Below is an exclusive interview of Mr. Xiao En, a former Virologist at the US Army Research Institute on the many important questions related to Coronavirus Coverup by the Chinese administration. The interview was conducted by the New Tang Dynasty Television (NTDTV) in Chinese and translated into English by GreatGameIndia team.
- COVID19 FILES – Scientific Investigation on Mysterious Origin of Coronavirus
- BOMBSHELL: How Coronavirus leaked from Wuhan Laboratory
- Exclusive: Coronavirus Bioweapon – How Chinese agents stole Coronavirus from Canada and weaponized it
- Exclusive Interview: Bioweapons Expert Dr. Francis Boyle on the Origins of Coronavirus (transcript)
- GGI IMPACT: White House to Investigate Coronavirus Origins
- EXPLOSIVE: Canadian Scientist Frank Plummer Key to Coronavirus Investigation Assassinated
- Breaking: India launch investigation against China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology
- Must read piece published worldwide: Coronavirus – China’s Secret Plan to Weaponize Viruses
- Update: Chinese Biowarfare agents at Harvard University caught smuggling deadly viruses
- Update 2: Indian Scientists Discover Coronavirus Engineered With AIDS Like Insertions
Join us on WhatsApp for more intel and updates.
So far, the source of the Coronavirus epidemic in Wuhan is still uncertain. Several reports published in professional journals have shown that the South China seafood market is not the origin or sole source of the virus. Regarding whether the new Coronavirus is artificially synthesized, the role of Wuhan P4 laboratory in it has been increasingly questioned.
On the other hand, Wuhan Institute of Virology first registered a patent for Radexivir for the treatment of New Coronavirus, causing heated discussions. So what is the source of the new Coronavirus? Does the Wuhan Virus Office involve infringement?
Guests: Tang Jingyuan (Current Affairs commentator) and Xiao En (former Virologist at the US Army Research Institute)
Moderator: Fang Fei
- 1 Coronavirus Coverup
- 2 Are Animal Testing Results being suppressed?
- 3 What is the mystery of the Wuhan Seafood Market?
- 4 Who is Patient Zero? Why is it so important?
- 5 Was Coronavirus artificially synthesized at Wuhan’s P4 laboratory?
- 6 What problems does Wuhan Virus Institute’s preemptive registration of a new drug patent reveal?
- 7 Whats going on at Wuhan’s Fangcai Hospital?
Start of Interview
Moderator: Hello, audience friends, welcome to this edition of [ Hot Interaction ], today is Wednesday, February 5. So far, the source of Wuhan Pneumonia (2019-nCoV) remains uncertain. Well, different articles published in medical journals show that the South China seafood market is not the only source of the virus, or the true source. Regarding whether the new crown virus is artificially synthesized, what role does the Wuhan P4 laboratory play in it? The questioning from outside is also growing. On the other hand, many cities in China have adopted similar measures to close the city. Tonight we invite two guests to focus on what is the source of the new crown virus? And the latest developments in the epidemic.
One is current affairs commentator Mr. Tang Jingyuan, hello Mr. Tang Jingyuan.
Tang Jingyuan: Hello host, everyone.
Moderator: OK, then there is another one who is connected to us through skype. Mr. Xiao En, a former virology researcher of the US Army Research Institute, Hello Mr. Xiao En.
Shaun: Hello host, hello audience friends.
Are Animal Testing Results being suppressed?
Moderator: OK, thank you for connecting with us. OK, then we also welcome audience friends to interact with us in the middle of the show and talk about your views on this issue. I would like to ask Mr. Xiao En to talk about the source of this new crown virus (2019-nCoV). We also talked about it in a previous show. Earlier in a paper published in The Lancet, it was mentioned that among the earliest 41 infected people, the first patient would talk to the South China Seafood Market. It doesn’t matter; in fact, 14 of these 41 people have no contact with the South China Seafood Market.
So the outside world, including scientists, has been questioning that this South China seafood market may not be the source of the disease or the only source. Then I want to hear your opinion. Has the source of this disease been found? How important is it to find this pathogen?
Shawn: This is a big question mark in itself. Just where did this virus infect people? How did it erupt? So generally speaking, in terms of infectious diseases, of course you find the first patient. From this patient, you follow his experience, who he is in close contact with, or what animal he has contacted, how did he cause the infection? . That information is crucial for the first patient. But at present, because of the CCP, you only see articles reported in a scientific journal, just about some clinical characteristics of this patient. As for the epidemiological history of this patient, these things have not been reported accordingly, so it is tantamount to say that this character is just a “mystery”; because he has done exactly what caused his own infection, he has no idea at all.
