Farewell to the hustle and bustle of the city and enter the experimental field for rice transplanting

June is the annual seedling planting season. Parents and families accustomed to city life enthusiastically signed up for this activity and came to the Zhuangxing Comprehensive Experimental Station of the Shanghai Academy of Agricultural Sciences in Fengxian District to get close to nature and visit the experimental field in the atmosphere of agricultural scientific research. , Agricultural greenhouses, laboratory buildings.

To commemorate the “Father of Hybrid Rice” Academician Yuan Longping, this science night specially planned the “Parent-Child Fun Rice Planting” session. Although it was raining, under the guidance of professional scientific research teachers, he rarely did farm work on weekdays, or even did it. Parents and children in the field are enthusiastic, sow their own rice seedlings by themselves, get close to the green and work hard, experience the magical vitality of seedlings, and learn about the difficulty of food research and development, production, sowing and harvesting.

After experiencing the hard work of the field, and seeing the process of rice turning into rice, the children can taste the taste of the latest rice and corn cultivated in Shanghai. At the site of the Zhuangxing Comprehensive Experimental Station of the Academy of Agricultural Sciences, in order to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China, a large-scale colored rice field with a length of 200 meters and a width of 100 meters was specially designed and planted, and the participating audience was invited to take photos with it. The audience participating in the event also met the breeders from the Municipal Academy of Agricultural Sciences, listened to the story of rice growth, and learned about the mentality of scientific researchers.

The development of “little breeder” in the Quest Lab In the afternoon and night events of this science night, a fun science interactive session was set up to develop a “little breeder”. Participants were invited to enter the Fengpu campus of the Shanghai Academy of Agricultural Sciences to explore the secrets of crop breeding and cultivation. Institute, communicate with researchers and laboratory science breeders. The site will be equipped with a microscope to observe the microscopic world, experiment with species, learn the use of centrifuges, experience rice DNA extraction and other scientific experiment interactions. Teenagers will be invited to complete scientific tasks, learn laboratory knowledge by themselves, and become children through understanding basic scientific research. Little agricultural scientist! Have you seen instant corn in different colors? What are the miraculous research and development achievements of rice, grain and oil? There will be an explanation and interactive session at the event site, and the instructor will take you around the session. The artificial climate room with a high temperature and constant temperature environment, the interesting edible fungus scientific research building, the flower greenhouse, and the breeding laboratory will find answers to all kinds of questions in the heart. As a popular brand event of the Shanghai Science and Technology Festival, the Science Night in 2021 will also enter more popular science venues, scientific research institutes, and popular landmarks in Shanghai, leading the public to play science and promote it in a happy atmosphere where parents and children are holding hands. The spirit of a scientist, to perceive the mystery and splendor of science. Dongfang.com reporter Cao Lei reported on June 21: Braving the heavy rain, he walked into the experimental field to plant seedlings, clocked in the large-scale colored rice fields, explored the laboratory to complete scientific research tasks, learned about the latest corn, grain, oil, vegetables and fruits cultivated in Shanghai, and cherished the enthusiasm for science. To commemorate Academician Yuan Longping and thank the scientific researchers for their hard work and cultivate the scientific awareness of young people in loving food and saving food. Focusing on the theme of “holding the rice bowl firmly in one’s own hands”, the 2021 Science Night recently held a special event at the Municipal Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Farewell to the hustle and bustle of the city and enter the experimental field for rice transplanting June is the annual seedling planting season. Parents and families accustomed to city life enthusiastically signed up for this activity and came to the Zhuangxing Comprehensive Experimental Station of the Shanghai Academy of Agricultural Sciences in Fengxian District to get close to nature and visit the experimental field in the atmosphere of agricultural scientific research. , Agricultural greenhouses, laboratory buildings. To commemorate the “Father of Hybrid Rice” Academician Yuan Longping, this science night specially planned the “Parent-Child Fun Rice Planting” session. Although it was raining, under the guidance of professional scientific research teachers, he rarely did farm work on weekdays, or even did it. Parents and children in the field are enthusiastic, sow their own rice seedlings by themselves, get close to the green and work hard, experience the magical vitality of seedlings, and learn about the difficulty of food research and development, production, sowing and harvesting. After experiencing the hard work of the field, and seeing the process of rice turning into rice, the children can taste the taste of the latest rice and corn cultivated in Shanghai. At the site of the Zhuangxing Comprehensive Experimental Station of the Academy of Agricultural Sciences, in order to celebrate the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China, a large-scale colored rice field with a length of 200 meters and a width of 100 meters was specially designed and planted, and the participating audience was invited to take photos with it. The audience participating in the event also met the breeders from the Municipal Academy of Agricultural Sciences, listened to the story of rice growth, and learned about the mentality of scientific researchers. The development of “little breeder” in the Quest Lab In the afternoon and night events of this science night, a fun science interactive session was set up to develop a “little breeder”. Participants were invited to enter the Fengpu campus of the Shanghai Academy of Agricultural Sciences to explore the secrets of crop breeding and cultivation. Institute, communicate with researchers and laboratory science breeders. The site will be equipped with a microscope to observe the microscopic world, experiment with species, learn the use of centrifuges, experience rice DNA extraction and other scientific experiment interactions. Teenagers will be invited to complete scientific tasks, learn laboratory knowledge by themselves, and become children through understanding basic scientific research. Little agricultural scientist! Have you seen instant corn in different colors? What are the miraculous research and development achievements of rice, grain and oil? There will be an explanation and interactive session at the event site, and the instructor will take you around the session. The artificial climate room with a high temperature and constant temperature environment, the interesting edible fungus scientific research building, the flower greenhouse, and the breeding laboratory will find answers to all kinds of questions in the heart. As a popular brand event of the Shanghai Science and Technology Festival, the Science Night in 2021 will also enter more popular science venues, scientific research institutes, and popular landmarks in Shanghai, leading the public to play science and promote it in a happy atmosphere where parents and children are holding hands. The spirit of a scientist, to perceive the mystery and splendor of science

These tests are being conducted at a secret facility near Apple’s Apple Park headquarters, according to The Independent. Photo: DigitalTrends “The purpose for the chips being tested is to see if they underperform in extreme situations – and if so, to make sure they only happen in the lab and not in the wild. the phone is in the hands of the user,” said The Independent. “Any of these inaccuracies can be a weakness for the device. Photo: Business Insider The Independent added that it is rare for a normal phone device to have to pass such extreme tests as it has to go from -40 degrees Celsius to 110 degrees Celsius. But the concern is real because if the chips lack security in such situations, bad guys can take advantage and the data stored inside can be stolen,” said The Independent. Photo: Business Insider The site was obtained in an interview with Craig Federighi, Apple’s senior vice president of software engineering.

Distinguishing between Trump and Biden In an article published in March 2020, CNN posted an image of former President Trump crossing out the word “Corona” and changing it to “Chinese” before the word virus in a note at a meeting with the task force against COVID-19. The American newspaper at the time asserted that this was an attempt by the President and some in the administration to distract the public from his failure to control the spread of the COVID-19 disease in the US. At the same time, many other American newspapers quoted a series of statements from the White House public health advisers asserting that it is inappropriate and inaccurate to associate SARS-CoV-2 with the name Wuhan virus. “Ethnicity is not the cause of the virus that causes COVID-19” , Forbes quoted Alex Azar – US Secretary of Health and Human Services at that time said. A photo shows the word “Corona” removed and replaced with “China” in Trump’s COVID-19 announcement. Sheet Vox Trump’s association with COVID-19 by geographical location is dangerous because it arouses xenophobia. CBS News stressed that the US leader’s statements related to the “Chinese virus” only fueled a wave of discrimination against Asian Americans. According to statistics from the database website Factbase, Trump used the phrase “Chinese virus” more than 20 times between March 16 and March 30. Before a series of criticisms from the media and public opinion, he did not mention this phrase but never “reduced” when he asserted that there was evidence that nCoV escaped from the Wuhan laboratory many months later. Unlike his predecessor, not long after taking office, President Biden signed an executive order banning COVID-19 contacts by geographical location. A few weeks ago, the hypothesis that COVID-19 leaked from the Wuhan laboratory became hot again when the Wall Street Journal It was reported that 3 researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology were hospitalized for treatment in early November 2019. The American newspaper confirmed that these people had “symptoms similar to COVID-19 disease”. A few days after the information Wall Street Journal Posted, President Biden directed the US intelligence community to intensify efforts to investigate the origin of COVID-19 and report to him within 90 days. This move of the American leader was welcomed by the US media. A series of American newspapers began to seriously analyze the possibility of the virus escaping the laboratory, citing experts who emphasized the need for a scientific investigation into this matter. CBS News Quoting former US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, it was a mistake to prematurely dismiss the theory that COVID-19 leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan. While New York Times said many scientists welcomed President Biden’s call for a more extensive investigation of the Wuhan lab. Many other newspapers are racing to publish information about the report of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, California, USA on the origin of COVID-19 which emphasizes the hypothesis that the SARS-CoV-2 virus leaked from a laboratory. China’s experiment in Wuhan is correct and needs further investigation. The same problem, but at two times, the way the American media reported under two presidents seemed different. Although compared to 1 year ago, the hypothesis that COVID-19 escaped from the Wuhan laboratory is only one more episode like Wall Street Journa l posted. Intelligence agencies around the world, including in the US, have yet to make any official conclusions about the origin of nCoV. Trump supporters criticize American media. Many opinions say that anti-Trump sentiment makes many newspapers lose their objective view when they only focus on going against what the US leader claims. The US has never given up investigating the origin of COVID-19 Even under Trump or Biden, the US has never given up on the investigation into the origin of COVID-19. Washington criticized China for denying international investigators access to the Wuhan lab and for failing to explain some of the inconsistencies in the hypothesis that the virus jumped from animals to humans. The Wuhan Institute of Virology became the focus of the investigation into the origin of COVID-19. (Image: Shutterstock) According to the sheet DW of Germany, the United States is taking every opportunity to remind the world that China is responsible for the entire current world mayhem. Whether it’s Trump or Biden, they want the American people to believe that the disease that has claimed more than 600,000 American lives originated in China and they have done everything to find the truth that Beijing hides. Blaming China also alleviated people’s dissatisfaction with the government’s shortcomings in putting in place anti-epidemic measures. It is undeniable that China has fought COVID-19 well and soon brought the epidemic under control. Beijing is also busy promoting its success story and drowning out international criticism for its “leaving” nCoV to the world. But China’s lack of transparency has also fueled speculation that Beijing is hiding something. This provides fertile ground for conspiracy theories. “Unfortunately, we are experiencing a situation in which the question of the origin of COVID-19 and different strategies in fighting the pandemic becomes the subject of a propaganda war between the US government and the US government. and China” , said German scientist Felix Wemheuer. Experts say that while trying to refer to China as an irresponsible country that spreads the disease but consistently denies it, the US has built itself as a leader in finding the truth, ready to stand up for justice. The US claims to blame China for COVID-19 are also against Beijing’s propaganda efforts that the virus did not originate in the country. After successfully controlling the epidemic, China began to shift public opinion from criticism aimed at the country to Beijing’s contributions in the pandemic. Beijing once hypothesized that the virus may not have originated in China after a study published in 2020 showed that antibodies against COVID-19 or a variant were detected in Italy in 2019. China also called called WHO to investigate the hypothesis that the virus leaked from laboratories around the world, referring to the possibility that the pathogen may have been brought by US military personnel to Wuhan, China in October 2019. If it is proven that COVID-19 came from a laboratory in Wuhan, the US will destroy the image that China has built and pressure Beijing to shoulder the burden of vaccination for the world. The US accusations against China may also give other countries a stronger voice in demanding an investigation into the origins of COVID-19 under the umbrella of US protection. In fact, British intelligence recently suddenly changed its opinion, from thinking that the virus theory leaked from the laboratory “unlikely” to saying this hypothesis is “absolutely possible”. For the US, an investigation into the origin of the epidemic could become a lever to increase pressure on China and be part of a competition for influence between China and the West. If it can obtain evidence of Beijing’s cover-up of the pandemic, Washington can use that as leverage in negotiations. Is the investigation being politicized? Under pressure from the US, China and WHO officials repeatedly called on Washington to stop politicizing and “poisoning” the investigation into the origin of COVID-19. Experts fear the US-China blame game for the origin of the epidemic threatens scientific investigations. (Photo: SCMP) “US efforts to politicize research on the origins of COVID-19 seriously undermine international cooperation and create difficulties and obstacles for efforts to combat the virus and save lives.” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman stressed. According to the DW The fact that the US is using COVID-19 as a “scapegoat” as well as the way China is not really transparent about providing information at the beginning of the outbreak are turning science into a political victim of the pandemic. . The world’s two largest economies are stuck in a blame game, fueled by theories about the origins of COVID-19. Experts fear this could distort the investigation into the origin of the epidemic, which is expected to be based on science. “Analysts are under political pressure to stick to the theory that the virus leaked from the lab,” he said. analyst Jeffery Wright said. Dr Mike Ryan, head of WHO’s health emergencies programme, once affirmed that “science needs to be central and science will find the answer”. Unfortunately, the WHO’s statements seem to be losing some weight due to earlier accusations by the Trump administration that the WHO is a “puppet of China” and that the organization is China-centric. Doubts with the WHO also increased when the organization’s investigation into the origin of COVID-19 in March did not come to a clear conclusion. The investigative report mentions the theory that the virus leaked from the laboratory but claims this scenario is “extremely unlikely”.

