closest_to_the_toilets.pdf - Daoyu Zhang

Please enable JavaScript to view the full PDF

archive.md/csYBM in fact the only https://archive.md/vlAgp Important distribution pattern is “closest to the toilets”. A primary confounding factor. https://archive.md/GjlEx https://archive.md/nAqKp https://archive.md/3WS68 All sampler boot prints, suit marks and no animals. There is zero evidence of natural infections in raccoon dogs. https://archive.md/mwT8i https://archive.md/GjlEx and no evidence of infected animals or positive correlation with SARS-CoV-2 https://archive.md/csYBM https://archive.md/gkquN https://archive.md/vlAgp exist in that “stall”. Not even freuling themselves http://archive.md/0O2TN http://archive.md/csYBM managed to record a naturally infected raccoon dog or infect them a second time. http://archive.md/VNr75 http://archive.md/rj1pV Again, is “stall closest to the toilets” a major confounding factor in that “pattern”? http://archive.md/gvHfw All of it is sampler-linked contamination. http://archive.md/FskYn http://archive.md/LJzSO http://archive.md/4cCHG archive.md/csYBM None of the “susceptible animals” actually had evidence for natural infections at all. archive.md/GKdtc Again, *markets selling frozen fish located in choke points between international travel and population centers* are the only possible superspreading site for Asia in 2020. archive.md/4rVph https://archive.md/yyX0Z https://archive.md/DChUL https://archive.md/iw1Pz There is zero evidence any of the animals were infected or even any evidence that they are susceptible at all to natural infection. https://archive.md/T2u0S https://archive.md/Ttn5P Bare hands, slippers, likely drop a glove? “All of the early genomic diversity” was not found in the market. The only lineage A sample was dropped by an infected WCDC staff member in 31/12/2019. There were no evidence that either raccoon dogs were infected in the market or evidence that they can be infected at all in the world. None of them are. http://archive.md/csYBM http://archive.md/HlJ9o http://archive.md/2sAST samplers, not raccoon dogs or other animals. http://archive.md/gvHfw In a stall that had its operators wearing slippers and handling fish with his bare hands! Also there are no lineage reads in the wildlife stalls—entirely plausible that the same sampler https://archive.md/CTP3i https://archive.md/ETjzS https://archive.md/BWZJL archive.md/LJzSO https://archive.md/4cCHG that dropped in the https://archive.md/rj1pV A20 sample also dropped in the wildlife stall samples by shedding and contaminating their suits in lab during preparation as he went on sampling. Making the patchy And artifact-full “late samples”—some contained only fresh human transcriptomes and no other mammals at all. archive.md/VNr75 https://archive.md/xGHOC Unfortunately what they picked up, the only lineage A sample, was dropped by the WCDC cleanup crew in December 31/2019. The stall owner wears slippers and handle fish with bare hands. Sample have no wildlife DNA in it. It contained Only plastic bags and tools but neither gloves nor shoe covers. And have you realized that all 3 lineage A samples in Wuhan clustered right next to the WCDC? Hotel right next door to WCDC. Must-go routes which the WCDC moved. Gloves dropped alongside shoe covers (unique professional PPE) by the WCDC. At least it didn’t use Shi’s broken test. archive.md/RirQ7 SARS-CoV-2 is most stable on PPE. And A18/A20 was the only location in the market which PPE itself (shoe covers and the associated gloves) was sampled. Dropped by 31/12/2019 cleanup workers from the WCDC. Again, SARS-CoV-1 emerged in the rural (as in 2002) area of Foshan Guangdong. http://archive.md/e3615 http://archive.md/vWjZl lower R0, didn’t require a major city. And most importantly, being the capital of wildlife consumption in China, an exclusively Wuhan primary outbreak that doesn’t infect Guangdong, also mean that the absence of infected animals in the market or the supply chains are perfectly sound and were in fact the only explanation for this observation. https://archive.md/yyX0Z https://archive.md/iw1Pz https://archive.md/4rVph https://archive.md/DChUL no initial outbreak in Guangdong mean not animal. Slippers and bare hands—are they even likely from the vendors? And guess which kind of people wear shoe covers? That’s right—samplers and cleanup workers. Lineage A sample 1: the “cluster 1” case. If you use the WHO map, the only map with a location, then it is found right on the shortest path be the old and new Wuhan CDC. Lineage A sample 2: WH04, and the closest “hotel near the Huanan market” happens to be a hotel right next door to the new wuhan CDC. Lineage A sample 3: A20. A “glove” in a stall that none of the operators wear them even when handling fish, and right next to a shoe cover that was not found anywhere else in the market, in a stall where the vendors wore slippers when operating. The stall owners are some of the least concerned in personal protection in the market. Both items are dropped in in 31/12/2019 when the WCDC ordered a crew to disinfect the market. “ All that “raccoon dog stall” had in it is Contamination and cross-contamination https://archive.md/xGHOC From incompetent samplers. https://archive.md/FskYn The reason why in both in Jan01 and Jan12, the stall with most positive https://archive.md/DChUL https://archive.md/gvHfw Samples out of all samples is the stall closest to the toilets. https://archive.md/NeybM https://archive.md/2PM9Y https://archive.md/RirQ7 https://archive.md/CTP3i https://archive.md/ETjzS https://archive.md/BWZJL https://archive.md/LJzSO