This is a big problem in itself. This is actually what the Wuhan Epidemic Prevention Department must explain to the public, that is, according to what they know so far, how did he get infected in the first patient? What is his health now? In fact, this must be explained to the outside world. The other is a big problem. The results of animal experiments have not been released to date.
In fact, if more than 20 of your first 41 patients are related to the seafood market, and you also know from the environment of the seafood market, such as samples collected on the surface of the object, some are positive. That means that this place was an outbreak anyway, right? The nearby animals at this outbreak point are the animals sold in this seafood market, or around the seafood market, such as mice, etc. These animals that are traveling around should also collect samples. This is an important task that the epidemic prevention department should take as soon as possible.
Moreover, at the time, relatively tough measures were taken to completely seal off this seafood market. Some of the stall owners in the seafood market said that many of the goods they sold could not be removed. Then you actually show that the epidemic prevention department is in a good position, whether it is sampling from seafood samples or animal samples, and then make tests immediately. Because this is a very important point in itself, even if you do n’t know that the original virus was transmitted from bats to people, even if you do n’t know that the original host is a bat, you will know what the intermediate host is, because this intermediate host is very Pivotal.
For example, if the mouse is an intermediate host, then your mouse is infected, it may run around and spread everywhere; then even if you block the city and stop all traffic, the mouse will not listen to you Right set? Then the mouse is still raging in this city, and it will run around with the virus. Therefore, the animal’s intermediate host is crucial from the perspective of epidemic prevention, which is also a very important factor to control the epidemic. Just like a normal outbreak, if we know that it is transmitted by mosquitoes, for example, then you need to do environmental sanitation right? Clean up all kinds of culverts and canals, etc., because you have to kill the source of mosquitoes.
If it’s a mouse, you’re gonna kill it, right? You don’t know what the host in the middle is now, and there is no result of any animal sample detection, which is very strange. Because this matter has passed for more than a month, even when such an epidemic broke out in mid-December, when it was known that there was a patient source in the seafood market, animal samples would be collected at that time. So it can be said that for one and a half months, at least no animal test results were provided, which is very strange. And the results of these tests do not need to be published until a leading medical journal is published, which is not the case.
The outbreak of the epidemic situation was the health department at that time. When it was detected, it would be notified everywhere. If it was a mouse, you would immediately take measures, right? If it’s a pig, then one animal is always positive. It is impossible to say that this incident broke out in such a large area in the city, and none of the animal samples tested positive. I think that’s a big joke, so to speak. There must be some animals that must be positive. If the government has not announced the results of this animal experiment, it must be hiding something.
And especially after January, if you have already got infectious strains, even if you take some different animals in the laboratory and do some experiments in common animal models, you will also know which animals the virus is in Is particularly infectious; or particularly transmissible, because you are also facing further risks. For example, if a person is infected, or if there is a pet in the house, if an animal is easily infected with this new virus, then the virus will spread further in the animal and it will cause more people to be infected , So you also need to do some animal experiments. So this is very strange. So far, all reports or official public health warnings have not mentioned any animal experiments, so I think this is a particularly strange thing.
Moderator: Yes, I also want to ask you, because I remember the earliest time, there was an infectious disease scientist Guan Yi in Hong Kong. He went to Wuhan for a few days. Then he said at the time that he went to the South China Seafood Market, but all the places were cleaned and disinfected, so there was no way to take any samples. So what you just said is that you think the official should do animal experiments, but we really don’t know if the official does animal experiments. is not it?
Xiao En: In fact, when Guan Yi went to Wuhan, it was too late. At that time, of course the seafood market had been cleaned up. I mean the government should have collected animal samples long before the seafood market was closed; that is to say, even if you did not have the test agent for detecting the new type of coronavirus at the time, this was all It doesn’t matter, because you have SARS detection reagents on hand, you can know that the sample of this animal is SARS positive as soon as you test it, right? Just like early patients, how do doctors know that there is a possibility of SARS infection in Wuhan Isn’t it just using the same test reagents? That’s enough warning.
And the big thing about this thing is that why the government keeps calling it “new coronavirus” and then “pneumonia” instead of directly calling it SARS, such as 2.0 or the like. Because if it is SARS, you don’t actually need a meeting of the World Health Organization. It is naturally an urgent public health event of international concern. You don’t need a meeting of the World Health Organization to define this thing and announce it. Therefore, the CCP did not say this, but at that time, it was already known that doctors tested positive with SARS reagents, so this is another irresponsible place in which I think it is incredible to deal with this matter. There is no animal sample that can not be explained to the outside world, so I think the international community should strongly demand that China publish the test results of all animal samples.