The hypothesis that the COVID-19 pandemic can originate from the Wuhan Institute of Virology is of great interest to the world. (Photo: CNN) Where is the “birthplace of COVID-19”? The laboratories at the Wuhan Institute of Virology are classified as the safest, or biosafety level 4 (BSL4). They are formulated to control dangerous bacteria and viruses that can cause serious diseases for which there is no cure or vaccine. The researchers here are all well-trained professionals and equipped with protective gear. “ The laboratory is equipped with an HVAC feeder system so viruses cannot escape through the exhaust, all wastes are treated with chemicals or high temperatures to ensure that no (pathogens) are still active. dynamic “, said Dr. Gregory Koblentz at George Mason University. In addition to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, there are still 59 similar scientific research institutions in the world. Meanwhile, there are no international standards specifying the level of safety, security and responsibility in the preservation of disease-carrying specimens at these facilities. The possibility of problems in these labs is entirely possible. This rate is even higher for the thousands of lower-level laboratories than the Wuhan research facilities scattered around the world. The laboratories at the Wuhan Institute of Virology are classified as the safest. (Photo: CNN) Man-made disaster A prime example of a disaster stemming from a laboratory accident is the human H1N1 virus. After the terrible pandemic of 1918, in 1977, the H1N1 epidemic once again leaked from the laboratories of the Soviet Union and China, then spread all over the world. In 2001, a mentally disturbed employee of a scientific laboratory in the US spread anthrax spores across the country, killing five people. In 2004, two Chinese researchers exposed to the SARS virus became the source of infection, one of the infected people died. In 2014, the US Food and Drug Administration discovered that some samples carried smallpox at risk of being released. Lynn Klotz, a senior fellow at the Center for Arms Control and Nuclear Nonproliferation, warned that scientific labs have posed many public health threats in history. history, and a similar situation is likely to repeat itself in the future. “ Human error accounts for more than 70% of laboratory incidents “, said Mr. Klotz. A prime example of a disaster stemming from a laboratory accident is the human H1N1 virus. Is Wuhan bat research dangerous? GOF research involves editing pathogens to make them more contagious, more dangerous, or easier to evade vaccines and treatments, all with the aim of improving measures against these pathogens. this disease. GOF has long been an area of ​​intense controversy. The US government, the largest funder of research on the link between COVID-19 and bats in Wuhan, disagrees with several independent scientists. They could not agree on whether this work should be classified as a GOF study. Epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch expressed concern about studying the SARS-CoV-2 virus in bats: I am afraid that it will create a new strain of virus that, although not deadly if infected by the laboratory staff, will cause a new pandemic.” . “ This research is unnecessary and does not contribute to drug or vaccine development ‘, said Professor Richard Ebright at Rutgers University, a longtime GOF expert. The US government also banned GOF research in 2014. The ban was relaxed in 2017, under which some cases will be considered to be allowed to operate based on the application of the research. However, the review process has been criticized as lacking transparency and unreliable. Leading US health experts Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci of the National Institutes of Health have denied the research on COVID-19 and Wuhan bats is of the GOF category, but independent scientists disagree with this. their statement. The US government is the largest funder of research on the link between COVID-19 and bats in Wuhan. (Photo: AP) There is currently no clear scientific evidence on whether the virus that causes the COVID-19 pandemic leaked from a laboratory. However, there is some indirect evidence in favor of this hypothesis: Wuhan is only about 1,600 km north of the bat cave containing the SARS-CoV-2 virus, scientists from Wuhan are also known to often frequent visits to bat caves to take samples. Alina Chan, an expert in molecular biology at the Broad Institute, said the SARS-CoV-2 virus does not grow quickly after infecting people. This is one of the signs that the virus came from the lab. Ms. Chan added that the research on the SARS-CoV-2 virus will not be abandoned even after the pandemic ends. On the contrary, this study can be further extended in the future.

On May 26, the Biden administration directed US intelligence officials to take a closer look origin of SARS-CoV-2 , including theories such as animal-to-human transmission and lab leaks. The SARS-CoV-2 virus has so far infected more than 172 million people globally and caused more than 3 million deaths. (Photo courtesy: AFP) To date, the most comprehensive look at the origins of Covid-19 is a report by the World Health Organization (WHO) published on March 30 by an international team of researchers who traveled to China to Investigate the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. However, weeks later, many countries around the world have expressed concern that investigators have not had access to adequate data, while scientists say the report clearly shows how the virus develope. “The quick and obvious answer is not possible, as it normally takes years to trace the source of the virus. But in this case, I think we have enough evidence to make some hypotheses about SARS-CoV-2,” said Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the Center for Global Health Science and Security at the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Georgetown University Health, said. In the WHO report, the team found that it is possible that SARS-CoV-2 was transmitted from one animal to another before it was transmitted to humans. They also looked at evidence supporting the hypothesis that the virus was transmitted directly to humans from the original host animal, or that the virus spread through the frozen food supply chain. In addition, the research team said that the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan (China) is “very unlikely”. Below are the evidences for each of the four hypotheses about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 that the WHO report makes. 1. Direct animal-to-human transmission WHO assesses direct transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from animals to humans as a “probable” possibility. The SARS-CoV-2 virus originated in an animal, possibly a bat, and then spread to humans. The WHO report provides evidence that the majority of coronaviruses that infect humans come from animals, including the virus that caused the 2003 SARS outbreak. Bats are thought to be the most likely animal to cause it. epidemics of Covid-19 because they are hosts of a virus that is genetically related to SARS- CoV-2. The WHO report acknowledges the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 spread to humans from pangolins or ferrets. However, David Robertson, a virologist at the University of Glasgow, said that the WHO team of scientists had sampled many animals other than bats for study, and the analysis showed that bats are a natural reservoir for the virus. SARS-CoV-2. 2. Transmission from animals to humans through an intermediate host According to WHO, the possibility of SARS-CoV-2 transmission from animals to humans through an intermediate host is very high. In the event that SARS-CoV-2 was not transmitted directly from bats to humans, the scientists believe the most likely hypothesis is that the virus first spread through another animal species, such as a ferret or ferret. pangolin. Unlike bats, these animals are in constant contact with humans, especially if they are raised on farms or during the illegal wildlife trade. If SARS-CoV-2 was initially transmitted to another animal, that could also explain how the virus adapted to harm humans, although Robertson said the virus probably won’t change much. Genome analyzes show that SARS-CoV-2 is a virus specifically adapted to humans, which explains why it can be easily transmitted between pangolins, ferrets, cats and other species. other animals. The WHO report indicates that this is the route that previous corona viruses have taken to infect humans. For example, the SARS virus is believed to have passed from bats to civets before causing an epidemic in humans in 2002. Meanwhile, the virus that causes MERS has been found in camels throughout the Middle East. Daniel Lucey, an infectious diseases specialist at Georgetown University Medical Center, said that the similarities between SARS-CoV-2 and coronavirus families like SARS and MERS are a compelling argument that the strain type This virus can be transmitted in the same way. However, if this hypothesis is correct, it remains unclear what the intermediate host for the transmission of the virus from animals to humans is. The WHO team analyzed samples from thousands of domestic animals across China, all of which tested negative for SARS-CoV-2. Mr. Lucey said that the WHO team did not adequately examine mink raised in China, one of the suspected intermediate hosts. 3. Transmission through frozen food WHO assesses the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 transmission through frozen food is probable. Another theory is that the virus can be transmitted to humans through the cold supply chain, the supply chain that distributes frozen food. In this case, the virus may have originated outside of China but spread into the country through the surface of the food packaging or in the food itself. This hypothesis gained interest in the summer of 2020 after several outbreaks in China. Since then, there has been some evidence that pathogens can survive longer at cold temperatures. However, while cold supply chains may play a role in new outbreaks, scientists say there is little reason to think that is the source of the pandemic. There is no direct evidence that SARS-CoV-2 causes food-borne outbreaks, while Rasmussen noted that SARS-CoV-2 is rarely spread through surfaces. . “It is not an impossibility. This possibility cannot be ruled out. But I think the current evidence is not enough to show that,” Ms. Rasmussen said. 4. Leaks from the lab According to WHO, the possibility of the SARS-CoV-2 virus leaking from the laboratory is extremely unlikely. The most controversial theory about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is that the virus leaked from a laboratory in Wuhan, where scientists studied coronaviruses in bats. WHO scientists point out that there is little evidence that the virus leaked from the laboratory. An employee works at the laboratory of the Wuhan Institute of Virology (China). Photo: AFP There are 2 possibilities of the SARS-CoV-2 lab leak hypothesis, that is, a researcher was accidentally infected in the laboratory or the researchers intentionally invented a corona virus strain to create SARS. -CoV-2. However, the researchers completely rejected the second possibility that SARS-CoV-2 was created by genetic evidence that the virus arose spontaneously. WHO focuses on the possibility that the virus accidentally escaped from a laboratory where wildlife samples are being studied. Although there have been laboratory leaks in the past, the WHO report indicates that these are very rare. According to the WHO report, there is no record of any laboratory in Wuhan working on a virus closely related to SARS-CoV-2 before the first cases of Covid-19 were diagnosed. diagnosed in December 2019, nor have any laboratory staff reported symptoms of Covid-19. An article by the Wall Street Journal on May 23 stated that three researchers from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became ill in November 2019 and were hospitalized with “symptoms consistent with both Covid-19. -19 and seasonal flu. However, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian on May 25 denied this information. When the WHO report was released in April, Mr. Lucey believed the hypothesis was plausible, although less likely than animal-to-human transmission due to the lack of evidence. Lucey pointed out that there was no forensic investigation of the Wuhan labs. “There really isn’t any way to prove or disprove the lab leak theory based on what is presented in this report,” Ms. Rasmussen said, noting that, to address the issue, A forensic examination of the laboratory is required to find the origin of SARS-COV-2. According to expert Robertson, supporters of the virus lab leak hypothesis argue that SARS-CoV-2 has spread too quickly and effectively in humans to become a virus of natural origin. But if SARS-CoV-2 is a “smart” virus, according to genomic studies, Robertson said, it is not surprising that it infects humans so quickly and so strongly.

Professor Marc Lipsitch, professor of epidemiology at the Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health, said the scientists signed a letter published in the journal Science to call for the attention of the scientific community. “What we’re saying is that the available evidence doesn’t rule out a laboratory origin of COVID-19, nor does it rule out a natural origin. And there’s really no solid evidence either. It’s just that. There’s quite a bit of evidence lacking right now, and we’re calling for it to be addressed because it’s such an important question,” said Prof. Meanwhile, the Business Standard on May 29 said that since last year, Professor Angus Dalgleish (British) and Norwegian scientist Birger Sorensen have come to a conclusion about the possibility that “the SARS-CoV-2 virus originated from To confirm their position, the two scientists published a 22-page paper in the journal Biophysical Discovery, explaining that, in the course of their research Researching the vaccine, they discovered “special traces” that the virus was not of natural origin.The clue was a row of four amino acids, which generate a positive charge and bind to negative human cells. . “The law of nature is that you can’t have four positive amino acids in a row. The only way to have this is to make it yourself,” commented Professor Angus Dalgleish. The article by these two scientists also affirms: “We now have no doubt that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was purposefully manipulated, forcing us to reconsider the We think there are retro-engineered viruses. They changed the virus, then tried to figure it out in sequence years ago. We’ve seen leaks. We know it’s happening in the lab, and we know it’s happening. We also know from the reports we’ve found that the coronavirus is studied in Biosafety Level 2 or 3 laboratories.” Both scientists are respected experts: Prof Angus Dalgleish is a professor of oncology in London known for his groundbreaking work on HIV vaccines while Birger Sorensen is a virologist and president of Immunor Pharmaceuticals, which is developing a COVID-19 vaccine called Biovacc-19. On May 26, US President Joe Biden ordered the country’s intelligence community to unravel the conspiracy theory that the virus leaked from a Chinese laboratory and must provide an answer within 90 days. Doubts Apparently, the hypothesis that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could be the result of a scientific experiment has heated up the debate among scientists about the operation of the safest biological laboratories in the world today. . The Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is suspected of leaking the virus, is a virology research institute managed by the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS). Located in Jiangxia District, Wuhan, Hubei, Wuhan Institute of Virology has China’s first biosafety level 4 (BSL – 4) laboratory and has close relations with the National Laboratory. Galveston in the US, the Center International de Recherche en Infectiologie in France, and the National Microbiology Laboratory in Canada. Gregory Koblentz, director of Biodefense Graduate, revealed that BSL-4 is built to work safely and securely against the most dangerous bacteria and viruses that can cause serious illnesses for which there is no treatment or vaccine. : “There’s an HVAC filtration system, so viruses can’t escape through the exhaust. Any wastewater that leaves the facility is treated with chemicals or high temperatures to ensure that nothing remains alive. The researchers themselves are highly trained and wear protective clothing.” Statistics show that there are 59 BSL-4s around the world but there are no binding international standards for safe, confidential and responsible work with pathogens. The report, Mapping Maximum Biological Containment Labs Globally, shows that accidents can happen, sometimes in top-tier facilities, and more often in lower-level labs. For example, the human H1N1 virus – the same flu that caused the 1918 pandemic, was leaked in 1977 in the Soviet Union (former) and China. In 2001, a mentally disturbed employee at a US laboratory sent anthrax spores across the country, killing five people. Two Chinese researchers exposed to SARS in 2004 spread the disease to others, resulting in one death. In 2014, a handful of vials of smallpox were discovered during an office move by the US Food and Drug Administration. Lynn Klotz, a senior scientist at the Centers for Non-Proliferation and Control, has been sounding the alarm for years about the public safety threats posed by such facilities. “Human error accounts for more than 70% of errors in laboratories, adding that US researchers must rely on data from freedom of information requests to learn about incidents.” hey,” Lynn Klotz said. These incidents do not mean that COVID-19 has leaked from a laboratory and the fact that there is no scientific evidence to support the scenario yet, said molecular biologist Richard Ebright of Rutgers University. laboratory accident for this pandemic.

