Australia 6 mesi prima, e che nel frattempo i virus cambiano

a fine 2013 vado in pensione...niente più riunioni di lavoro e sopratutto niente più pendolarismo con i mezzi pubblici....niente più vaccino antinfluenzale (perchè scoraggiato dalle precedenti esperienze negative)
e niente più influenze a primavera, fatto salvo qualche occasionale raffreddore....

ora, premesso che non sono certo un no-vax e premesso che sono ben consapevole che l'esperienza di un singolo individuo è ben poco significativa, sulle vaccinazioni antinfluenzali e sullo stesso vaccino che verrà ho le idee molto confuse....
 
Goccioline di coronavirus vive e infettive isolate nell’aria

Goccioline di coronavirus vive e infettive isolate nell’aria: la prova in un nuovo studio
Secondo molti esperti l’aerosol disperso ha un ruolo significativo nella diffusione della malattia, ma per la prima volta è stato dimostrato che il virus campionato è infettivo
di Cristina Marrone
Goccioline di coronavirus vive e infettive isolate nell'aria: la prova in un nuovo studio shadow
In molti sono ancora piuttosto scettici sul fatto che il coronavirus possa diffondersi anche per via aerea e solo di recente anche l’Organizzazione mondiale della sanità , su input di un gruppo di scienziati, ha ammesso questa possibilità di contagio: non solo tosse e starnuti ma anche goccioline più piccole che fluttuano nell’aria prima di evaporare, emesse mentre si parla o si respira possono essere veicolo di contagio. Ma queste goccioline sono effettivamente infettive? Che si produca aerosol, soprattutto espirando profondamente, cantando o parlando ad alta voce è noto. Ora però un nuovo studio ha dimostrato che le goccioline di aerosol contengono virus vivi e non solo frammenti di materiale genetico. Insomma, la prova che gli scienziati attendevano: il virus nell’aria è infettivo.
L’aerosol infetto trovato anche a quattro metri dalla fonte
Il team di ricerca dell’Università della Florida è riuscito a isolare da goccioline di aerosol virus vivi in una stanza con pazienti ricoverati per Covid-19 a una distanza tra i due e i quattro metri da loro, ben oltre la distanza raccomandata per evitare il contagio. La ricerca non ha ancora ottenuto la revisione da parte di altri scienziati ma tra gli addetti ai lavori è stata accolta come una «pistola fumante», la prova tanto attesa, come dice la dottoressa Linsey Marr, esperta nella diffusione aerea dei virus. Intervistata dal New York Times la scienziata ha dichiarato: «Questo è quanto le persone stavano chiedendo a gran voce, la prova inequivocabile della presenza di virus infettivi negli aerosol». Molti esperti sostengono comunque che non sia ancora chiaro se la quantità di virus rintracciato sia sufficiente a causare l’infezione.

I tentativi precedenti
Questo genere di indagine è molto complessa perché gli aerosol sono già molto piccoli. L’evaporazione li rende ancor più piccoli e i tentativi di «catturare» queste goccioline di solito danneggiano il virus che contengono. In passato gli scienziati hanno usato filtri di gelatina oppure tubi di vetro o plastica per raccogliere l’aerosol, ma la potenza dell’aria ha ridotto il volume degli aerosol eliminando il virus. Un altro gruppo di lavoro era riuscito a isolare il virus vivo, senza però riuscire a dimostrare che il virus isolato potesse infettare le cellule.
Come si è svolta la ricerca
Nel nuovo studio i ricercatori hanno inventato un campionatore che utilizza vapore acqueo per ingrandire gli aerosol e poterli raccogliere dall’aria. Una volta raccolti l’apparecchiatura li trasferisce in un liquido ricco di sali, zucchero e proteine che preserva l’agente patogeno. Gli scienziati hanno raccolto campioni d’aria da una stanza in cui erano ricoverati pazienti Covid all’Health Shands Hospital dell’Università della Florida. Nessuno dei pazienti era stato sottoposto a pratiche mediche note per generare aerosol (come ad esempio la broncoscopia). Gli scienziati hanno raccolto il virus a due e quattro metri di distanza dai pazienti dimostrando che quel virus campionato nell’aria era in grado di infettare cellule in laboratorio. La sequenza del genoma del virus isolato era identica a quella del tampone di un paziente sintomatico appena ricoverato in quella stanza. Stanza che aveva sei ricambi d’aria all’ora ed era dotata di filtri efficienti, radiazioni ultraviolette e altre misure di sicurezza per inattivare il virus. Queste misure potrebbero spiegare perché sono state campionate solo 74 particelle virali per litro di aria. Certamente in spazi che non sono dotati di una buona ventilazione come potrebbero essere scuole e uffici, le particelle virali sarebbero state di più.
I dubbi
Altri esperti affermano che è difficile stimare il rischio di infezione con questi risultati. «Non sono sicura che questi numeri siano abbastanza alti da provocare l’infezione di qualcuno. L’unica conclusione che posso trarre da questo documento è che è possibile coltivare virus vitali campionati in aria, e ammetto che non è poco» ha dichiarato Angela Rasmussen, virologa della Columbia University di New York intervistata dal New York Times.
18 agosto 2020 (modifica il 18 agosto 2020 | 10:52)