EXCLUSIVE#Coronavirus Bioweapon Thread
How China Stole Coronavirus From Canada And Weaponized Ithttps://t.co/tc7W2DrmAA
— GreatGameIndia (@GreatGameIndia) January 27, 2020
What is the mystery of the Wuhan Seafood Market?
Moderator: OK. Therefore, Mr. Tang Jingyuan, I think Mr. Xiao En raised a very important question just now, is the result of this animal experiment, or whether the animal experiment was done. So if there is no result, I think there are only two possibilities. One is that the CCP did not conduct this animal experiment at all, and one may know that this was not uploaded from the animal. So what do you think about the cause of this disease?
Tang Jingyuan: I think so. In fact, just now I think Mr. Xiao has spoken comprehensively. I will add two important facts. First of all, I can confirm that the official must have concealed something, that is, the problem of pathogens. They deliberately confused their sights. What does it mean? Because according to this paper published by The Lancet. This paper was written by a Chinese expert, and its first author was the Jinyintan Hospital, and the vice-president of the first designated hospital was called Huang Chaolin. Therefore, it is a thesis written by a Chinese expert, which clearly mentions that, except that the first patient was discovered on December 1, and the official announcement was later on December 8, in fact Huang Chaolin was writing In this paper, the official information should actually be known, but the official deliberately confused this sight, and then the official insisted that the pathogenic place was the seafood market. But this review has a very important detail that mentions that out of the top four cases, three have nothing to do with this seafood market.
Moderator: No contact.
Tang Jingyuan: This is a very important detail, which shows that this seafood market is not the origin, the first patient has nothing to do with the seafood market; three of the first four patients have nothing to do with the seafood market, then this is a very powerful one Evidence. But I think the official is confusing these things intentionally. Why does the official have to take this seafood market and say that it is the origin of the epidemic? Because according to this paper, we can actually draw three conclusions; because the author of this paper has also drawn three conclusions, that is, there are only three possible sources of this plague. The first may be someone infected with a virus outside this market and then bringing it into this market; this possibility is the greatest. Because this model is consistent with the 41 cases they collected, the model established by the analysis is completely consistent.
The second possibility is that there are multiple such people or animals that have entered the market at the same time. Because the paper mentions one piece of evidence, it is also the Chinese official announcement that the country’s CDC (China Centers for Disease Control and Prevention), are they not sampling in the South China seafood market? They sampled and found that 33 samples were positive. Scattered in 22 stalls and one garbage truck in the entire market, it is scattered in 23 locations. So as soon as you come up, you can see the evidence that as soon as this case began to explode in the seafood market, it showed that it was diverse and that multiple points came at the same time. So this is not very suitable. If you say that the seafood market is the only source, then the second possibility just mentioned, if you want to explain it reasonably, you can only imagine that many people or animals are infected with the virus , And then they (they) entered the market at the same time. This possibility is relatively low.
Then the third possibility is that most people think that there is only one animal, and one animal is infected with the virus, and then this animal enters this market, and it goes around this market, as Dr. Xiao En mentioned just now, such as It is a mouse that can move in it. It has contacted many people and many things, and can cause this phenomenon. It is in the whole seafood market that there are many points where this reaction is positive. So from this perspective, we can basically say with certainty that this seafood market is not the true place of origin of pathogens, and I think this conclusion should be relatively clear.
Moderator: As you said, if the official has concealed this matter, do you think it is because the official has not figured out the pathogen, there is no way to explain it to the outside world, or because there are other reasons, the official has to hide ?
Tang Jingyuan: I think the latter is more likely. Because just as Xiao En mentioned a very important point, we know that this state-level expert organization of the Communist Party of China arrived in Wuhan on December 31 and officially announced this. Well, before the official announcement of this incident, they actually realized the seriousness of the incident, so they always reported to the country, that is, the CDC National Center for Disease Control and Prevention, so they sent this expert group down. Well, before they submitted the report, in fact, I believe that they should be local in Wuhan, for example, experts from the Health and Medical Committee of Wuhan City or Hubei Province. This is the least common sense.
As mentioned by Xiao En just now, if you want to find out if this place is the source of the disease, you must investigate the animals in that place; then the report of this investigation must be taken out, and then you have evidence to prove You have to persuade the public that we can be sure that this place is the place of origin, there is no other place of origin, just such a source. Then you have to come up with this fact to convince people, including your experts in this industry, you also need to come up with such a proof, you can convince these experts. Otherwise, many experts are exactly like the question raised by Xiao En just now. You cannot get these evidences. Why do you say that the South China Seafood Market is the only place of origin? Just in case it’s not. We know there are many seafood markets in Wuhan! There are so many markets like this. In case the South China Seafood Market is not the pathogenic place, it means that many seafood markets may have hidden dangers, and the disease may break out. Why did you only seal such a seafood market? Have you not closed other seafood markets? There is no explanation for this matter, right.