The lack of information raises more questions. Recently, 24 scientists sent a letter to the World Health Organization (WHO) asking for an independent and rigorous investigation because they thought that the international investigation to China in early February was not deep enough. US President Joe Biden on May 26 also ordered intelligence forces to “double efforts” to investigate the origin of the Covid-19 pandemic, including the possibility of a leak “from a laboratory accident”. While the theory that the corona virus leaked from the laboratory was “resurrected”, two competing groups of experts in the study of bat diseases in Wuhan became the target of criticism. The reason is that they are willing to ignore safety measures during research. Many new diseases in the past originated in bats. Photo: SCMP. “Batwoman” and Wuhan Institute of Virology Nicknamed “bat woman”, Dr. Shi Zhengli is a famous Chinese corona virus researcher. She has identified many strains of the virus similar to SARS (severe acute respiratory distress syndrome) over the years and forewarned of new pandemic risks. Thach’s laboratory at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) also discovered and studied viruses that are closely related to corona virus. However, the scientists point out that the two viruses are still decades apart in natural evolution. According to the report of the WHO expert team, Ms. Thach said that all field activities were carried out with full protective clothing, including N95 masks, overalls, visors, and gloves. However, in a speech in June 2018, Ms. Thach said that is not the case. “Most of the time, we’ll wear simpler protective gear, and that’s fine,” Thach said in her speech. That’s because most diseases in bats can’t be directly transmitted to humans, but can only be through intermediate animals, Ms. Thach explained. To illustrate, Ms. Thach showed the audience during the presentation a photo of her team casting nets to catch bats in the cave and sorting the samples. Some people on the team only wore medical masks and thin rubber gloves, while others used their bare hands and did not wear masks. “When are we going to strengthen the protective gear? For example, when there are too many bats in the cave or when there is a lot of dust when entering the cave,” Thach said. When the pandemic hit, Ms. Thach became quiet and appeared only occasionally. On February 2, 2020, she posted to friends on the social network WeChat and “swore on her life” that her lab was not related to the pandemic. Three months later, Ms. Thach continued to post denying rumors that she had brought intelligence files to the West, according to Global Times . Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Photo: AFP. When suspicions fell on the WIV, Ms. Thach sent a statement to the scientific journal Science in July. She said the corona virus could not have come from the WIV because her team did not encounter this strain during research. In addition, every employee here has tested negative for corona virus antibodies. According to Ms. Thach, before the pandemic, her team “never exposed or studied this virus, and did not know of its existence”. But she also admitted that her lab has not yet sequenced the genes of every sample due to financial and human constraints. She declined to say how many samples remain unsequenced. In January, Thach’s laboratory was questioned even more after the US State Department announced that there were “reasons to believe” that some WIV researchers showed symptoms similar to Covid-19 in the fall of 2019. May, Wall Street Journal also cited intelligence reports that three WIV researchers had been so sick that they needed to be examined. Vien Chi Minh, WIV’s laboratory director, called this a “blatant lie” in response to state media. Bat explorer and Wuhan CDC CDC During this time, the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) lab was less visible than the WIV. The WHO expert team’s report on the trip to the Wuhan CDC did not include notes on research safety measures. According to the report, the laboratory moved on December 2, 2019 to a location near the Huanan market – the market that was linked to the first cases of corona virus infection. “Such activity can disrupt the operation of any laboratory,” the WHO expert team said. However, the Wuhan CDC laboratory did not record any interruptions, according to the WHO expert. The Wuhan CDC is the place to monitor China’s initial response to the pandemic. At the Wuhan CDC, there is also a person who regularly works with bats – Dien Tuan Hoa. According to the Washington Post , in terms of position, Dien Tuan Hoa is a deputy technician in the pest control department of the Wuhan CDC. But Mr. Dien is known for being an aggressive adventurer when it comes to working with bats and insects. “He often goes to places that other people cannot find to get the necessary specimens,” a colleague said of Mr. Dien on a local TV station in January 2020. “He can confidently say that he can catch what others can’t.” Tian Junhua on a field trip to collect insects in Hubei province. Photo: China Daily. Using nets and traps, Mr. Dien’s team caught 155 bats in his home province of Hubei, and hundreds of bats in other areas for research in 2013. Mr. Dien was also a member of the team. discovered 1,445 new vertebrate RNA virus species. This result was published in a famous scientific journal Nature in 2016. Once, Wuhan CDC held an internal meeting with the theme “Learning from the achievements of Dien Tuan Hoa”. “No one can remember how many mountains he climbed, how many rivers he waded, how many bat caves he explored, how many stables he crawled, and how many landfills he had to search,” the CDC wrote of the event. However, Mr. Dien also admitted that sometimes he did not comply with research safety rules. In 2017, Mr. Dien told the state newspaper Wuhan Evening News that he once forgot his personal protective equipment, so he had to be isolated at home for 2 weeks after being shot in the body by bat urine. On several other occasions, he got bat blood on his skin while trying to control the animal with forceps, Mr. Dien said. On February 3, 2020, Mr. Dien’s team continued to appear in the journal Nature with early-stage clinical descriptions of a corona virus patient in Wuhan. The team’s research indicates that bats can be a host for pathogens. But when Covid-19 spread, Mr. Dien became quiet. March 2020, the state newspaper Health Times An anonymous source said Mr. Dien was not infected with corona virus. According to the article, Mr. Dien was in a bad mood because of rumors about whether he was patient zero. According to a report at the end of March by the WHO expert team, the Wuhan CDC denied storing or experimenting with bat viruses before the pandemic took place. However, in a video, Mr. Dien said he had been to dozens of bat caves and studied 300 types of virus vectors. Also from March, Mr. Dien no longer spoke in public. This highlights the challenge of an independent investigation into the origins of Covid-19: Many of the people who might have had key information in Wuhan are now silent. Mr. Dien continued to research during this time. In August 2020, Mr. Dien was a co-author on a study on ticks. Another of his November 2020 studies focused on antibiotic resistance genes in fish. Mr. Dien no longer speaks or publishes research on bats.

One theory is that the virus came from a bat-like animal. The virus then passes to another animal that has close contact with humans and infects them. The second theory suspects that the SARS-CoV-2 virus leaked from a chemical laboratory in Wuhan, China – where the first patient with Covid-19 was recorded. This hypothesis has been rejected many times, even by the WHO team of experts who came to Wuhan to investigate and rejected this hypothesis. However, in recent weeks, this question has been dug up again. Both of these hypotheses still have no reasonable answer, creating a controversy among scientists. The focus of public opinion The Wuhan Institute of Virology specializes in the study of pathogens in nature that are capable of infecting humans – causing novel diseases and high mortality. The Institute has collected many samples from wild animals for experiments to assess the vulnerability of humans to a variety of animal viruses. The institute has carried out numerous studies on bat viruses since the 2002 SARS outbreak, which claimed the lives of 774 people worldwide. Years after a strenuous search, scientists discovered a virus similar to the one that causes SARS exists in a bat cave in southwestern China. To reduce the risk of pathogens accidentally escaping, the facility had to enforce a series of stringent procedures, such as protective clothing or air filtration systems. However, even the most stringent measures cannot eliminate the risk of the virus leaking into the environment. Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Photo: South China Morning Post. For some scientists, the spread of pathogens by a careless laboratory worker is a plausible theory that explains how the pandemic began. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is located right near the Huanan seafood market – the outbreak is considered the most likely to transmit the virus from animals to humans. The location between the two immediately raised suspicions. Many people are even more suspicious in the context that the animal that carries the disease has not been identified and the Chinese government repeatedly refuses to allow the investigation of the scenario that Covid-19 is a leaked product from a laboratory. The scientists developed the hypothesis based on concerns about the risks associated with laboratory research, clues in the virus genome, and information from the institute’s studies. The Wuhan Institute of Virology insists that its laboratory does not have a virus closely related to SARS-CoV-2 – the origin of the Covid-19 outbreak. This hypothesis was repeatedly rejected, and was forgotten for some time. Until May 23, Wall Street Journal Citing a confidential US report, it was revealed that in November 2019, before China reported its first Covid-19 cases, some researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were hospitalized. . Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian stated on May 24 that the article was “completely untrue”. The ability to transmit viruses from animals to humans A larger number of scientists believe that the virus that causes Covid-19 is of natural origin because there is no scientific evidence to support the scenario of a leak from a laboratory. Kristian G Andersen, a scientist at Scripps Research, who has done extensive research on coronaviruses, Ebola and other pathogens transmitted from animals to humans, says similar natural gene sequences are present in viruses as well. corona. Many new diseases in the past originated in bats. Photo: SCMP. In addition, from a historical perspective, a number of new diseases that have emerged in the past century have been traced back to human interactions with wild and domestic animals, including SARS (bats), MERS-CoV. (camels), Ebola (bats or primates) and Nipah viruses (bats). However, under any scenario, there is not enough evidence to prove that the other scenario cannot happen. 24 scientists recently sent a letter to the World Health Organization (WHO) demanding a rigorous, independent investigation, arguing that an international investigation into China in early February was insufficient. deep. US President Joe Biden on May 26 also ordered intelligence forces to “double efforts” to investigate the origin of the Covid-19 pandemic and report the results of the investigation within 90 days.

Man-made virus? Oncologist at St George’s Hospital in London, Professor Angus Dalgleish, and Norwegian virologist and president of Immunor Pharmaceuticals Birger Sørensen, revealed they had found evidence. originally about this last year, but was ignored by academia. Accordingly, during their research, the two experts concluded that “the possibility that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is the result of the development process in the natural environment is very low”. Both said this virus could be genetically modified at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (China) and a part of scientists tried to hide information about the origin of this virus. According to the two experts, they have found “special traces” that show that the virus is not of natural origin. This clue is a row of four amino acids, which generate a positive charge and bind to negative human cells. “According to the laws of nature, you cannot have four positive amino acids in a row. The only way to have this is to create it yourself,” Dalgleish said. He added that he and Sørensen had found evidence of human impact on the formation of the virus and made it look like a mutation in nature. Two British and Norwegian experts said the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which causes the COVID-19 pandemic, was created in a laboratory. Photo: THE NATION In addition, the two scientists also looked at studies on China, some in collaboration with US universities, to find out how tools for creating viruses were developed. Sputnik news. They conclude that most of the studies above use a “functional development” research approach, which involves manipulating natural viruses in the laboratory to make them more infectious, allowing scientists to study their potential effects on humans. “We believe the virus was designed and created in a functional development approach. They changed the virus, then tried to find its mutated form years ago,” Dalgleish said. “A natural viral pandemic would mutate gradually and become more infectious, but less pathogenic. Many people predicted the COVID-19 pandemic would be like this, but that doesn’t seem to happen,” – the two scientists said. Two experts: Discovery during vaccine research According to the two experts, “it seems that the documents about SARS-CoV-2 in Wuhan are confidential and related information has been destroyed”, so both “face huge gaps”. in the data will probably never be filled”. Mr Dalgleish and Mr Sørensen first raised their concerns last summer, after discovering suspicious features of the deadly virus while working on a vaccine against COVID-19. Security guards stand outside the Institute of Virology in Wuhan City, China. Photo: REUTERS The information about the research paper of the two scientists comes in the context of the US repeatedly calling for another investigation into the origin of the pandemic before China has always denied the possibility that the virus leaked from another in their laboratories, according to the South China Morning Post . On May 25, the Senate Intelligence Committee and the US House of Representatives Intelligence Committee announced that they were conducting their own investigation into the origin of the virus that caused the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as how the US government responded to the crisis. this panic. US officials are concerned that “the lack of cooperation and transparency in the information provided by the Chinese government will continue to adversely affect any efforts to determine the source of the virus that causes the COVID-19 pandemic. “. A day earlier, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian once again rejected the idea that the virus causing the COVID-19 epidemic originated in a laboratory in Wuhan, asserting that “there is no which leak” occurred. “The World Health Organization (WHO) team of experts went to investigate all the places they wanted to go, interviewed anyone they asked, and were satisfied with the results,” Zhao said.