https://archive.md/4cCHG “ https://archive.md/8JhAb “Live, susceptibile animals”? http://archive.md/yyX0Z http://archive.md/iw1Pz http://archive.md/4rVph http://archive.md/DChUL None of the species were ever observed to be infected in nature—there is strictly no evidence that any of the animals were “susceptible”. Go past the confounding factor which is the fact that the majority of samplers entered and exited the market through the corner which the wildlife stalls were located, and which it was the location with the only toilet and mahjong room was located, both primary sources of contamination, The only consistent positive correlation is with Homo Sapiens. http://archive.md/HlJ9o http://archive.md/lI04H http://archive.md/A892b http://archive.md/7doR8 http://archive.md/Sokty http://archive.md/gkquN http://archive.md/0O2TN http://archive.md/csYBM Which fingerprint is found mainly on the trigger? Which species is found in positive correlation with SARS-CoV-2 in the “stall”? Homo Sapiens. Given that civets or raccoon dogs aren’t even observed to be infected in nature with SARS- CoV-2, it is in effect fingerprints of the victim on the barrel who wasn’t even strong enough to pull the trigger. In fact, Homo sapiens was in every single positive sample out of Jan 12. https://archive.md/GvRcD they all far dwarfs the https://archive.md/tlfNr Viral reads inside, and are entirely consistent with contamination. https://archive.md/vlAgp All that existed in the “stalls” were from samplers contaminating there—closest to where they entered and exited after all. https://archive.md/k0GC9 https://archive.md/LJzSO https://archive.md/4cCHG archive.md/LJzSO http://archive.md/T2u0S http://archive.md/JSQvc there is neither evidence of an infected animal in these “wildlife stalls” nor http://archive.md/4rVph http://archive.md/yyX0Z http://archive.md/DChUL there is any evidence that raccoon dogs can be infected.” archive.md/gvHfw Contamination caused by samplers—positive samples are all found where kicking of surface or rubbing of the sample tube or surface is likely. And it was one month from first case to sampling—even the most durable SARS-CoV-2 RNA were already gone, And all that were left that can be sampled would be what they brought in themselves. Positive samples require contact with a sampler ( ): http://archive.md/CTP3i http://archive.md/ETjzS http://archive.md/BWZJL "Negative samples exclude frequent handling by a vendor ( ): http://archive.md/NeybM http://archive.md/2PM9Y http://archive.md/RirQ7 When the only “reference for raccoon dog susceptibility” was still freuling et al, you know something is terribly wrong with that “raccoon dogs at the market” claim. https://archive.md/1kO88 https://archive.md/vlAgp Also, positive human cases were notably found far away from the wildlife stalls—only link were to the toilets and mahjong room, unfortunately then proximity to these regions confounded the “wildlife stalls”—W9-36-38 having the exact same animal composition as W6-29-33 but entirely negative. Again, Gao et al deliberately https://archive.md/rSaO9 bleached the toilets before sampling them to blame the wildlife stall—but forgot that he still had a sampler shedding the virus https://archive.md/CTP3i https://archive.md/13bdP which left one final batch of samples that again, contained no lineage reads and now contained only Homo Sapiens as the mammalian species—and not any other mammals. archive.md/NeybM toilets and infected samplers. https://archive.md/ETjzS https://archive.md/BWZJL https://archive.md/KLkHS Contamination and cross- contamination. https://archive.md/YGDiK All sewage well samples including those with reads say toilets not wildlife stalls. Oh, https://archive.md/csYBM https://archive.md/JSQvc https://archive.md/T2u0S https://archive.md/Ttn5P The main stalls where those raccoon dogs were in fact located on the far end of W8-W9, all negative. Once you enter that precious “raccoon dog stall”, all that existed there is clear evidence Homo sapiens brought it in. https://twitter.com/daoyu15/status/1672496395465670656?s=46&t=wRQSWp_1VffWmS2v KQwhSA https://twitter.com/daoyu15/status/1672490034518429696?s=46&t=wRQSWp_1VffWmS2v KQwhSA The entirety of Jan12 https://archive.md/LJzSO https://archive.md/4cCHG https://archive.md/csYBM is contamination. archive.md/vlAgp The entirety of stall W6-29-33 is caused by contamination. Homo Sapiens uniquely is the only mammalian species with https://archive.md/gkquN Consistent positive correlation in that “stall”. And only species with consistent and significant positive correlation https://archive.md/JSQvc for the https://archive.md/csYBM https://archive.md/Ttn5P Jan 12 dataset in general. https://archive.md/tlfNr The samplers aren’t even trained to preserve the scene and took the samples after several cleaning passes have been done. https://archive.md/FskYn And some samplers were already infected. No lineage reads in the wildlife stall samples and its closest proximity to the entrance of the market in all sampling efforts targeting the wildlife stalls https://archive.md/CTP3i https://archive.md/RirQ7 Mean that addition to the toilets, contamination by infected samplers as they group, suit up and enter the market, likely contributed additionally to all of the detection of contamination in these “stalls”, especially during later sampling which were full of artifacts and eventually cumulating in samples with no mammals other than Humans. https://archive.md/LJzSO https://archive.md/4cCHG Confirmation bias is a powerful process that can lead to contamination, too. https://twitter.com/daoyu15/status/166019050789577114