Who is Patient Zero? Why is it so important?
Moderator: So I think this source. I have seen a movie called “Infectious Diseases” before. The scene in this movie is similar to the outbreak of Wuhan pneumonia. So I want to ask, there is a “patient 0” mentioned in this movie, and the end of this movie reveals: how was the first person infected with this virus infected by pigs, and then How so. The process of this infection is very important, so from the beginning scientists tried to figure out who was the first infected. How important is the first infected? Now if this is not clear, what impact will it have on the overall control of the epidemic?
Tang Jingyuan: Let me briefly explain this “patient 0”, why is he called “patient 0” and not “patient 1”? It is “patient 0” from the medical point of view: the definition is that the first person is infected and spreads the virus to other people; such a person.
But “patient No. 0” is not necessarily the first patient, so we can call him “patient No. 1” as the first person to develop symptoms. Then this first one is equivalent to carrying, he may not be sick. Then we call him “Patient 0”, where is the importance of this “Patient 0”?
In several respects, first of all, if you can lock this “patient 0” as soon as possible, you can lock his transmission method, which is the first.
Second, you can ask “History of Patient 0” by asking his medical history, and we can roughly understand how long the incubation period of this disease is. Thirdly, from the process of this “patient No. 0” and his relatives and friends, that is, those who are in active contact with him in society; if we include this close contact person into the scope of monitoring, we can Quickly assess how strong the virus is and how infectious it is. These are very important information, very important data. And if you find this “patient 0”, you can directly lock the infectious agent. How did you get the infection? What animal did you come into contact with? Or come into contact with something unusual. It is “Patient 0” that helps you quickly lock down the real infectious agent.
The last important significance is that if “Patient No. 0” does not have the disease himself, because if he is ill, he will be treated and then spread; this will be easily locked. But we now see that the official did not find this “patient No. 0”, it is likely that he is an asymptomatic carrier, then it probably means that his body, or his physique was just after the initial infection There may be antibodies. Or there is something special in “Patient No. 0”, so that he has no symptoms, and then infect others. This is of great significance for the subsequent development of vaccines, search for antibodies, search for serum and so on. So the key to this “patient 0” is here.
Moderator: Is it possible that among the 41 patients, the first infected person is actually patient 0? But the official has no way to infer from his history how he was infected?
Tang Jingyuan: Right. I think this possibility exists. Because now the official information has not been published, including the article mentioned that: the first patient developed the disease on December 1, but the official did not confirm that this person was the “patient 0”. Because he became ill on December 1, according to this incubation period, he now understands it for at least half a month; then it should be pushed around mid-November, and he may be infected already. When is it infected? What other people did he contact? Nothing is clear now.
Moderator: Yes. There is no such information at all, so I would like to ask Mr. Xiao En. Now many foreign experts have begun to work on the virus itself; then there have been many reports recently, that is, their research on this new crown virus (2019-nCoV) Afterwards, there were some similar findings. It seems that this virus is not the same as the general coronavirus, so many people now question whether this virus is artificially synthesized? Especially the Wuhan P4 laboratory was involved in this whirlpool of public opinion. I would like to ask you first to talk about the outside world’s doubt that the virus may have leaked from the laboratory. Do you think this is a conspiracy theory? Or do you think there are some clues and basis?
Xiao En: I think it is definitely a kind of questioning to say “conspiracy theory”. Because from the perspective of molecular virology, now in the experiment to do different mutations of this gene, to do further virological research, or to develop vaccines, or to study antibodies, etc., in virology It’s not surprising at all to do mutation research in this area.
In addition, the “Wuhan Virus Research Institute” itself has sufficient capabilities. A series of articles published in the past have fully demonstrated such capabilities. It even sent a team to the bat cave in Yunnan for a long time. Hundreds of bat virus samples were obtained every month. The “Wuhan Virus Research Institute” itself has done some recombination experiments, including changing the spike protein of SARS, the spike protein gene on the surface to the coronavirus skeleton of bats, etc. It has such ability. In fact, it ’s not surprising that we do the corresponding artificial recombination in the laboratory or some important health check mutations. The “Wuhan Virus Research Institute” has this ability, and it may be done for vaccine research Further mutation.