Wuhan Institute of Virology, China. Photo: AFP 59 leading biological laboratories in the world The Wuhan Institute of Virology is among the most secure, often referred to as biosafety level 4, or BSL4. Such laboratory facilities are built to operate safely and securely against some of the world’s deadliest viruses and bacteria, which can cause serious diseases for which there is no cure or vaccine. . “There are air-conditioning filtration systems that prevent viruses from escaping through exhaust gases and wastewater, which are treated with chemicals or high temperatures to make sure nothing remains. at,” Gregory Koblentz, director of the Biosafety Program at George Mason University, told AFP. In addition, the researchers themselves are professionally trained and wear protective gear when conducting experiments. There are about 59 such biological laboratories around the world, a report co-led by Mr. Koblentz published this week said. “There are no mandatory international standards for safety, security and accountability standards for diseases,” the report said. Accidents can happen at any time Accidents can sometimes happen in even the world’s top facilities and are even more likely to happen in thousands of lower-end labs. The H1N1 virus – the same type of virus that caused the 1918 pandemic was leaked in 1977 in the Soviet Union and China, and then spread around the world. In 2001, a mentally challenged employee at an American laboratory sent parcels of anthrax spores across the United States, killing five people. Two Chinese researchers were exposed to the SARS virus in 2004 and spread the disease to others, killing one person. Lynn Klotz, a senior scientist at the Centers for Arms Control and Disarmament, has raised the alarm about the threat to the public from such experimental facilities. “Human errors account for more than 70% of errors in laboratories,” the researcher said. Controversy entitled “Strengthening the research function” There are controversies within the US government, which also funds the Wuhan coronavirus research program, and some independent scientists over whether gains of function – GOF) should be conducted. GOF studies focus on tailoring pathogens to make them more infectious, more dangerous, or easier to escape from treatments and vaccines – all with the aim of learning how to cope with them more effectively. This field has been going on for a long time. The debate heated up when, in 2011, two research groups showed that they could make avian influenza viruses more infectious in animals. Harvard epidemiologist Marc Lipsitch told AFP he was concerned that “would create a strain of the virus that, if it infects laboratory workers, not only kills the person but causes a pandemic”. “This study was not requested and does not contribute to the development of drugs or vaccines,” said molecular biologist Richard Ebright of Rutgers University, one of the strongest opponents of the type of research. this said. In 2014, the US government announced it would stop funding such research, but the process was criticized for its lack of transparency and trust. Late last year, a non-profit organization received funding from the US for research “to predict the risk of virus escaping from the laboratory” from corona virus in bats to humans in Wuhan. This week, before a question from Congress, experts Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci of the US National Institutes of Health also denied conducting activities to strengthen research functions.

Researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Photo: Daily Mail According to the Daily Mail (UK), this incredible mistake was revealed in a screenshot sent to a Chinese medical journal. The photo shows information about a 61-year-old woman, known as “patient Su”, who lives about a mile from one of Wuhan’s main virus research facilities. The woman was also near a train station along the high-speed rail line that played a key role in spreading the virus around the city of 11 million people. This latest finding was revealed through an interview by a medical journal with the scientist tasked with compiling China’s official data on cases. In an interview with Health Times, Yu Chuanhua, Professor of Biostatistics at Wuhan University, said there were 47,000 confirmed and suspected cases on the national database of COVID-19 by the end of the year. February 2020. Among these, there was a death of a patient at the end of September 2019. “There is data on a patient who became ill on September 29. The data shows that the patient has not been given a nucleic test and a clinical diagnosis. It is possible that this is a suspected case of COVID-19. The patient died. This data has not been confirmed,” added Mr. Yu. The data also shows that two other suspected COVID-19 cases were reported to doctors in Wuhan on November 14 and November 21, 2019, along with several other cases prior to December 8, the period. China informed the World Health Organization (WHO) of the first cases. Inside the Wuhan Institute of Virology, Hubei Province, China. Photo: AP The Health Times article includes screenshots of information of two suspected COVID-19 cases in November 2019 on the database of Professor Yu. Although the patient’s personal details have been obscured, some information can still be seen, including the hospital name and home address. Information shows that patient Su has been treated at Rongjun hospital in Wuhan. Both the home address and the hospital where this patient is being treated are in Hongshan District, Wuhan City, where many studies on SARS-CoV-2 virus related to bats have been conducted in laboratories. experience. The area where patient Su lives and is treated is more than 20 kilometers from the Huanan seafood market, which Beijing initially believed to be the source of the COVID-19 infection. The second patient discovered in November 2019 is a 62-year-old man named Wang, who is being treated at Hanyang Hospital. However, Professor Yu has requested that the information published in the newspaper be retracted, claiming that the dates were entered incorrectly and that all other suspected cases before December 8, 2019 need further verification. . Wuhan Institute of Virology, Hubei Province, China. Photo: EPA This detail was discovered by Gilles Demaneuf, a member of the Drastic digital operations team, who discovered many facts that are said to contradict the theory that COVID-19 is an infectious disease from animals. Chinese objects. “We were able to accurately determine the name, age, and address of the suspected COVID-19 case very early, almost a month before the first case was officially announced. This address is right next to metro line 2 and not far from the hospital that treated some of the other first cases,” Demaneuf said. The railway system, which carries 1 million people a day, is linked to a seafood market, the Wuhan Institute of Virology and an international airport, he said. Demaneuf argues that these new findings show that more clues can be accessed if there are continued and determined efforts to evaluate the hypothesis that the virus leaked from the laboratory. The Wall Street Journal last week also cited a US intelligence report that said three researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology were hospitalized for medical care in November 2019, a few months before China announced it. announced the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in this country. However, China has denied the above information. Beijing insists the WHO-led investigation team concluded after a visit to the Wuhan Institute of Virology in February that the possibility of a virus leak from the laboratory was “extremely unlikely”.

Security guards stand guard outside the Wuhan Institute of Virology (China)Source: South China Morning Post Recently, Mr. Chris Said, a data scientist, a member of the House of Representatives of Malta, posted on Twitter a list of viruses that have accidentally escaped from laboratories so far. According to him, SARS-CoV-1, the virus that caused the outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in 29 countries around the world in 2003, had leaked from several Asian laboratories. The first time SARS-1 “escaped” was in August 2003 at the National University of Singapore. The second time happened in December 2003 in Taiwan (China). The results of the investigation showed that a SARS scientist in Taiwan handled the leaked biological waste without wearing gloves, masks or gowns. In April 2004, SARS-1 escaped from the National Institute of Virology of China. The H1N1 bird flu virus first appeared in the world in 1918, causing a global pandemic. In 1977, the virus “re-emerged” and many believe it was the result of a leak from a laboratory. That lab is said to be working on a way to produce a live attenuated vaccine in response to the threat of a global flu pandemic. Martin Furmanski, a researcher at the Scientific Working Group on Biological and Chemical Weapons (USA), wrote in a 2014 report that authorities do not want to disclose the laboratory origin of H1N1 because worried about affecting virus research cooperation between countries. “Virilologists and public health officials quickly realized that the most likely source (of H1N1) was a lab leak, but they agreed not to make this public,” Furmanski wrote. Foot-and-mouth disease emerged in the UK in 2007, about 4km from a biosafety level 4 laboratory in the Pirbright area. The results of the investigation showed that the construction vehicles were carrying sludge contaminated with the virus from a faulty sewage line in Pirbright, Italian newspaper The Print reported on May 31. Smallpox virus leaked from two prestigious smallpox laboratories in the UK. The first occurred in 1972 at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The second case was recorded in 1978 at the Birmingham Medical School. Continuing to investigate the origin of COVID-19 In recent days, world opinion has heated up again about the origin of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes the global pandemic COVID-19. On May 13, a group of 18 scientists published in the journal Science (Science) of the United States, calling for a more thorough investigation of the origin of SARS-CoV-2. They believe that the hypotheses about the accidental release of the virus from the laboratory and natural transmission are both possible in reality. Earlier, in March, a team of experts sent by the World Health Organization (WHO) to China concluded that the hypothesis of a laboratory leak was “extremely unlikely” in reality. However, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that the team’s assessment of whether SARS-CoV-2 could emerge in the community after a laboratory incident was “not broad enough” and request further investigation. Even America’s top medical expert, Dr. Anthony Fauci, who once denied the lab leak theory, now says he doesn’t believe the virus evolved naturally. US President Joe Biden has ordered the US intelligence community to investigate the origins of COVID-19, after new surveillance results showed there was a possibility of a pandemic after SARS-CoV-2 leaked from the laboratory. experience in China, American newspaper The Wall Street Journal reported on May 27. The White House came under pressure to investigate on its own after China told the WHO that its part of the investigation had been completed, and efforts to trace the source of the virus should turn to other countries. President Biden wants the US intelligence community to produce a report on the origin of COVID-19 within 90 days. He said that US intelligence focuses on two scenarios, SARS-CoV-2 comes from human contact with an infected animal or from a laboratory incident. Earlier, a US intelligence report wrote that three researchers at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became so sick in November 2019 that they had to be hospitalized. In December 2019, China reported its first cases of COVID-19. “This questions the credibility of the claim by veteran researcher Shi Zhengli of the Wuhan Institute of Virology that there is no transmission of SARS-CoV-2 or SARS-related viruses among staff and students. of the Wuhan Institute of Virology”, American newspaper USA Today May 24, citing documents from the US State Department. However, the intelligence report on 3 Chinese researchers seriously ill The Wall Street Journal The mention is not conclusive evidence that SARS-CoV-2 leaked from the lab, and the intelligence community still doesn’t know for sure what illness they have, CNN reported.

Researchers wear protective gear at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Photo: Xinhua US President Joe Biden announced last week that the US intelligence community had questioned two possible origins of the COVID-19 pandemic: “Human contact with infected animals or a laboratory incident. “. He ordered a new investigation “to bring us closer to a final conclusion”. According to Bloomberg, no matter where the investigation leads, the history of laboratory safety shows that leakage of pathogens has happened, sometimes with deadly consequences. Smallpox virus leak By the late 1970s, smallpox had been eradicated from the wild, but research on the disease continues in several laboratories around the world, including one in Birmingham (UK). where a virulent strain of smallpox virus is handled. In the summer of 1978, a medical photographer working there named Janet Parker became ill. When pustules spread on her body, the local doctor diagnosed it as a severe case of smallpox. Victim Janet Parker in the smallpox virus leak from the laboratory. It was the third leak of the smallpox virus in that decade from a UK laboratory. The British government has drastically stopped the outbreak by urgently isolating hundreds of people and vaccinating many others. Thanks to those efforts, only one other person became infected, and that was Parker’s mother. However, the female photographer experienced a painful, lonely death in quarantine, and is believed to be the last known fatal victim of smallpox. But there are other victims of the incident. At that time the press mentioned the director of the laboratory in Birmingham, a smallpox virus expert named Henry Bedson. Although there was no evidence, the media still blamed him for the incident. Quarantined at home and in despair, Bedson slit his own throat and died shortly thereafter. The British government has organized a thorough investigation into the outbreak. An investigation found Mr Bedson may not have followed adequate safety procedures and speculated that Parker contracted smallpox from a virus that leaked into the gas pipeline. Technicians at a laboratory in Rockville, Maryland (USA), where smallpox vaccine is produced. A lawsuit later dismissed this explanation, and raised the disturbing possibility that Parker herself had entered one of the workspaces without proper protection. To this day, the debate over the Parker incident remains unresolved. Anthrax spores from the lab When laboratories let pathogens leak in a secret environment, it is much harder to confirm the source of the outbreak. A case in point is the anthrax outbreak in Sverdlovsk, a rather isolated city in the former Soviet Union. In 1979, rumors of anthrax killing dozens, even thousands, began to spread to the West. Later that year, Soviet newspapers confirmed some reports, noting that more than 100 people had contracted anthrax after eating contaminated meat, and over 60 had died. It was a tragedy, but perhaps unavoidable because anthrax is readily apparent in local animal populations. However, US intelligence officials are not convinced by that. Satellite images show disinfecting truck-like objects around the city, with a significant focus of activity on a mysterious military facility known as Complex 19. CIA analysts have reported hypothesized that the Soviet Union leaked a weaponized form of anthrax. The Soviets reacted indignantly to this allegation. In 1980, Russia’s official news agency Itar Tass published a rebuttal titled “A Seed of Deception,” accusing the US of making false statements to gain geopolitical advantage. Sverdlovsk was once one of the military secret cities of the Soviet era. Then, under the administration of President Ronald Reagan, the CIA sought to better handle what happened. They asked Matthew Meselson, a distinguished geneticist at Harvard who worked on the bioweapons ban program, to directly assess the evidence. Mr. Meselson was not convinced by the US intelligence findings. In the 1980s, he rejected another theory that the Soviet Union used some kind of fungal weapon in Laos – and he initially held the same view on the anthrax case, endorsing the main explanation. information from the Soviet Union, with one important caveat: Without a thorough investigation in Sverdlovsk, it would be impossible to know for certain what happened. Essentially, Mr. Meselson supported the explanation that the meat was tainted, judging it to be “completely reasonable and consistent” based on what was known about anthrax. He also arranged meetings with Soviet scientists to add credence to this interpretation, with slides of pathology samples taken from the victims. The US intelligence community, however, remains skeptical. And in this case, the intelligence agencies, not the scientists, turned out to be right. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, Meselson and other researchers finally had access to pathological samples taken from the victims’ lungs, which showed they had died from inhaling anthrax spores. Subsequent revelations added to the picture of what happened. Turns out Complex 19 is a biological weapons facility. Here they produce anthrax spores. According to the Laboratory Director of Complex 19 at the time, a filter connected to the spore dryer was clogged. This still happens often. The military officer in charge left a message for his replacement on the next shift but did not enter the logbook as is customary. When it came to the next shift, the replacement team looked at the notebook, saw nothing, and restarted the purifier. A series of anthrax spores quickly spread throughout the vicinity. Mr. Meselson eventually pieced together all the data and published a paper in the journal Science, which combined wind data with interviews, pathological samples and other evidence to describe the outbreak. Coal killed more than 60 people. That was in 1994, 15 years after the incident. Mysterious flu virus leak In addition, there is another incident that took place in the Soviet Union that is still a mystery. In the same decade that witnessed the leaks of smallpox in Britain and anthrax in the Soviet Union, there was also an unusual strain of flu at the time, called H1N1. Laboratory virus leaks have had deadly consequences. Photo: Atlantis In 1977, an H1N1 outbreak broke out on the border between China and the Soviet Union. The epidemic eventually spread worldwide that year, causing an unusual proportion of young patients. The mortality rate from epidemics is relatively low compared to some strains of influenza. But that’s not the problem. The worrying aspect of the epidemic is that this particular strain of H1N1 has not been present since 1950, when it was superseded by other strains of influenza. The appearance of that kind of “back in time” was confusing. Some researchers speculate that the virus may have “escaped” from a laboratory in the Soviet Union or China, but both countries deny this theory. However, the matter remains a puzzle for virologists. Many theories have been born and come to explain the so-called “frozen evolution”, among which the most prominent is the hypothesis that the virus spread to humans from a laboratory, possibly testing a vaccine to neutralize the disease. swine flu. A scientist involved in the development of a vaccine. Photo: Reuters The exact origin of COVID-19 may not be known All of the above incidents occurred in the 1970s. Laboratory safety was expected to have improved since then, but that has not always been the case. After the SARS outbreak in 2003, laboratories around the world began studying the virus. Since that time, there have been no less than 6 laboratory leaks of SARS. The first occurred at the National University of Singapore, where a student contracted the virus from a sample of the virus. This was followed by an incident in Taiwan/China, where a researcher contracted the virus, possibly during the disinfection of waste products from the laboratory. After that, several leaks happened at the National Institute of Virology of China. In one incident, a researcher infected her mother with the virus, and she died of SARS. In all cases, human negligence, mainly exacerbated by inadequate safety protocols, was the cause of the pathogen leakage. History has supported the theories being put forward that the current COVID-19 pandemic may not have a natural origin, but we are not in a position to rush into judgment. When it comes to lab leaks, the investigation and review process often takes a long time, and sometimes the answers remain unsatisfactory and incomplete. In the case of the COVID pandemic, we must prepare for the possibility that the world may never know the exact origins of a pandemic that has claimed millions of lives.