Coronavirus, goccioline vive e infettive isolate nell’aria - Corriere.it
 
l'ultima scoperta di Trump ;)

(CNN)President Donald Trump and Mike Lindell, the creator of MyPillow and an avowed supporter, participated in a July meeting at the White House regarding the use of oleandrin as a potential therapeutic for coronavirus, Lindell confirmed to CNN.

Oleandrin is an extract from the plant Nerium oleander. The raw oleander plant is highly toxic, and consumption of it can be fatal.
He described the President's response toward the extract as "enthusiastic."
"He was enthusiastic, as he is on everything that's going to help people," he told CNN, adding that Trump wanted the Food and Drug Administration to "do its course."
Trump confirmed he's "heard about" oleandrin when asked Monday on the White House South Lawn


Oleandrina
L'oleandrina è un glucoside cardiotonico che viene prodotto dal Nerium oleander. Insieme alla neandrina è l'agente responsabile della velenosità della linfa dell'oleandro.
L'ingestione dell'oleandrina può causare effetti gastrointestinali e cardiaci. Gli effetti gastrointestinali consistono in nausea e vomito, eccesso di salivazione, dolore addominale e diarrea. Gli effetti cardiaci sono invece più pericolosi: andando ad interferire con l'attività dei canali del calcio va ad alterare il normale flusso di ioni attraverso la membrana cellulare. L'anormale concentrazione all'interno delle cellule cardiache causa irregolarità nella pulsazione cardiaca, aritmia ed arresto cardiaco.

che dire, magari funziona
 
How the pandemic might play out in 2021 and beyond

How the pandemic might play out in 2021 and beyond

This coronavirus is here for the long haul — here’s what scientists predict for the next months and years.

05 August 2020
NEWS FEATURE
Megan Scudellari

Illustration of a line of people walking through a jungle that is filled with Sars-CoV-2 virus.
Illustration by Ana Kova
June 2021. The world has been in pandemic mode for a year and a half. The virus continues to spread at a slow burn; intermittent lockdowns are the new normal. An approved vaccine offers six months of protection, but international deal-making has slowed its distribution. An estimated 250 million people have been infected worldwide, and 1.75 million are dead.

Scenarios such as this one imagine how the COVID-19 pandemic might play out1. Around the world, epidemiologists are constructing short- and long-term projections as a way to prepare for, and potentially mitigate, the spread and impact of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. Although their forecasts and timelines vary, modellers agree on two things: COVID-19 is here to stay, and the future depends on a lot of unknowns, including whether people develop lasting immunity to the virus, whether seasonality affects its spread, and — perhaps most importantly — the choices made by governments and individuals. “A lot of places are unlocking, and a lot of places aren’t. We don’t really yet know what’s going to happen,” says Rosalind Eggo, an infectious-disease modeller at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine (LSHTM).

“The future will very much depend on how much social mixing resumes, and what kind of prevention we do,” says Joseph Wu, a disease modeller at the University of Hong Kong. Recent models and evidence from successful lockdowns suggest that behavioural changes can reduce the spread of COVID-19 if most, but not necessarily all, people comply.


Last week, the number of confirmed COVID-19 infections passed 15 million globally, with around 650,000 deaths. Lockdowns are easing in many countries, leading some people to assume that the pandemic is ending, says Yonatan Grad, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health in Boston, Massachusetts. “But that’s not the case. We’re in for a long haul.”