It is more worrying that if you perform such a mutation of gain of function in a foreign country, you must actually pass a very strict medical ethical evaluation; because if the control is not good, you do n’t know the virus has passed. Your change, if it increases its infectivity and its pathogenicity, how much disaster the whole thing brings. What kind of failures and injuries will happen during the experiment? In this aspect, doing research on the gain of function of this more dangerous virus is actually a very very vigilant thing. In the past, there were also scientists who wanted to study the gain of function of avian influenza virus. Later, it caused a rebound in the entire international community and stopped it.
I think what concerns me in China is that, for example, He Jianzheng, an associate professor at China Southern University of Science and Technology, has also done mutations in human genes, and so on, using CRISPR to do this kind of experiment. If it is abroad, it is basically impossible to pass Review. This plan itself is impossible to implement; but China could actually let He Jianzheng go forward. From this example, the review of medical ethics in China is actually relatively loose. The “Wuhan Virus Research Institute” is going to experiment with this virus, not to mention the background of military cooperation. Is the approval process too lax? I don’t know, or it is a military project.
Generally speaking, the “Wuhan Virus Research Institute” definitely has this ability. In addition, the currently detected sequences also have some questionable points. For example, the five important sites of Spike glycoprotein are sites that bind to an donor ACE2 on the surface of human cells. There are five sites within Four have mutations. This becomes a coincidence that is hard to believe, and it will affect the binding of the spike glycoprotein of the virus itself to the body cell surface donor, which is a very strange phenomenon. It was also reported that among the early patients, the sequence of the virus detected in the samples isolated from them by seven or eight patients was almost the same, which is also a little unbelievable. It’s a bit like these people were infected with the virus at the same time, not one patient passed to more than one person, so there were more outsiders who would question whether this was an accident caused by a laboratory leak. The virus itself has traces of artificial processing, and the virus itself has such capabilities. China itself also has a review of medical ethics that also had major flaws in the past. So many factors make people question.
I think the outside world’s questioning is a reasonable question in this case. It cannot simply be slandered as a conspiracy theory; because the responsibility to really clarify this matter lies in the “Wuhan Virus Research Institute”, It is an official of the CCP. They need to prove, or for the responsibility of the government, that they want to check the Wuhan Virus Laboratory, has there been any accidents in the past? Or are there any other deviations in the processing of animal samples? This is the government department to check.
Because if the public raises such a challenge, the government has the responsibility to investigate whether it is possible that the accident was a “man-made” accident. It just wants to agree with the outside world that it seems that the “bat virus” suddenly infected people directly; It has been in the bat for thousands of years, and its breakthrough speed can suddenly infect people, which is a very difficult task in itself.
Therefore, I feel that the responsibility for clarification lies with the government and the “Wuhan Virus Research Institute” itself. We cannot simply describe all the more reasonable questions from the outside world as conspiracy theory. This is a truly irresponsible way statement.
Moderator: Yes, Mr. Tang Jingyuan said clarification. We know that a researcher of Wuhan Institute of Virology is called Shi Zhengli. She came out to clarify, but the way she clarified was very strange. She said: guarantee her life. However, the researcher also published a paper on the synthesis of SARS-like coronavirus in the journal Nature in 2015, and published a paper, just as Mr. Xiao En mentioned, to enhance the virus Papers. So what do you think of the whole thing? Especially now that someone is reporting her by real name, what do you think of the clues mentioned in these reports?
Tang Jingyuan: I think so. Didn’t we mention conspiracy theories in her clues about reporting her? Let’s set aside conspiracy theories first, and let’s not make any inferences. We can enumerate Shi Zhengli’s relationship with this matter. At least four aspects of the evidence are conclusive. The first evidence, Shi Zhengli himself published this paper in 2015. In this paper, she made it very clear that they claim to have modified a coronavirus in bats; that is, a hybrid virus has been made and produced, and this hybrid virus has the ability to infect people. The hybrid virus has not only been tested on mice, it has been verified; it can cause mice to cause lung lesions, and it has also been tested on monkeys. This is a conclusive fact, written in Shi Zhengli’s own thesis.
The second fact is that after this outbreak of Wuhan plague, experts in Shanghai have now discovered that Wuhan virus, let’s call it “Wuhan virus”, is to isolate the virus from patients. Shi Zhengli, we know that her team mainly researched the coronavirus carried in bats. There are actually many kinds of coronaviruses, and they have studied many kinds. One of them is similar to the virus that is currently isolated in humans The coincidence degree reached 96%. This is very high. At least this is a factor worthy of investigation and a factor worthy of our doubt. This is also an objective fact.