Front of Wuhan Institute of Virology Photo: Reuters This information adds weight to calls for a more complete investigation into the possibility that the COVID-19 pandemic virus escaped from this laboratory. The above content is mentioned in a report from the Donald Trump administration, which said that some researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), a center dedicated to research on corona viruses and other pathogens, had fell ill in the fall of 2019 “with symptoms resembling COVID-19 and common seasonal flu.” U.S. officials and former officials with intelligence on researchers in Wuhan expressed differing views on the strength of the evidence outlined in the report. One said that information was provided by an international partner and could be important, but needed further investigation. Others claim that the information is very reliable. “The information that we have comes from a variety of sources and is of very good quality. It is very accurate. What the report doesn’t talk about is the exact reason why they got the disease,” the source told Journal City Wall . Many epidemiologists and virologists believe that November 2019 was the time when SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes the COVID-19 pandemic, began to spread in Wuhan. Beijing says that the first confirmed case in the city fell ill on December 8. China has repeatedly denied that the virus escaped from laboratories. On May 23, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs cited a report published by an investigation team led by the World Health Organization (WHO) after a visit to the Wuhan Institute of Viruses (WIV), saying that the virus leaked from the laboratory. experience is extremely unlikely. “The US continues to hype the theory of lab leaks. Are they really interested in traceability or are they trying to distract? China’s Foreign Ministry said. However, WIV does not share with the WHO team raw data, diaries and lab records where a lot of coronaviruses from bats are studied, the animals that many scientists consider most likely to be the animals. origin of the virus. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said that the team had not yet fully tested the lab leak hypothesis, so further investigation was still needed. There is an opinion that the article of Journal City Wall appearing before the upcoming WHO meeting was to heat the matter up again. But the Biden administration declined to comment on the intelligence report, saying only that all credible theories about the origins of the pandemic should be investigated by WHO and international experts. Abnormal point Shi Zhengli, the leading expert on bat coronaviruses at the WIV, said that the virus did not come out of the place where she was working. She told the WHO investigation team that all staff here were negative for COVID-19 antibodies and there were no staff changes in the corona virus research team. In February, Dutch virologist Marion Koopmans, a member of the investigation team who traveled to Wuhan, told NBC News that some WIV staff members fell ill in the fall of 2019, but she attributed it to common seasonal illnesses. “It’s normal to get sick from time to time. Nothing outstanding. Maybe 1 or 2 people. It’s not a big deal,” Koopmans said. Beijing even suggested that the virus could have originated outside of China, including a laboratory at the Fort Detrick military facility in the US state of Maryland, and then called on WHO to investigate the first COVID-19 outbreaks. in other countries. But most scientists see no evidence to support the idea the virus originated in a US military lab, and the White House says there is no credible reason to investigate the facility. . It is normal for Chinese people to go to the hospital for medical examination and treatment when they are sick, because family doctor services are not yet common. COVID-19 and seasonal flu, although two different illnesses, share many of the same symptoms, such as fever, cough, and aches and pains. However, it is worth noting that members of the same corona virus research team were sick and had to be hospitalized with similar symptoms, before the disease was detected. David Asher, a former US official who led the State Department task force to investigate the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic under Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, told a Hudson Institute panel in March that he suspects suspected that the WIV researchers were sick at the same time from the common seasonal flu. “I highly doubt that three people with good protective clothing working in a third-degree lab caught the flu and were hospitalized with severe symptoms in the same week that had nothing to do with the coronavirus,” he said. Asher said, these three people could be the “first known COVID-19 outbreak”.

The study said the new virus is more distantly related to the previously found strains of the coronavirus that cause Covid-19. However, this new virus has a high degree of similarity in gene sequence with the virus that causes Covid-19. This is the first time that the Wuhan Institute of Virology has released detailed information about the virus it has collected several years ago. “These results suggest that the coronavirus we detected from bats may be just the tip of the iceberg,” the team wrote in the paper. Wuhan Institute of Virology, China. Photo: AFP. Many research results have never been published Through the paper, the institute also provides more insight into the viruses they host. The latest study examines eight viruses collected during a 2015 survey trip to a town in southwestern China’s Yunnan province. During this trip, researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology collected more than 1,000 specimens from bats living in and around the cave over a three-year period. The Wuhan Institute of Virology has studied the corona virus found in bats. Photo: South China Morning Post. This trip started after a few workers came to the cave and became ill. After testing, the doctors said they had an unprecedented virus, so they started looking for a virus from bats. The team also added that the group of workers at that time did not have Covid-19. Previously, in the journal Nature published in November 2020, Wuhan researchers said that during their exploration of the cave, they found 9 viruses that cause severe acute respiratory syndrome and Covid- 19. One of them is RaTG13 – published by researchers in February – still considered the closest “relative” to Sars-CoV-2, the cause of Covid-19. The remaining eight viruses were newly classified in the May 21 paper. The origin of Covid-19 is still unclear and controversial. Doubt In February, after a trip to China, international experts investigating the origin of Covid-19 by the World Health Organization (WHO) suggested that the virus probably came from a bat-like animal. . The virus then passes to another animal that has close contact with humans and infects them. Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Photo: SCMP. However, critics, including the head of WHO, say the investigation is not deep enough. May 23, Wall Street Journal Citing a confidential US report, it was revealed that in November 2019, before China reported its first Covid-19 cases, some researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were hospitalized. . Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian stated on May 24 that the article was “completely untrue”. Article by Wall Street Journal was released ahead of the WHO meeting, which is expected to discuss in detail the next phase of the investigation into the origins of Covid-19. The amazing variety of corona virus virus Evolutionary biologist Edward Holmes at the University of Sydney said that the paper by researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology provides further evidence that the Wuhan laboratory does not have a virus closely related to Sars -CoV-2 – the origin of the Covid-19 outbreak. A database of hundreds of thousands of bats is needed to see a complete picture of the coronavirus. Photo: AP. “This paper shows us the incredible diversity of coronaviruses found in animals in the wild,” added Mr Holmes. He and another team of experiments also found four viruses in bats closely related to Sars-CoV-2 among more than 400 samples collected in Yunnan province. The area is considered by WHO to be an important place for further research into the origins of Covid-19, although it remains unclear whether research is ongoing. The May 21 article also highlights recent work that highlights the possibility that Covid-19 is related to another species, besides bats. A pangolin coronavirus has the ability to effectively bind to human cells, distinct from the bat viruses associated with Sars-CoV-2 that have been identified so far. However, according to Maciej Boni, an associate professor at the Center for Infectious Disease Dynamics at Pennsylvania State University (USA), there are not enough viruses yet to see an overall picture. “We need to have databases of hundreds of thousands of viruses in bats. Until then, we won’t have many new discoveries about the origin of Sars-CoV-2,” he said. Satellite photos show that Covid-19 can spread in Wuhan from August 2019 According to a study from Harvard Medical School (USA), satellite photos of hospital parking lots in Wuhan show that the corona virus may have been spreading since August 2019.

The COVID-19 pandemic first broke out in Wuhan city, Hubei province, China. Photo: Getty Images The United States and several countries are closer than ever to defeating COVID-19 thanks to progress in vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 virus. But the world still does not know how this deadly virus appeared, and there is a growing opinion from the scientific community that it does not happen naturally. The US is stepping up calls for more research and warning about the risks of future pandemics. Washington is also more open to weighing the theory that a mistake or failure in a Chinese laboratory caused the COVID-19 pandemic. Meanwhile, the Chinese Government completely rejected this hypothesis and said that the dossier to trace the origin of the COVID-19 epidemic was closed. What’s new? According to CNN, a recent US intelligence report found that several researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology fell ill in November 2019 and were hospitalized – a new detail on the severity of the symptoms. disease in these scientists. It is not clear whether the researchers at that time had COVID-19 but the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) vehemently rejected the report, considering it a lie to promote the hypothesis that the virus leaked from the laboratory. . Scientists who worked for the WIV previously said the institute had nothing to do with COVID-19 disease until December 30, 2021. On May 24, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs also denied the information that three Wuhan researchers were hospitalized before the outbreak of COVID-19 and affirmed that this information was “completely untrue”. Spokesperson Zhao Lijian confirmed that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was not exposed to the SARS-CoV-2 virus before December 30, 2019, and its staff so far have not been infected. Scientists at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Photo: AFP Meanwhile, on May 25, speaking at the US Congress, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, said that the failure to fund previous research on Corona virus in bats in China. Quoc is a “negligence of duty”. According to Fauci, the US should have pursued to the place where the contact between animals and humans could lead to the spread of the virus between species. Dr. Fauci himself, the leading infectious disease expert in the US, said this week he did not believe the COVID-19 outbreak occurred spontaneously and prompted further investigation. A World Health Organization (WHO) adviser, Jamie Metzl, also said the leak hypothesis is possible, while scientists are “groping, creating and studying” the virus with the aim of vaccine development. “So I believe what could have happened was a leak, followed by a cover-up,” said Metzl, who served at the US State Department and the Atlantic Council during the US presidency. President Bill Clinton said. The conclusion is that further investigation is needed An in-depth study conducted by WHO in collaboration with the Government of China, published in March, explored the different possible origins of the COVID-19 epidemic and came to the conclusion that: although still It is not yet known how the disease originated, but it is likely that it spread to humans, either directly from bats, or more likely from an intermediate species that caught the virus from bats and then spread to humans. for human. Bats can be an intermediary that spreads the SARS-CoV-2 virus to humans. Photo: NPR The WHO report called the laboratory leak theory “extremely unlikely”, citing the fact that no laboratory staff in Wuhan were infected before December 2020 as an argument against this hypothesis. After the WHO report was published, its officials still called for an additional and public investigation from the Chinese side. Meanwhile, a newly released US intelligence report shows that laboratory workers of the Wuhan Institute of Virology have been sick since before December. According to WHO adviser Jamie Metzl, in the early stages of the outbreak of the disease. when China did not warn the world appropriately, Chinese officials blamed the transmission on an initial hotspot, a seafood market in Wuhan, which at this point was essentially Is not right. This expert said that there is a lot of evidence that the Chinese government initially tried to cover up the existence of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. “Whatever the origin of the pandemic, the first month, when China was spending all its energy trying to cover things up rather than fixing the problem, allowed the fire in the furnace to cause a fire in the kitchen.” into a house fire and a worldwide fire,” said Metzl. The Wuhan Institute of Virology became the center of doubts about the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Photo: Getty Images A group of well-known and experienced scientists also criticized the WHO report for not taking seriously the hypothesis that the virus leaked from the laboratory. According to them, this hypothesis was refuted within just a few pages of a hundred-page report published by WHO. The scientists wrote in the journal Science: “We must seriously consider the contagion hypotheses in the wild and in the laboratory until we have enough data.” Fear of a recurrence of a pandemic These “closed doors” have also helped conspiracy theories expand. Arkansas Republican Senator Tom Cotton has promoted the idea that the SARS-CoV-2 virus was purposefully created as a biological weapon. But there’s no concrete evidence to back up that claim, and experts still say it’s unlikely. Dr. Paul Offit, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine, told CNN it’s unlikely the Wuhan lab manipulated the virus to make it more contagious. but “we have to find out” the truth. Dr. Offit said that the world needs to do something to prevent another pandemic. “What I know is that they [Trung Quốc] must allow this [điều tra mở về nguồn gốc dịch]“This is now the third pandemic to emerge in the past 20 years,” said Mr. Offit. First there was SARS 1, then there was MERS. I think we can assume we’re not done with this yet.”