If immunity to the virus lasts less than a year, for example, similar to other human coronaviruses in circulation, there could be annual surges in COVID-19 infections through to 2025 and beyond. Here, Nature explores what the science says about the months and years to come.

What happens in the near future?

The pandemic is not playing out in the same way from place to place. Countries such as China, New Zealand and Rwanda have reached a low level of cases — after lockdowns of varying lengths — and are easing restrictions while watching for flare-ups. Elsewhere, such as in the United States and Brazil, cases are rising fast after governments lifted lockdowns quickly or never activated them nationwide.

The latter group has modellers very worried. In South Africa, which now ranks fifth in the world for total COVID-19 cases, a consortium of modellers estimates2 that the country can expect a peak in August or September, with around one million active cases, and cumulatively as many as 13 million symptomatic cases by early November. In terms of hospital resources, “we’re already breaching capacity in some areas, so I think our best-case scenario is not a good one”, says Juliet Pulliam, director of the South African Centre for Epidemiological Modelling and Analysis at Stellenbosch University.

People wearing face masks sitting apart for social distancing at a cinema in Hangzhou, China
Cinemagoers in Hangzhou, China, follow new norms of distancing and mask-wearing.Credit: AFP/Getty
But there is hopeful news as lockdowns ease. Early evidence suggests that personal behavioural changes, such as hand-washing and wearing masks, are persisting beyond strict lockdown, helping to stem the tide of infections. In a June report3, a team at the MRC Centre for Global Infectious Disease Analysis at Imperial College London found that among 53 countries beginning to open up, there hasn’t been as large a surge in infections as predicted on the basis of earlier data. “It’s undervalued how much people’s behaviour has changed in terms of masks, hand washing and social distancing. It’s nothing like it used to be,” says Samir Bhatt, an infectious-disease epidemiologist at Imperial College London and a co-author of the study.

Researchers in virus hotspots have been studying just how helpful these behaviours are. At Anhembi Morumbi University in São Paulo, Brazil, computational biologist Osmar Pinto Neto and colleagues ran more than 250,000 mathematical models of social-distancing strategies described as constant, intermittent or ‘stepping-down’ — with restrictions reduced in stages — alongside behavioural interventions such as mask-wearing and hand washing.


Profile of a killer: the complex biology powering the coronavirus pandemic

The team concluded that if 50–65% of people are cautious in public, then stepping down social-distancing measures every 80 days could help to prevent further infection peaks over the next two years4. “We’re going to need to change the culture of how we interact with other people,” says Neto. Overall, it’s good news that even without testing or a vaccine, behaviours can make a significant difference in disease transmission, he adds.

Infectious-disease modeller Jorge Velasco-Hernández at the National Autonomous University of Mexico in Juriquilla and colleagues also examined the trade-off between lockdowns and personal protection. They found that if 70% of Mexico’s population committed to personal measures such as hand washing and mask-wearing following voluntary lockdowns that began in late March, then the country’s outbreak would decline after peaking in late May or early June5. However, the government lifted lockdown measures on 1 June and, rather than falling, the high number of weekly COVID-19 deaths plateaued. Velasco-Hernández’s team thinks that two public holidays acted as superspreading events, causing high infection rates right before the government lifted restrictions6.

Aerial shot of people gathered inside painted circles on the grass encouraging social distancing in a San Francisco park
Social distancing could be required intermittently for years to suppress COVID-19 peaks.Credit: John Edelson/AFP/Getty
In regions where COVID-19 seems to be on the decline, researchers say that the best approach is careful surveillance by testing and isolating new cases and tracing their contacts. This is the situation in Hong Kong, for instance. “We are experimenting, making observations and adjusting slowly,” says Wu. He expects that the strategy will prevent a huge resurgence of infections — unless increased air traffic brings a substantial number of imported cases.


Pandemic on campus: tell us how your institution is coping

But exactly how much contact tracing and isolation is required to contain an outbreak effectively? An analysis7 by the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases COVID-19 Working Group at the LSHTM simulated fresh outbreaks of varying contagiousness, starting from 5, 20 or 40 introduced cases. The team concluded that contact tracing must be rapid and extensive — tracing 80% of contacts within a few days — to control an outbreak. The group is now assessing the effectiveness of digital contact tracing and how long it’s feasible to keep exposed individuals in quarantine, says co-author Eggo. “Finding the balance between what actually is a strategy that people will tolerate, and what strategy will contain an outbreak, is really important.”