The third fact, we know that in this paper, Shi Zhengli mentioned one thing, that is, how they studied the virus of bats. How can they infect people after the transformation? Xiao En has already mentioned that by modifying the virus, one is called S protein. After the transformation, the S protein can be combined with the human ACE2 donor. We generally say that Shi Zhengli, they built a bridge. The virus carried by bats could not infect the human body, and it could not be infected across species. But they built such a bridge, and the virus could infect the human body.
And now it has been found that this is also confirmed by experts in Shanghai. The pathogenic gene sequence of Wuhan virus and the gene sequence that can invade the human body are also combined by the virus S protein and the human ACE2 donor. That is to say, the mechanism of Wuhan virus pathogenesis and Shi Zhengli’s thesis, which they have now confirmed, are completely the same.
Moderator: What’s the point of her studying this? Let the virus infect the body more easily.
Tang Jingyuan: According to their own paper, the purpose of this research is to study the development of vaccines against SARS virus. Of course, this actually involves a very professional field, and I’m not too sure if her statement is true or not; but we can at least see the fact that this is the third fact.
The fourth fact, we mentioned earlier, that the corona virus is not present in bats. Bats have a history of thousands of years, and they have always carried the virus. Why is it safe for people? It is because the virus cannot spread across species, so it is relatively safe for humans. There is evidence for this. We know that in Chinese medicine, there is a medicine called “Yue Mingsha” in Chinese medicine. “Yue Mingsha” is actually made by collecting the faeces of bats, because there are many things in Chinese medicine that are collected from this natural source.
This medicine has been used by Chinese people for at least thousands of years, because we all know that bats carry the virus. This virus can be excreted in the faeces of bats. What does it mean? We can fully prove that Chinese medicine uses bat’s feces. Pharmaceuticals are safe for humans. It has no problem after eating for thousands of years, indicating that the stability of this virus is very high, and it will not easily undergo any mutation. of.
But why did they suddenly make this mutation after Shi Zhengli did this experiment and related research? According to Shi Zhengli, she said that this is a natural mutation, not our manual intervention, she is such a conclusion. But it seems strange to us. Why hasn’t it mutated for thousands of years, and suddenly it suddenly mutates now? So these are solid facts, and they are enough to play a role.
I think it is worthy of the public or the government to conduct a comprehensive and independent investigation into this matter. At least we don’t give a conclusion now, is it because it has something to do with the research done by Shi Zhengli, we can’t make this conclusion. But there is already so much evidence that it is likely to be related to your research. Is it always OK for the government to conduct an independent investigation?
Moderator: Yes, I see more and more scientists in their papers, because scientists don’t say absolute. But they would say 90%, or very likely, this thing is the result of manual intervention.
Tang Jingyuan: Right!
Moderator: Yes, I think a lot of people are paying attention to this issue. I think this is a must to see what is going on in the end?
Tang Jingyuan: It also includes those authorities that have been nominated by Nobel for many times, some of them are many academic authorities, they think so. When a scientist speaks, he does not say directly that I will give you a conclusion, but after all, a scientist is an authority in this regard. He knows exactly what the probability of this virus mutates, so he can say such things.
Moderator: A lot of information in China is opaque. So I also want to ask Mr. Xiao En. Before the CDC in the United States said that they had proposed to go to China three times to help this epidemic situation and to study the progress in this area, but the CCP rejected it. I don’t know if you think there will be some information in it. The CCP does not want to let the outside world know about such a factor?
Shaun: I think in fact, in the case of such a big epidemic, receiving international assistance should be a very reasonable process. Just like the Ebola virus outbreak that year, your destruction of your entire medical system in that area of Libya was very serious. In fact, an urgent appeal should be made to the international community to help control the epidemic. Because even in such a small country, you can’t easily control it, let alone a big city like China, right? Wuhan’s population is quite large, on such a large scale, and then if you have such a severe outbreak, you receive help from foreign experts. Even with a further assessment of this matter, it is not necessarily directly involved at different levels. For example, it is not necessary for Wuhan to participate in epidemic prevention at this level. But just get involved and say that you evaluate this thing together and analyze the possibility of this thing together. After all, there are quite a lot of experts in this field who are studying coronavirus. The CDC (United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) is also very experienced in epidemic prevention, so accepting the support of the CDC and accepting a consultation of them, I think it should be.