A heart cell organ that can beat like a real heart. Photo: livescience According to sciencemag.org, this mini organ (cell organelle) mimics the real heart of a 25-day-old human embryo and could help solve many mysteries, such as why children’s hearts don’t have scars. after having a heart attack. Not involved in the new study, but Zhen Ma, a cardiac organelle development bioengineer at Syracuse University, says it’s a great study, and the experiment is important in understanding Congenital heart defects and human heart formation. This process has so far relied solely on animal models. Although other mini-organs such as the brain, intestines, and liver have been grown in the lab for more than a decade, the heart cell organ presents a more challenging challenge for scientists.
The first cardiac organoids were created from mouse heart cells. They may beat on a lab plate, but they look like a bunch of heart cells, not a real heart. According to Aitor Aguirre, a stem cell biologist at Michigan State University, the cardiac organelle needs to function. With the heart, one wants the heart cell organ to have chambers and function to beat in rhythm. Watch a video of a mini heart beating in the lab (source: Sciencemag.org): To create an embryonic-like self-organizing heart cell organelle, the authors of the new study programmed human pluripotent stem cells (cells that have the ability to develop into any type of tissue). which) for this cell to turn into other types of heart cells. They wanted to create three layers of cells in the wall of the chambers of the heart, one of the first developing parts of the heart. Next, they embedded these stem cells in different concentrations of growth-promoting nutrients. They tried until they found a recipe to get these stem cells to form tissue in the correct order and shape in the embryo. After a week of development, the cardiac organelle was structurally equivalent to the heart of a 25-day-old embryo. At this stage, the heart has only one chamber, which will later be the left ventricle of the mature heart. Cardiac organelles are only about 2mm in diameter and have the typical major cell types in this stage of development: myocytes, epithelial cells, fibroblasts, and the epicardium. They also have a clear chamber that beats at a rate of 60-100 beats per minute, similar to the heart rate of embryos of the same age. Lead study author Sasha Mendjan, a stem cell biologist at the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology of the Austrian Academy of Sciences, said: “When I first saw it, I was surprised that these chambers had self-forming. What’s amazing is that you see right away whether this experiment works and if this organelle is working, because it has a pulse.” Scientists were able to study heart formation in unprecedented detail. Photo: livescience The mini-heart has so far been more than three months old in the lab and will help scientists monitor the heart’s development in unprecedented detail. They can know the source of heart diseases such as congenital heart defects in children and heart cell death after a heart attack. Mendjan and his colleagues also frozen organelles to test their response to injury. They found that cardiac fibroblasts, a type of cell responsible for maintaining tissue structure, travel to the site of damage to repair dead cells, as happens in children who have had heart attacks. Scientists have long wondered why children’s hearts can regenerate after being damaged without scarring, unlike adults. Mr. Aguirre said the next step would be to connect this organ of beating heart cells to a network of blood vessels and test its ability to pump blood. Mendjan’s team intends to find a way to modify the nutrient solution to produce a four-chambered heart cell organ. With this innovative heart cell organ, researchers were able to learn more about heart problems that can arise when the walls of the heart’s chambers begin to form. Meanwhile, Mr. Ma said that growing a more mature heart cell organ with all four chambers and structure is a matter of the future. He thinks this will take a decade to materialize.

But many Covid-19 tests can give results within hours without sending the sample to a lab, and most of these tests use an approach called microfluidics. What are microfluidics? A microfluidics system is any device that handles small amounts of liquid. Fluid moves through channels thinner than a hair, and tiny valves can turn the flow on and off. These channels are made of materials such as glass, polymers, paper or gel. One of the ways to move liquids is to use a mechanical pump; another way is to use the surface charge of certain materials; and one more way is to use so called capillary action – commonly known as wick. One thing is clear, every nook and cranny of the human body is microfluidic. We could not be born or function without complex blood capillaries that carry food, oxygen, and signaling molecules to every cell. Like microelectronics, size is a key factor in microfluids. As components get smaller, devices can rely on the exotic properties of liquids on a small scale, can work faster, more efficiently, and have cheaper manufacturing costs. The microfluidics revolution has been quietly shouldering microelectronics technology. Another major benefit of microfluidic devices is that they require only a very small amount of liquid and can therefore be very small in size. NASA has been considering using microfluidic analyzers for their long Mars missions. The analysis of precious liquids – such as human blood – also benefits from the ability to use small samples. Example: A glucose meter is a super liquid instrument that requires only one drop of blood to measure a diabetic’s blood sugar. Chances are you have been using microfluidics quite often in your life. Inkjet printers shoot out tiny droplets of ink. The 3D printer extrudes the molten polymer through a microfluidic nozzle. A nebulizer for asthma patients will spray out tiny droplets of medicine. The pregnancy test relies on the flow of urine in a microfluidic strip of paper. In scientific research, microfluids can direct drugs, nutrients or any liquid to very specific parts of an organism to more accurately simulate biological processes. The future of microfluidics Microfluidics will be key to bringing medicine into a new, fast-paced, affordable era. Wearables that measure substances in sweat to track fitness progress and implantable devices that help deliver cancer drugs locally to a patient’s tumor are some of the next frontiers in microbiology. biomedical liquid. Researchers are developing complex, fascinating microfluidic systems called organs on a chip that aim to simulate different aspects of human physiology. In laboratories around the world, teams are developing tumor-on-chip platforms to test more effective cancer drugs. These patient-representative chips will allow scientists to test new treatments in a way that doesn’t entail the cost, suffering, and ethical issues associated with animal or human testing. Imagine going to the doctor, taking a biopsy sample and, in less than a week, using the scientists’ microfluidic device, the doctor can figure out which drug is most effective to remove the mass. your u. While that is still in the future, what we do know is that microfluidic will be an integral part of the future.

4DFWD is a shoe version that uses the latest advancement of adidas 4D technology. In the lab, more than 5 million meshes were studied to find the most perfect bow geometry for the FWDCELL knit mesh soleplate made of 40% biomaterial, specially encoded for compression. forward when there is vertical force. Compared to previous 4D midsole generations, the adidas 4DFWD produces three times the optimal forward movement. As a result, the peak of braking force when the athlete is stalled during the run is reduced by 15% because the midsole has redirected the longitudinal forces into a translational movement in the horizontal direction – providing the same running performance with Ultraboost series midsole under laboratory conditions. In addition, adding an additional advantage to the 4DFWD midsole is the new Primeknit upper (upper) made from recycled polyester, giving runners the full experience of a premium sole. Ultra light and compact feet. Posts: Nice News

Photo of the Ingenuity Mars helicopter taken by NASA’s Preseverance spacecraft. Photo: NASA. Open a new door Ingenuity attached to the belly of the Perseverance probe landed together inside Mars’ 45 km wide Jezero crater on February 18. On April 3, a solar-powered helicopter was dropped from Perseverance’s belly. NASA is expected to make history on the Red Planet with its first self-powered flight powered by energy. “That is extremely important. Technological inventions will open a door to completely different tools. And for me, that’s very interesting. We still haven’t envisioned all the benefits of this new technology, ”said Thomas Zurbuchen, NASA’s Deputy Administrator. Ingenuity is considered a “technology show”. Because, the expected flight of this helicopter on Mars is designed simply to demonstrate the efficiency of the technology. Although there is an onboard camera to take pictures during the mission, it’s the only feature on the plane that is not directly related to Ingenuity’s take-off. “The speed of light is too slow for us to actually control it in real time,” said Mr. Zurbuchen. In addition, the team must find a way for the helicopter to fly over Mars in a challenging environment, with a very thin atmosphere. Obviously, flying on another planet is not easy for helicopters. This is an exciting moment in the history of spacecraft and technology. Many people questioned whether Ingenuity was equipped with any technology application to achieve such a feat. Scientists hope to use Ingenuity to explore in the future, according to Zurbuchen. Because, a small helicopter can “probe many places that we can not go to by plane”. The expert also explains that Mars has some interesting things. The crater walls and other destinations will be interesting to study up close, while astronauts won’t be able to explore. In the future, helicopters could be an important asset for both robot and human exploration on the Red Planet, Mr. Zurbuchen said. However, as mentioned before, Mr. Zurbuchen said, there are many applications to this technology that are yet to be developed. Science breakthrough The deployment of the Ingenuity helicopter flight plan on Mars aims to demonstrate that humans can fly in the extremely low density, reduced gravity and extreme temperatures of the red planet. In addition, the amount of sunlight the planet receives is only half that of Earth; At night temperatures down to -90 degrees C cause electronic components to crack and freeze if left unprotected. While a mission on Mars is not an easy task, NASA is confident that this small helicopter can overcome the challenge. However, the first flight will be at low altitude and take place shortly. Members of the mission group said, Ingenuity (weighing 1.8 kg) is expected to fly no more than 3 meters above the floor of the Jezero crater on Mars. The helicopter will stay high for 40 seconds or so. However, even such a modest flight time would be an achievement. Because, Mars’ atmosphere is only 1% thicker of Earth. Aircraft generate lift by pushing air. However, according to Project Director Ingenuity – MiMi Aung, of the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Southern California, on Mars, there are fewer molecules to propel. That disadvantage outweighs the benefit that helicopters get from Mars’ weaker gravity. So Ingenuity has to behave a little differently from its predecessors on Earth. Specifically, Ingenuity propellers are made of carbon fiber, made for Mars. They are particularly large compared to the overall 48 cm high helicopter. Each wing extends 1.2 m. Those propellers will spin at about 2,500 rpm to bring Ingenuity off the ground. This is much faster than that required by a 4lb motor. Besides, Mars is also a place where the cold is “piercing”. Perseverance measured the Red Planet’s nighttime temperature to minus 117.4 degrees F (minus 83 degrees C) on the surface of Jezero. So Ingenuity has a fireplace so it won’t freeze. Currently, it takes more than 15 minutes for an order to be sent from the control agency on Earth to Mars. Real-time operation with the joystick is therefore not an option. Flight orders must be sent in advance. However, that doesn’t mean Ingenuity is going to be in trouble. This helicopter will be able to do many tasks on its own. For example, Ingenuity can analyze photos captured by the downward-facing camera. From there, locate it. The images will be in black and white. Ingenuity is also capable of 13-megapixel color photography. There are a series of complicated devices that are inserted into the “small body” of Ingenuity, although the helicopter does not carry any scientific tools. Cameras, electrical systems, avionics systems, and communications equipment for data transfer to Perseverance were all introduced into Ingenuity. In fact, the size of devices like objects has made it impossible for many helicopter missions on Mars. Ms. Aung and her colleagues tested Ingenity extensively on Earth before launching. Ingenuity used to have to fly in a special chamber at the JPL – which simulates the conditions of the Red Planet. Thanks to that, Ingenuity has been doing well on the Jezero crater since its separation from Perseverance. Therefore, the scientists expressed confidence in Ingenuity’s mission. If successful, Ingenuity will fly again – up to 5 times in about a month. Ingenuity helicopters pave the way for future space exploration.