Tracing 80% of contacts could be near-impossible to achieve in regions still grappling with thousands of new infections a week — and worse, even the highest case counts are likely to be an underestimate. A June preprint1 from a Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) team in Cambridge analysing COVID-19 testing data from 84 countries suggests that global infections were 12 times higher and deaths 50% higher than officially reported (see ‘Predicting cases and deaths’). “There are many more cases out there than the data indicate. As a consequence, there’s higher risk of infection than people may believe there to be,” says John Sterman, co-author of the study and director of the MIT System Dynamics Group.

Graphic showing how official figures for COVID-19 infections and deaths have been significantly understated in 86 countries.
Source: Data from ref. 1, updated with authors’ estimates until 10 July 2020
For now, mitigation efforts, such as social distancing, need to continue for as long as possible to avert a second major outbreak, says Bhatt. “That is, until the winter months, where things get a bit more dangerous again.”

What will happen when it gets cold?

It is clear now that summer does not uniformly stop the virus, but warm weather might make it easier to contain in temperate regions. In areas that will get colder in the second half of 2020, experts think there is likely to be an increase in transmission.

Many human respiratory viruses — influenza, other human coronaviruses and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) — follow seasonal oscillations that lead to winter outbreaks, so it is likely that SARS-CoV-2 will follow suit. “I expect SARS-CoV-2 infection rate, and also potentially disease outcome, to be worse in the winter,” says Akiko Iwasaki, an immunobiologist at the Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut. Evidence suggests that dry winter air improves the stability and transmission of respiratory viruses8, and respiratory-tract immune defence might be impaired by inhaling dry air, she adds.

In addition, in colder weather people are more likely to stay indoors, where virus transmission through droplets is a bigger risk, says Richard Neher, a computational biologist at the University of Basel in Switzerland. Simulations by Neher’s group show that seasonal variation is likely to affect the virus’s spread and might make containment in the Northern Hemisphere this winter more difficult9.

In future, SARS-CoV-2 outbreaks could arrive in waves every winter. The risk to adults who have already had COVID-19 could be reduced, as with flu, but it would depend on how rapidly immunity to this coronavirus wears off, says Neher. What’s more, the combination of COVID-19, flu and RSV in autumn and winter could be challenging, says Velasco-Hernández, who is setting up a model of how such viruses might interact.


Special report: The simulations driving the world’s response to COVID-19

It remains unknown whether infection with other human coronaviruses can offer any protection against SARS-CoV-2. In a cell-culture experiment involving SARS-CoV-2 and the closely related SARS-CoV, antibodies from one coronavirus could bind to the other coronavirus, but did not disable or neutralize it10.

To end the pandemic, the virus must either be eliminated worldwide — which most scientists agree is near-impossible because of how widespread it has become — or people must build up sufficient immunity through infections or a vaccine. It is estimated that 55–80% of a population must be immune for this to happen, depending on the country11.

Unfortunately, early surveys suggest there is a long way to go. Estimates from antibody testing — which reveals whether someone has been exposed to the virus and made antibodies against it — indicate that only a small proportion of people have been infected, and disease modelling backs this up. A study of 11 European countries calculated an infection rate of 3–4% up to 4 May12, inferred from data on the ratio of infections to deaths, and how many deaths there had been. In the United States, where there have been more than 150,000 COVID-19 deaths, a survey of thousands of serum samples, coordinated by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, found that antibody prevalence ranged from 1% to 6.9%, depending on the location13.

What happens in 2021 and beyond?

The pandemic’s course next year will depend greatly on the arrival of a vaccine, and on how long the immune system stays protective after vaccination or recovery from infection. Many vaccines provide protection for decades — such as those against measles or polio — whereas others, including whooping cough and influenza, wear off over time. Likewise, some viral infections prompt lasting immunity, others a more transient response. “The total incidence of SARS-CoV-2 through 2025 will depend crucially on this duration of immunity,” wrote Grad, Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch and colleagues in a May paper14 exploring possible scenarios (see ‘What happens next?’).