When the CCP refuses to enter the CDC, it will become said that, on the surface, the CCP has always cooperated with the World Health Organization and open cooperation with other countries. You have also learned the lessons of SARS that year. But if the CCP is not willing to help you, it becomes very questionable, that is, does the CCP have any information in the process that it does not want to disclose? Everyone also knows that to a certain extent, the World Health Organization has too much influence on the Chinese Communist Party, and has controlled some of the main leadership staff. Basically, they will not criticize the CCP harder, so they will be willing to cooperate with the World Health Organization. To this day you still see the CCTV broadcast the Director General of the World Health Organization to China to praise China for its good work. This is to define who supports it from the perspective of political needs. Instead of controlling the epidemic, decide what should be done and ask more experts to help control the epidemic. So I think at this point, the CCP’s refusal to accept the CDC should be a political consideration. Are there any hidden feelings at the same time? Then I think if the CDC experts go in later, I think there will be some further news.
What problems does Wuhan Virus Institute’s preemptive registration of a new drug patent reveal?
Moderator: Yes, we hope that the American CDC experts can get in. It seems that so far, it is uncertain whether CDC experts can be included in the WHO expert group. Speaking of outside help, I would also like to ask Mr. Xiao En very soon, that is, we know that the United States has a western medicine that is being clinically tested in China. This medicine is called the hope of the people by Chinese netizens. May be effective. Would you please talk to us quickly, that is, the drug of the company Gilead in the United States, what is the rationale behind its effectiveness (Remdesivir)? Another one, do you think it can work in a large area in a clinical environment?
Xiao En: I think this matter should be treated with caution, because there are often many things in the domestic media that have the magnifying effect of propaganda machines; it is as if to give people hope at once, a savior has come. No matter where this medicine is provided, the official media of the Chinese Communist Party will have such a propaganda purpose behind it.
But in fact, from a medical point of view, you must be cautious about this medicine. It (Remdesivir) is really not a drug for coronavirus, it is a broad-spectrum RNA-like drug. Basically, after the drug enters the human body, it will produce an intermediate state substance during metabolism. This substance can inhibit this replication of the virus, and it will have such an effect.
But in the past, the virus was a drug developed to fight the Ebola virus. And when Ebola broke out in 2014, it was actually applied to patients in a small amount, but it was not applied on a large scale. After 2018, when Ebola broke out in the Congo, some human studies were done on a large scale. But local doctors later said that in fact, no obvious effect was seen.
So this drug, now in the United States it (Remdesivir) does see a certain effect in a patient. As for whether this large-scale human experiment has a clear effect? I think there will be many question marks. Because what is involved here is that there is a problem with the amount of medicine used in the hospital. How long does this patient take this medicine (Remdesivir)? When should we observe the changes of patients? Does the patient’s virus rebound during this medication? Then how does the relative side effect of the body itself compare with the effect of this (Remdesivir)? I think there are a lot of them. In fact, this is from pharmacology. You also have to take a closer look at how effective this medicine is.
It’s not that simple. It doesn’t mean that suddenly a medicine becomes the people’s savior. I don’t think so, but think objectively. It is indeed more important now to treat the entire epidemic situation very rationally. As for the treatment of patients, it is also inevitable that China should also adopt a comprehensive treatment of multiple drugs.
Including Wuhan University of Virology’s previous experiments on their simple in vitro cells, they also found that there are other drugs, such as even a broad spectrum, that target HIV (HIV). And Chloroquine, etc., these drugs may be effective. Because it involves Ebola and this coronavirus. It has similarities in the process by which the virus enters the body and associates with this ENDOSOME. Therefore, some drugs may have similar effects, but how much side effects on the human body really need to be carefully studied in order to show that this drug can be safely used in large areas.
Moderator: Yes, in fact these days around this medicine (Remdesivir), I think the latest hot spot is rather unexpected, but please also talk about Mr. Tang Jingyuan, the patent issue surrounding this medicine (Remdesivir). We see that the Wuhan Institute of Virology has registered this patent on January 21 that this drug can work on this coronavirus. But this drug was developed by an American company, so what is going on with this patent? What do you think of this?
Tang Jingyuan: I think this patent is actually a trick of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The patent they applied for was not actually for the drug (Remdesivir) itself. Because the drug itself was developed by an American company, it is impossible to grab it with such an open fire. The patent it applied for was a formula made by combining the drug Remdesivir with another drug called chloroquine phosphate. It said that this medicine had a certain effect on the disease of new coronary pneumonia (2019-nCoV), so the patent applied for refers to this formula. In other words, let’s make an analogy. If the medicine Remdesivir is a nutritious meatball, then the Chinese Academy of Sciences actually uses a high-level deceit, or a high-level theft. The Chinese Academy of Sciences took the medicine, brought the meatballs, and then I wrapped it with a thin layer of dough.