Hanoi specialty shrimp cakes in the perception of many diners are golden pieces of shrimp wrapped with shrimp, served with sweet and sour sauce like the sentences described by Thach Lam in the book “Hanoi chopped six streets”: “The intestines tightened first, we watched the cake gradually yellow, gradually yellow, the shrimp shrank, the sweet potato hatched, and the cake curled up a little hotly, wanting to lie on the plate. A faint scent floats into the air, which we take in a refreshing breath along with the cold north wind … ” Looking for the taste of Hanoi shrimp cakes in Ho Chi Minh City, I happened to know that Bom Gastronomy restaurant also serves this cake, but it is an alternative version, out of the shape of the original dish. Not following the traditional processing steps, the shrimp cakes at this restaurant have been completely redone thanks to a new cooking method called: Molecular Cuisine. Bom Gastronomy has refreshed the shrimp cake by shrinking and consolidating the ingredients from the powder coating, to the shrimp filling, dipping sauce and raw vegetables, the small ingredients in the palm of the hand. That fusion is one of the techniques of a modern cooking method called: Molecular gastronomy. This method is a cross between cuisine, science and art. In each dish, the chef will apply the rules of physics and chemistry to the processing, altering the structure of the dish, providing an alternative culinary experience. Compared with the traditional version, the ingredients for shrimp cakes in the molecular cuisine version are almost unchanged, including fresh shrimp, eggs, flour, fried flour, fish sauce, purple onion, garlic, herbs. Sharing about the difference between traditional cakes and molecular-style shrimp cakes, Mr. Do Bao Duong, founder of Bom Gastronomy restaurant, said that the traditional cooking method is somewhat relative, the cook tasting based on experience and senses. For example, dipping sauces are mixed not according to specific quantities, taste can change at salty, sometimes light. On the contrary, molecular cuisine is about the precision when weighing ingredients, which is one of the rules of this cooking method. Each ingredient in the culinary version of shrimp cakes is calculated to balance the flavor and nutritional value. Some diners may not be familiar with the recipe-based accuracy, as each person’s taste is different. “Bom introduces molecular cuisine into traditional dishes, using familiar ingredients to suit a wide range of Vietnamese diners. The restaurant also wants young guests to feel the traditional taste from a modern perspective. The dishes here apply basic techniques so that customers can easily receive and learn about this interesting culinary trend ”, Mr. Duong shared about the innovation of traditional dishes by processing methods. modern. “The kitchen becomes a miniature laboratory when chefs create dishes according to the method of molecular cuisine”, Mr. Duong said. At the “laboratory” in Bom Gastronomy, chefs apply desconstructed and faux caves techniques to create the modern version of shrimp cakes. First of all, it must be deconstructed. This is a technique that changes the structure and shape of the original dish, creating a completely new version but still ensuring the original taste. When applied deconstructed, the chef does not wrap the whole shrimp in the dough but chopped and divided it into 2 parts. The base of the cake is minced shrimp coated with crispy flour, the top layer is sautéed minced shrimp. In the traditional version, the sauce is the liquid in a bowl to add seasoning. To the molecular culinary version, fish sauce is condensed into a fixed gel layer directly onto the cake thanks to the faux caves technique. Here’s how to make a solution in the form of a liquid glue. The liquid is held by a thin, viscous, non-melting gel film. Instead of dipping shrimp cakes with their own sweet and sour fish sauce, the molecular cuisine version has fused the sauce with the other ingredients. To make fish sauce gel, the chef uses normal fish sauce, adding gelatin to thicken. The ingredients are carefully weighed so that the gel layer is not too loose or too thick, has a transparent texture, a deep yellow honey color. This way of processing is completely different from the traditional shrimp cake making steps. The original dish consists of 3 separate crust, filling and sauces. When processing, the chef will prepare the ingredients in pieces, the cake is wrapped in dough and then fried until golden crispy. Cake is served with sweet and sour fish sauce. In the molecular culinary version, the chef prepares fresh shrimp, peels and then purees it. Shrimp meat is mixed with eggs, purple onion, garlic, salt and pepper spices, shaped into a flat circle, rolled over the deep fried dough and deep fried until both sides are golden. The remaining ground shrimp meat is also rounded, flat, steamed, then sautéed golden. Separating 2 parts of shrimp is lettuce. The top part is carrot and perilla leaves. All are fixed with a bamboo toothpick. The dish’s molecular culinary spirit lies in the fish sauce gel droplets decorated on the perilla leaf layer. The innovative version of the shrimp cake is simply decorated with layers of ingredients stacked on top of each other. The crust is the crispy fried shrimp, followed by the rounded lettuce layer, followed by the pan-fried shrimp. The top layer is perilla leaf dotted with 3 drops of honey-colored, transparent fish sauce gel. The fish sauce gel drops on the perilla leaves make the dish more prominent, stimulating the taste buds. The chef instructed me to eat by holding a bamboo toothpick, bringing the whole piece of cake into my mouth in one go. If chopped or eaten separately, it will be difficult to recognize the flavor of this dish like the original version. Even though it’s finger food (the appetizer is small in size), I found the shrimp cake to be quite large to eat in one piece. I cut the cake in half from the top with a knife, and fixed the falling ingredients with a fork. The chopped portion is still 2 layers of shrimp, raw vegetables and fish sauce gel. The taste of the dish reminded me of the times I sat down to eat shrimp cakes at the West Lake sidewalk restaurant. This time I also eat shrimp cakes, but in a more luxurious place with dark space, yellow lights, on a table with candles, knives and forks, there is a attentive service staff. Unlike a plate of golden yellow cake on a plastic plate, with a basket of raw vegetables and a bowl of garlic and chili sauce, the shrimp cake at Bom Gastronomy is placed in a polite white ceramic plate, neatly trimmed vegetables, dipping sauce. are beautiful gel drops. Before enjoying it, I expect the taste of the dish to be similar to the original version. However, this cake does not have the traditional sweet potato so the new flavor lacks sweetness. In return, the shrimp meat tastes well even though it has been minced. Deep-fried shrimp coated with flour, pan-fried shrimp reminds me of fried dishes. The dish does not create a greasy feeling because raw vegetables balance the flavor. In the traditional version, the delicious shrimp cake or not depends largely on the dipping sauce. Likewise, the fish sauce gel portion forms the soul of a molecular cuisine version of shrimp cake. This gel layer has a strong taste of salty fish sauce, clear the smell of garlic and chili spices, adding sweetness of sugar. It is this gel sauce that makes me feel similar to traditional shrimp cakes. It is difficult to judge which version of the cake is better because each type of processing has its own characteristics. If you like the feeling of eating hot cakes, biting crunchy dough blended with sweet potato pulp, chewing intact shrimp with fish sauce, you should choose the original version of shrimp cake. If you are curious about the modern culinary trend, want to experience a dish that exceeds the standards of traditional rules, dine in a luxurious space, you should immediately try shrimp cake in molecular cuisine. For diners who choose to enjoy the taste of modern cuisine, chef Bom Gastronomy suggests that after appetizing with shrimp cakes, diners can order more Bom Iberico, Mushroom Ravioli and a glass of Bom signature cocktail. These are all typical dishes of the molecular culinary approach. Iberico pork dish is served with sweet potato and melon jelly (cantaloupe jelly). This type of jelly was made from the edible paper method. Jelly includes potato powder, soybeans, fresh fruit color and flavor, creating a combination that is not ideal but the opposite flavor stimulates the taste of diners. The Mushroom Ravitol is the wonton soup of Italy. The texture of this dish is just foam. There is also another cooking technique of molecular cuisine called foam (sauce whisk). The foam has a fragrant, smoked, smoked meat flavor that melts right away when it touches the tip of the tongue. The chef introduces the restaurant’s signature cocktail, inspired by his trip to Da Lat (Lam Dong). The glass of water brings a familiar tamarind scent in the new wine taste, creating an attractive sweet and sour taste. In a modern space with traditional features from the image of Bom, mo fan to bronze drums decorated in the restaurant, Bom Gastronomy is the ideal place for diners to explore the taste of Vietnamese food, refreshing by modern cooking method.

Mr. Pham Trung Kien – Deputy General Director of HABECO and Assoc. Tran Ngoc Khiem – Vice Rector of Hanoi University of Science and Technology signs a memorandum of understanding Hanoi University of Science and Technology (HCMUT) is a close partner with HABECO for many years. The cooperation with HABECO to cooperate training high quality human resources HABECO in particular and the society in general, as well as cooperation in research and application of technology and modern equipment systems, has helped the University increase its reputation and reputation, helping HABECO always maintain its quality with Many product lines are trusted by domestic and foreign consumers. Since 2016, Hanoi University of Science and Technology and HABECO signed a Memorandum of Understanding, forming a content framework for cooperation programs including: training and developing human resources; co-operate scientific and technical research ; use the lab; advisory Technology transfer ; recruiting human resources for internships; working at HABECO. On the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the establishment of Hanoi University of Science and Technology, HABECO sponsored the “Food Quality Analysis Laboratory” for Food and Biotechnology Institute in order to improve the quality of training and experimental skills of students food Technology (Currently there are about 900 Food Technology students being trained in the Institute), especially in the field of fermented beverage technology for 3, 4 and 5 year students to provide high quality human resources for Food factories including HABECO (where a large team of alumni). This year, on the 65th anniversary of the establishment of Hanoi University of Science and Technology, HABECO continues to sponsor facilities and equipment for teaching, learning and activities of the school, including: upgrading the hall. B1 building and equipped with an upgraded package of analytical equipment “food quality analysis laboratory” under the Institute of Biotechnology and Food. HABECO donated 2,165 billion VND to Hanoi University of Technology to train human resources Mr. Pham Trung Kien, Deputy General Director of HABECO, said that there are more than 100 technical staff of HABECO are alumni of Hanoi University of Technology. Hanoi University of Science and Technology is the region’s leading research university in engineering and technology. The cooperation between the two units this time further tightens the spirit of cooperation between Hanoi University of Science and Technology and HABECO, contributing to the development of education for future generations of the country. At the same time, contributing to spreading HABECO’s brand name, attracting high-quality human resources for HABECO. In the framework of the signing ceremony, Professors, Associate Professors and Doctors of Hanoi University of Technology have proposed cooperation plans to apply artificial intelligence in production and business of HABECO as well as technology transfer and training high quality human resources.

The findings are largely as expected but still have many unanswered questions. This report has provided more in-depth details on the explanation behind the team’s conclusions. The report’s authors also propose further research on this except for the laboratory leak theory. The publication of the WHO report on the origin of the COVID-19 epidemic has been repeatedly delayed and raises questions about whether the Chinese side is falsifying the conclusion, to avoid accepting accusations that China is the place the origin of the pandemic. An official from the World Health Organization said over the weekend that the report is expected to be released “within the next few days”. The AP news agency said it had received what appeared to be the final version on March 29 from a WHO diplomat. It is not clear if the report will still be changed prior to publication. The diplomat does not want to be identified because they are not allowed to release the report before the final release is made public. The publication of a joint report between WHO and China on the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic has been repeatedly delayed. Photo: Reuters Researchers have listed four possible scenarios for the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Topping the list is transmission by an animal, which is most likely to occur. Researchers believe that the possibility of transmission through “frozen” food is also possible, but not high. The closest animal found to carry the corona virus, believed to be the source of COVID-19, is the bat. However, the report said, “the evolutionary gap between bat viruses and SARS-CoV-2 is estimated to be several decades, which suggests an uncertain association.” Viruses are also found in pangolins, the report says, and animals like weasels and cats are also susceptible to COVID-19. This shows that all of the above animals can be carriers. This report is based on the visit of an international team of WHO experts to the city of Wuhan, China where COVID-19 was first discovered. The group has worked from late mid-January to mid-February. Mr. Peter Ben Embarek, WHO expert who led the investigation team in Wuhan, said the report has been finalized and is being checked and translated. “I hope that in the next few days, the whole process will be completed and we can make this report publicly available,” said Peter Ben Embarek. The draft of the report does not conclude that the outbreak began at a seafood market in Wuhan – where the first outbreak was discovered in December 2019. Previous discovery of other infections has suggested that epidemics could have started elsewhere. The report notes that there can be milder cases that go undetected. As the pandemic spread globally, China found virus samples on frozen food packages introduced into the country, and it tracked the link between single outbreaks and these products. Frozen foods can be the cause of cross-border spread of viruses, the report confirms, but are unlikely to cause an outbreak, much less contagious than through transmission. Human-to-human respiration. “Although there is some evidence that the SARS-CoV-2 virus can be revived through contaminated frozen products imported into China since the beginning of the pandemic, this would be very unreasonable. usually in 2019 because then the virus is not widely circulated, ”the study said. sea ​​oats ( According to AP )