Graphic showing how immunity and the role of seasons could effect temperate regions in the future.
Source: Ref. 14
Researchers know little so far about how long SARS-CoV-2 immunity lasts. One study15 of recovering patients found that neutralizing antibodies persisted for up to 40 days after the start of infection; several other studies suggest that antibody levels dwindle after weeks or months. If COVID-19 follows a similar pattern to SARS, antibodies could persist at a high level for 5 months, with a slow decline over 2–3 years16. Still, antibody production is not the only form of immune protection; memory B and T cells also defend against future encounters with the virus, and little is known so far about their role in SARS-CoV-2 infection. For a clear answer on immunity, researchers will need to follow a large number of people over a long time, says Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. “We’re just going to have to wait.”

If infections continue to rise rapidly without a vaccine or lasting immunity, “we will see regular, extensive circulation of the virus”, says Grad. In that case, the virus would become endemic, says Pulliam. “That would be really painful.” And it is not unimaginable: malaria, a preventable and treatable disease, kills more than 400,000 people each year. “These worst-case scenarios are happening in many countries with preventable diseases, causing huge losses of life already,” says Bhatt.

If the virus induces short-term immunity — similar to two other human coronaviruses, OC43 and HKU1, for which immunity lasts about 40 weeks — then people can become reinfected and there could be annual outbreaks, the Harvard team suggests. A complementary CIDRAP report17, based on trends from eight global influenza pandemics, points to significant COVID-19 activity for at least the next 18–24 months, either in a series of gradually diminishing peaks and valleys, or as a “slow burn” of continuing transmission without a clear wave pattern. Yet these scenarios remain only guesses, because this pandemic has so far not followed the pattern of pandemic flu, says Osterholm. “We’re in a coronavirus pandemic for which we have no precedents.”


Mounting evidence suggests coronavirus is airborne — but health advice has not caught up

Another possibility is that immunity to SARS-CoV-2 is permanent. In that case, even without a vaccine, it is possible that after a world-sweeping outbreak, the virus could burn itself out and disappear by 2021. However, if immunity is moderate, lasting about two years, then it might seem as if the virus has disappeared, but it could surge back as late as 2024, the Harvard team found.

That forecast, however, does not take the development of effective vaccines into account. It’s unlikely that there will never be a vaccine, given the sheer amount of effort and money pouring into the field and the fact that some candidates are already being tested in humans, says Velasco-Hernández. The World Health Organization lists 26 COVID-19 vaccines currently in human trials, with 12 of them in phase II trials and six in phase III. Even a vaccine providing incomplete protection would help by reducing the severity of the disease and preventing hospitalization, says Wu. Still, it will take months to make and distribute a successful vaccine.

The world will not be affected equally by COVID-19. Regions with older populations could see disproportionally more cases in later stages of the epidemic, says Eggo; a mathematical model from her team, published in June18 and based on data from six countries, suggests that the susceptibility to infection in children and people under 20 years old is approximately half that of older adults.

There is one thing that every country, city and community touched by the pandemic has in common. “There is so much we still don’t know about this virus,” says Pulliam. “Until we have better data, we’re just going to have a lot of uncertainty.”

Nature 584, 22-25 (2020)
 
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

A man was infected with the coronavirus after recovering from an initial bout in April in what scientists said was the first case showing that re-infection may occur within a few months.


The 33-year-old’s second SARS-CoV-2 infection was detected via airport screening on his return to Hong Kong from Europe this month. Researchers at the University of Hong Kong used genomic sequence analysis to prove that he had been infected by two different strains. The information technology worker didn’t develop any symptoms from his second infection, which might indicate “subsequent infections may be milder,” the researchers said.

“Our findings suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may persist in humans,” Kwok-Yung Yuen and colleagues said Monday in a paper accepted for publication in the journal Clinical Infectious Diseases. The findings also suggest SARS-CoV-2 is reminiscent of the coronaviruses that cause the common cold, and may continue to circulate “even if patients have acquired immunity via natural infection or via vaccination,” they said.

Read More: Two Chinese Patients Test Positive Months After Virus Recovery


While some patients have tested positive for the virus over many weeks, even after their symptoms have resolved, scientists haven’t fully understood whether these cases reflect lingering traces of the virus, a re-eruption of an infection, or a new infection.

