SARS COV 2 WAS SEQUENCED! (Conclusion is it was engineered) Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag Prashant Pradhan$1,2, Ashutosh Kumar Pandey$1, Akhilesh Mishra$1, Parul Gupta1, Praveen Kumar Tripathi1, Manoj Balakrishnan Menon1, James Gomes1 , Perumal Vivekanandan1and Bishwajit Kundu1 1Kusuma School of biological sciences, Indian institute of technology, New Delhi-110016, India. 2Acharya Narendra Dev College, University of Delhi, New Delhi-110019, India $Equal contribution Corresponding authors- email: bkundu@bioschool.iitd.ac.in vperumal@bioschool.iitd.ac.in Abstract: We are currently witnessing a major epidemic caused by the 2019 novel coronavirus (2019- nCoV). The evolution of 2019-nCoV remains elusive. We found 4 insertions in the spike glycoprotein (S) which are unique to the 2019-nCoV and are not present in other coronaviruses. Importantly, amino acid residues in all the 4 inserts have identity or similarity to those in the HIV- 1 gp120 or HIV-1 Gag. Interestingly, despite the inserts being discontinuous on the primary amino acid sequence, 3D-modelling of the 2019-nCoV suggests that they converge to constitute the receptor binding site. The finding of 4 unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV, all of which have identity /similarity to amino acid residues in key structural proteins of HIV-1 is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature. This work provides yet unknown insights on 2019-nCoV and sheds light on the evolution and pathogenicity of this virus with important implications for diagnosis of this virus. Discussion The current outbreak of 2019-nCoV warrants a thorough investigation and understanding of its ability to infect human beings. Keeping in mind that there has been a clear change in the preference of host from previous coronaviruses to this virus, we studied the change in spike protein between 2019-nCoV and other viruses. We found four new insertions in the S protein of 2019-nCoV when compared to its nearest relative, SARS CoV. The genome sequence from the recent 28 clinical isolates showed that the sequence coding for these insertions are conserved amongst all these isolates. This indicates that these insertions have been preferably acquired by the 2019-nCoV, providing it with additional survival and infectivity advantage. Delving deeper we found that these insertions were similar to HIV-1. Our results highlight an astonishing relation between the gp120 and Gag protein of HIV, with 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein. These proteins are critical for the viruses to identify and latch on to their host cells and for viral assembly (Beniac et al., 2006). Since surface proteins are responsible for host tropism, changes in these proteins imply a change in host specificity of the virus. According to reports from China, there has been a gain of host specificity in case 2019-nCoV as the virus was originally known to infect animals and not humans but after the mutations, it has gained tropism to humans as well. Moving ahead, 3D modelling of the protein structure displayed that these insertions are present at the binding site of 2019-nCoV. Due to the presence of gp120 motifs in 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein at its binding domain, we propose that these motif insertions could have provided an enhanced affinity towards host cell receptors. Further, this structural change might have also increased the range of host cells that 2019-nCoV can infect. To the best of our knowledge, the function of these motifs is still not clear in HIV and need to be explored. The exchange of genetic material among the viruses is well known and such critical exchange highlights the risk and the need to investigate the relations between seemingly unrelated virus families. Conclusions Our analysis of the spike glycoprotein of 2019-nCoV revealed several interesting findings: First, we identified 4 unique inserts in the 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein that are not present in any other coronavirus reported till date. To our surprise, all the 4 inserts in the 2019-nCoV mapped to short segments of amino acids in the HIV-1 gp120 and Gag among all annotated virus proteins in the NCBI database. This uncanny similarity of novel inserts in the 2019- nCoV spike protein to HIV-1 gp120 and Gag is unlikely to be fortuitous. Further, 3D modelling suggests that atleast 3 of the unique inserts which are non-contiguous in the primary protein sequence of the 2019-nCoV spike glycoprotein converge to constitute the key components of the receptor binding site. Of note, all the 4 inserts have pI values of around 10 that may facilitate virus-host interactions. Taken together, our findings suggest unconventional evolution of 2019-nCoV that warrants further investigation. Our work highlights novel evolutionary aspects of the 2019-nCoV and has implications on the pathogenesis and diagnosis of this virus. ?Paper now withdrawn? https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v2

Whoaa. Thank you for sharing. That’s a spicy meataball.

“Find problems with their methodology”

Proof these people, Fauci included, are not scientists. Scientists test or retest others data and methods, but once you decide that you don’t like another research papers results and your goal is not to test it but to attack it then you are no longer practicing the scientific method, you are just being political.

Asked my dad who was an FBI agent about all the retractions. Apparently they can basically retract whatever the fuck you want and if you want to get that info, you have to go to the judge, and they look at what the info is and get to decide if it should stay concealed, where you basically have no ability to argue because you don’t know wtf it says.

An article published by a group of medical scientists in India in the medical science journal BioRXiv in January 2020 was entitled “Uncanny similarity of unique inserts in the 2019-nCov spike protein to HIV-1 and Gag.”

In a highly controversial finding, the medical scientists in India reported: “We found 4 insertions in the spike glycoprotein (S) which are unique to the 2019-nCoV and are not present in other coronaviruses. Importantly, amino acid residues in all 4 inserts have identity or similarity to those in the HIV-1 gp120 or HIV-Gag, all of which have identity/similarity to amino acid residues in key structural proteins of HIV-1 is unlikely to be fortuitous in nature.”

The article almost immediately was withdrawn after disinformation experts recognized the medical scientists in India were suggesting that COVID-19 was created by inserting the particular glycoprotein from the HIV-1 disease that involve patents held by or applied for by Fauci. Even more upsetting to disinformation operatives was the suggestion that the insertion of these 4 inserts into a SARS virus is not likely to occur in nature.

The clear suggestion was that COVID-19 was laboratory-created, possibly as a bioweapon, and that the creator of the virus used GP120 to do so, a glycoprotein from the HIV-1 1990s era that tied back to Fauci.

https://angloamerica101.wordpress.com/2020/07/09/why-does-fauci-hold-patents-on-a-key-hiv-component-used-to-create-covid-19/