Tang Jingyuan: Then I called it Baozi, this is a dumpling, and then I applied for a patent. I am applying for a patent for this bun, or a patent for this dumpling. So in other words, it is a very clever technique, but everyone knows that you go to eat that bun, or eat the dumpling. The real thing is to eat that stuffing!
Moderator: Mainly that stuffing.
Tang Jingyuan: The most important thing is that stuffing. What really works is that stuffing. Because of this chloroquine phosphate they are combined. What kind of medicine is chloroquine phosphate? This medicine is mainly used to treat malaria. We know that the pathogen of malaria is Plasmodium, which is a parasite. Therefore, it is actually a completely different pathogen from the virus, so why does this chloroquine phosphate also have such an inhibitory effect on the new coronavirus (2019-nCoV)? This rationale has not been clear to even these experts. They are a bit like going for a test now. Anyway, I take this medicine out and try it, and then take another medicine and try it out. Maybe this is the kind.
Moderator: As long as it meets a little use, I will try it first.
Tang Jingyuan: Then there may be another situation that Mr. Xiao En mentioned just now. Some medicines are originally broad-spectrum, they suppress immunity, or they may have a certain degree of effect on certain basic principles of curing diseases in this body. However, it is “broad” but it cannot be “exclusive.” That is, it may have a little effect on this and it may have a little effect on that disease, but its effect is not very specific. It can’t reach such a degree, so at least we can see that it can really achieve special effects. It is the first case that was cured in the United States.
Tang Jingyuan: This effect can be said to be very good, because according to the treatment report published by the United States, the whole is very detailed. This first patient took the drug on the evening of the 7th day (on the 7th day of the onset). On the eighth day, his symptoms improved significantly, and then some of his symptoms disappeared.
So from this case, the effect is indeed very good. However, there is indeed a problem. Although it has been greatly improved, the patient also had a positive virus response after testing the test strip made from his nasal cavity after the 12th day. So you seem that although the effect of this medicine on improving symptoms seems to be very good, it does not say that it can actually kill the virus, so its effect really needs further observation.
Whats going on at Wuhan’s Fangcai Hospital?
Moderator: Yes, and I think this patent is a problem. What I noticed was that it applied for a patent on January 21, and it was very anxious to apply for a patent. But on January 21, it did not try to give this medicine to the hospital to treat these patients, I think this is a very incomprehensible operation! that
There is still a little time, I quickly asked Mr. Xiao En, that we see the current situation in Wuhan, there is a new one is that they are going to build “square cabin hospitals” in some public places, which is also a concern that everyone pays attention to The thing is, can this hospital play a role? Then we saw that in the outgoing video, we saw that these beds are densely packed, so many people are worried that they will not cause more cross infections. What do you think of the “square cabin hospital”?
Xiao En: Actually, I think the local government should have used it earlier. Because, for example, the Spanish flu virus early in 1918, when people resisted the epidemic, they would see that when a large area of people was infected, this approach was almost inevitable.
It is a large area that brings people together, especially people who have been diagnosed with the infection. One of the benefits of this is that many medical staff can help many people in a short time, and it has such benefits. But there is a risk of cross infection, but here is the trade-off! If you have a lot of infections and you are running around, the risk of infecting more people is even greater, so this is a practice in battlefield hospitals.
Then if you want to reduce the possibility of some cross-infection, that is, according to some operating rules of respiratory infectious diseases, you must basically ensure that the distance between the bed and the bed is at least about one meter, so that means cross-infection The probability will be reduced a lot. I also saw some pictures on the Internet. This design has some beds that are very close together. This is more worrying. But in general, this is a last resort, but I think this approach should be used by the government long before, even before the city is closed. Some people who are definitely diagnosed can be isolated in large areas.
Moderator: Yes, rather than letting them go home and isolate themselves, that is really too risky. Okay, thank you very much for the two comments today. The time for our show today is coming soon. We are also very grateful to our friends for watching. We will continue to pay attention to the development of the epidemic. See you next time!
End of interview
The above interview was conducted by the New Tang Dynasty Television (NTDTV) in Chinese, published by The Epoch Times on February 07, 2020 and translated into English by GreatGameIndia team. Courtesy of the NTDTV Interactive Production Team and Editor-in-chief Li Hao
GreatGameIndia is a journal on Geopolitics and International Relations. Get to know the Geopolitical threats India is facing in our exclusive book India in Cognitive Dissonance. Past magazine issues can be accessed from the Archives section.
Read more on Chinese Biological and Chemical warfare activities against India in our exclusive History of Narco-Terrorism issue.