This is “the world’s first documentation of a patient who recovered from Covid-19, but got another episode of Covid-19 afterwards,” the researchers said in an emailed statement.

Worldwide, some 24 million people are known to have been infected with Covid-19, Maria van Kerkhove, the World Health Organzation’s technical lead on Covid-19, told reporters in Geneva Monday. Most patients -- even those who have a mild case -- mount an immune response to the infection, she said. What’s not known is how strong and how long that response lasts.


It’s important to document cases like the one described in Hong Kong, “but not jump to any conclusions,” Van Kerkhove said. Studies tracking larger numbers of cases over time are needed to better understand the quality and durability of recovered patients’ neutralizing antibody response to SARS-CoV-2, she said.

“Before this report, many believe that recovered Covid-19 patients have immunity against re-infection, however, there is evidence that some patients have a waning antibody level after few months,” the University of Hong Kong researchers said in the statement.
 
si è reinfettato senza sintomi, ma sti cavoli
 
a me quello che lascia basito è l'indifferenza rispetto allo Sputnik

Prima si scriveva che il vaccino era l'unica soluzione , oggi che la Russia ha cominciato a vaccinare si sottolineano i rischi del vaccino russo

e per me succederà lo stesso con il Vaccino USA che sarò pronto entro fino ottobre
 
chissa' quante persone al mondo stanno studiando qualcosa per questo virus e sostanzialmente non hanno ancora trovato un qualcosa che lo blocca...
 
Virologa cinese fuggita in Usa: "Il virus è artificiale"

"Ci troviamo davanti non a un virus derivato da un patogeno naturale, ma a un virus artificiale, elaborato e rilasciato dal Wuhan Istitute of Virology, un laboratorio di massima sicurezza che è posto sotto il controllo del Partito comunista cinese". Lo dice a La Verità Li-Meng Yan, virologa, prima firmataria del Rapporto Yan (un paper di 26 pagine sul coronavirus), convinta che "si sia creato un virus letale al fine di diffonderlo senza poter risalire agli autori".

La virologa afferma di aver iniziato le ricerche sul Covid-19 "il 31 dicembre" scorso, "prima che il 7 gennaio le autorità cinesi dessero l'annuncio ufficiale del primo caso accertato, che addirittura risale al 16 novembre" e precisa che svolgeva le sue ricerche "nel laboratorio dell'Organizzazione mondiale della sanità presso l'università di Hong Kong". Ha lavorato fino alla primavera nel dipartimento di Salute pubblica della Hong Kong University. Ora è a New York, vive "sotto la protezione del governo degli Stati Uniti".

"Nessuno dice la verità. Il governo cinese, l'Oms, il mondo scientifico - afferma - Ho studiato il genoma del Sars-Cov-2 e quel corredo cellulare non esiste in natura. E' molto simile a un virus in possesso di un laboratorio di ricerca militare, un Sars-like-Cov isolato anni fa, chiamato Zc45/Zxc21". "Nel mio paper spiego in modo dettagliato la procedura seguita dal Wuhan Institute of Virology per modificare tale coronavirus. Alcune parti sono state aggiunte, scambiate, modificate", dice, con l'obiettivo di "farlo sembrare un virus nuovo". Poi ancora, "la regione del virus che caratterizza l'infezione del Sars-Cov-2, chiamata Rbm, assomiglia molto a quella del virus Sars-Cov-1, responsabile dell'epidemia di Sars", nel 2003.

Infine, "una proteina di Sars-Cov-2 chiamata Spike esiste in un sito di taglio per la furina che manca in tutti gli altri coronavirus simili a questo". E, afferma, "questa caratteristica del nuovo coronavirus induce a pensare che il Covid-19 non sia naturale, ma sia stato creato artificialmente". C'è dell'altro. "Le tecniche usate per creare il Covid-19 erano state impiegate fin da 2008 da un gruppo di ricerca coordinato dalla dottoressa Zhengli Shi del laboratorio di Wuhan - afferma - E il fatto che la stessa regione Rbm sia stata modificata dalla dottoressa Shi e da suoi collaboratori è la pistola fumante, la prova che il Sars-Cov-2 è il prodotto di una manipolazione genetica".

Virologa cinese fuggita in Usa: "Il virus e artificiale"
 
Indietro