On March 30, the World Health Organization (WHO) and China released a joint report on the results of investigating the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus causing pandemic COVID-19, radio ABC (USA) reported. The report summarizes the results of the survey from January 14 to February 10 by the WHO expert group in China – an effort seen as the first step in the work that could take many years to find the source. COVID-19. Some members of the WHO investigation team (sitting in the car) surveyed at the Wuhan Virus Research Institute on February 3. Photo: REUTERS The report repeated many of the conclusions discussed by the expert group at the end of the mission in China and drew a clearer picture of the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic. Four hypotheses about the source of the SARS-CoV-2 virus to humans ABC has pointed out four hypotheses about the source of SARS-CoV-2 virus infection to humans are mentioned in a report published by WHO and China on March 30. 1. Is the virus transmitted directly from animals to humans? According to the WHO report, the SARS-CoV-2 virus can or is highly likely to have been transmitted directly from animals (most likely from bats) to humans through farming, hunting or close contact. difference between human and animal. 2. Is the virus transmitted to humans through an vector of an vector? According to WHO, there is a very high possibility that the SARS-CoV-2 virus from the original pathogen (bat) has been transmitted through mediators such as weasels, pangolins, rabbits … and humans are infected by exposure to secondary pathogens. this level. 3. Can people get a virus through frozen food products? According to WHO, this could happen. This means that people can become infected when they come into contact with frozen food contaminated with the bio-waste of animals infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus (without the need to come into contact with the original pathogen). 4. Is there a virus leak from the lab? This so-called “highly political” hypothesis has been repeatedly rejected by experts from China and the WHO. According to the latest WHO report, it is extremely unlikely that the SARS-CoV-2 virus is a product from a certain laboratory in China. Although assessing the SARS-CoV-2 virus leak hypothesis from the laboratory as unlikely, WHO Director-General Tedros noted that the experts have considered all the hypotheses and need further research to bring to make more certain conclusions. Hoa Nam Seafood Market is the “super infectious” nest, not the place where the epidemic begins According to WHO data, the first case of COVID-19 infection has been linked to the Hainan Seafood Market in Wuhan City, Hubei Province (China). WHO experts have taken large-scale samples at the Hoa Nam market – including samples from the environment, food and animals in the market. A total of 718 environmental samples were collected at Hoa Nam market and 14 samples were collected from warehouses related to Hoa Nam market. Some samples from the environment showed traces of the nucleic acid of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and some even showed virus isolation results. However, no trace of SARS-CoV-2 virus was found in market animals. Some members of the WHO investigation team came to investigate at Hoa Nam market in late January. Photo: REUTERS Meanwhile, the genomic sequences of several (human) cases related to the region are identical, leading scientists to speculate that the Hoa Nam market is a “super infectious” nest. Along with some analysis of the distribution of the SARS-CoV-2 virus variants, experts are continuing to examine the possibility that the SARS-CoV-2 virus appeared in the Hoa Nam market due to frozen products. The way to find the origin of COVID-19 is still very long WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus noted that “this report is a very important start but it is not the end point”. “We have yet to find the origin of the virus (SARS-CoV-2) and we must continue to follow the scientific recommendations and find out all possibilities as we are doing,” Tedros said in press conference on 30-3. Although many argue that the WHO March 30 report is nothing new, Dr. Ian Lipkin – Director of the Center for Infections and Immunology at Columbia University (USA) – describes it as a “extreme report. detailed and complete period “. Mr. Lipkin noted that what the scientists are trying to do is “re-enact events from a year and a half without the complete data and biological samples” so it could take years, or even never before. Now, find the exact conclusion. However, Mr. Lipkin reiterated that before the WHO expert group came to China, several routes of infection with the SARS-CoV-2 virus were envisioned and the WHO report provided possible data. prove those hypotheses. Meanwhile, Professor Vincent Racaniello – an expert in microbiology and immunology also at Columbia University – said that scientists were “lucky” to find clues about the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Mr. Racaniello reiterated that after many years, scientists have yet to find the origin of the Ebola virus.

Wuhan Institute of Virology – which is hypothesized to be the source of Covid-19 infection. (Source: Reuters) According to a report published on 30/3, a joint investigation by the World Health Organization (WHO) and China conducted on the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus causing acute respiratory infections (Covid- 19) concluded that it was “extremely unlikely” that the virus had escaped a laboratory in the central Chinese city of Wuhan. The origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is still questionable The report concludes that the virus is most likely transmitted to humans from an unknown animal, while contradicting the theory made by former US President Donald Trump that the Chinese lab may be the birthplace. virus. While China praised the report, 14 countries including Japan, the US, Australia, the UK, Canada and South Korea have expressed “common concern” about the study and claim that the investigation has was “delayed a long time and lacked access to complete data and originals”, and called for “a fast, efficient, transparent, science-based and independent process” to produce international assessments in case of future outbreaks. WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus said: “All theories are still being discussed. Although the team has concluded that the laboratory leak is the least likely hypothesis, it requires requiring further investigation, it is likely that additional missions including many experts will have to be deployed. According to WHO Director-General, the inspection team should have access to full data including biological samples from at least September 2019. He asserted that this report is a very important beginning and not the end. “We have not found the origin of the virus yet, and must continue to follow the science without missing any details”, Mr. Tedros Ghebreyesus stressed. While the majority of the report focuses on molecular studies, viral evolution, and potentially host animals, the report on potential laboratory leaks does. Very sketchy presentation. Although the host origin of SARS-CoV-2 is widely recognized, some scientists still maintain the view that this virus may have been collected and stored in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, despite the fact that Chinese scientists have rejected this claim. Viruses similar to SARS-CoV-2 were reported to have been found in bats and pangolins, but an intermediate host for transmission to humans has yet to be identified. This report is based on a study conducted by an international team of experts that mink and cats, which are known to be susceptible animals, may be one of the potential hosts. Need more information The Trump administration once hypothesized that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could have come from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and claimed that some researchers there had already had Covid-19-like symptoms in the fall. year 2019. However, the team said they found no evidence to support this claim during a January-February 2021 field trip to Wuhan City to investigate the source of the virus. The Chinese authorities have stated that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could have been introduced into the country through imported frozen food. Such transmission is possible but cannot be verified as imported frozen products are not considered a potential path of infection during early spread, the team report said. viruses and there were no tests for them at the time. Matthew Kavanagh, a researcher at Georgetown University, said the report said more in-depth information about the origin of the virus, but more information is needed. “Obviously, the Chinese government does not provide all the necessary data, and until they do this, the conclusions will be very difficult,” said researcher Matthew Kavanagh. The reporting team included experts from many different countries and officials from WHO, World Veterinary Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The team, after being quarantined for two weeks in Wuhan in mid-January 2021, inspected the research institute and other places believed to be related to the virus such as seafood markets. They also had discussions with Chinese experts. Representatives of the WHO and China expert group at a joint press conference in Wuhan on February 9. (Source: Reuters) “Opposite” views Jesse Bloom, an expert on evolutionary biology at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle (USA), said he does not believe that a lab leak is unlikely. The expert agrees that the virus naturally evolved to spread to humans, but he did not see any explanation in the report disproving the possibility that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could catch. source from a laboratory. Meanwhile, Mr. Peter Daszak, a member of the WHO expert group, a British ecologist in infectious diseases, and the executive director of the Ecological Health Coalition – a disease prevention organization in New York. , has voiced opposition to the flow of comments criticizing the research results and the degree of cooperation of China. Mr. Peter Daszak said that the lab leak hypothesis “has political purposes from the very beginning”. Dr. Daszak added that the WHO team of experts was not prohibited from participating in interviews with scientists who were on the ground during the early stages of the pandemic. Mr. Daszak himself has also been accused of a conflict of interest due to collaborating research on the virus with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which he thinks an infectious disease ecologist should do. “We were in the right place because we knew there was a risk of disease outbreaks. We were working there with this exact team and it happened,” said Dr Daszak. A group of scientists not affiliated with WHO is calling for a new investigation into the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic. They argue that such an investigation needs to consider the possibility of the virus spreading from a laboratory in Wuhan or infecting people inside it. (synthetic)

The WHO report on the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic is still not clear enough. (Source: You Gov) The report was made by a group of 34 people made up of Chinese scientists and international experts who were sent to Wuhan, China to investigate a series of politically controversial questions, such as whether the virus could unintentionally emerge from a Chinese laboratory or not. Here are the key takeaways from this report. The results are not satisfactory However, the results of the report do not seem to satisfy much of the world, raising even more doubts. First, there is concern among experts about China refusing to share original data about the first Covid-19 cases. WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus acknowledged those concerns when he released the report on March 30. Mr. Tedros also criticized China for not releasing sufficient data to international experts. Second, for experts, this survey is still limited and has not yielded results that make them satisfied. WHO working group leader to Wuhan, PhD. The experts have only just touched the surface of things and will need a lot more research, says Ben Embarek. This expert noted, the time of discovery of the first cases in December 2019 with all cases worsening. As a result, cases of mild or asymptomatic symptoms may have already appeared in the community. According to Mr. Embarek, Wuhan is one of the central cities of China with direct flights to almost all parts of the world. As a result, the virus could have been quietly moving around the world a few months earlier. Mr. Tedros himself hopes that future studies will be “shared more in a timely and comprehensive manner.” The Wuhan Virus Research Institute, which allegedly leaked the SARS-CoV-2 virus to the world. (Source: AFP) Rebuttal of the laboratory hypothesis For months, scientists, politicians and people outside of China have hypothesized that the virus could have been an accident from a laboratory in China. While there are conflicting opinions on the above hypothesis, they still urge WHO to strictly investigate this possibility. The report has completely rejected the theory of the virus being leaked from the lab and argues that this is “very unlikely”. Experts are mainly based on conversations with scientists in Wuhan. But the WHO Director-General unexpectedly aroused skepticism, saying that this theory needed further investigation and that he was ready to deploy more experts to do so. “I do not believe this assessment is wide enough. We will need more data and more research to come to more certain conclusions” – Mr. Tedros said at the press conference on 30/3. Experts at the Wuhan Virus Research Institute say they have not dealt with any viruses that are closely related to the corona virus that caused this pandemic and say that the staff has been trained on how to ensure that safety. Some critics claim that the WHO investigation team is “controlled” by China and has undergone an investigation of the laboratory in Wuhan. Raina MacIntyre, head of the biosecurity program at the Kirby Institute at the University of New South Wales, Australia, expressed skepticism about the results of the investigation: “There is definitely a possibility of an accident in the laboratory. ” The role of Wuhan Seafood Market The team concluded that the corona virus could appear in bats before being spread to humans through an intermediate animal. But the team said there was not enough evidence to determine the spread of the virus from animals. In the early part of the pandemic, Chinese officials theorized that the corona virus outbreak could have originated in the South China seafood market. It was reported more than a year later that the role of animal markets in the story of the pandemic remains unclear. The team of experts, after studying the reports of the vendors at this market, found that many initial infections had absolutely no clear association with Hoa Nam market. A market in Wuhan city. (Source: New York Times) According to the report, of the initial confirmed cases, about 28% were linked to the Huanan market and 23% were linked to other markets in Wuhan, while 45% had no further history. contact with markets. “There are no definitive conclusions about Hoa Nam’s role in the cause of the outbreak, or the cause of the spread of the virus in the markets,” the report said. The report also points out that more in-depth studies on Chinese farms and wildlife are needed, as the truth about the role of markets during the pandemic may be unraveled. Depends on China The team of experts made a long list of recommendations for additional research such as: more testing on wildlife and domestic animals in China and Southeast Asia; further study of the first Covid-19 infections; and continues to hunt down all routes of infection from farms to markets in Wuhan. But it is not clear whether China, which has repeatedly obstructed the WHO investigation, will continue to cooperate. Chinese officials have sought to divert attention to another matter, suggesting that the virus may have appeared in the US or in other countries. The delay in the investigation has affected its ability to prevent further pandemics from happening in the future, experts say. Michael Baker, professor of public health at the University of Otago in New Zealand, said: “This delay has clearly damaged the investigation’s ability to recreate the origins of Covid-19 and identifying ways to reduce future risk of infection. (According to the New York Times)

Hanoi specialty shrimp cakes in the perception of many diners are golden pieces of shrimp wrapped with shrimp, served with sweet and sour sauce like the sentences described by Thach Lam in the book “Hanoi chopped six streets”:

“The intestines tightened first, we watched the cake gradually yellow, gradually yellow, the shrimp shrank, the sweet potato hatched, and the cake curled up a bit impatiently, wanting to lie on the plate. A faint scent floats into the air, which we take in a refreshing breath along with the cold north wind … ”

Looking for the taste of Hanoi shrimp cakes in Ho Chi Minh City, I happened to know that Bom Gastronomy restaurant also serves this cake, but it is an alternative version, out of the shape of the original dish.

Not following the traditional processing steps, the shrimp cakes at this restaurant have been completely redone thanks to a new cooking method called: Molecular Cuisine.

Bom Gastronomy has refreshed the shrimp cake by shrinking and consolidating the ingredients from the powder coating, to the shrimp filling, dipping sauce and raw vegetables, the small ingredients in the palm of the hand.

That fusion is one of the techniques of a modern cooking method called: Molecular gastronomy. This method is a cross between cuisine, science and art. In each dish, the chef will apply the rules of physics, chemistry in the processing, altering the structure of the dish, providing a different culinary experience.

Compared with the traditional version, the ingredients for shrimp cakes in the molecular cuisine version are almost unchanged, including fresh shrimp, eggs, flour, fried flour, fish sauce, purple onion, garlic, herbs.

Sharing about the difference between traditional cakes and molecular-style shrimp cakes, Mr. Do Bao Duong, founder of Bom Gastronomy restaurant, said that the traditional cooking method is somewhat relative, the cook tasting based on experience and senses. For example, dipping sauces are mixed not according to specific quantities, the taste can change when salty or light.

On the contrary, molecular cuisine is about the precision when weighing ingredients, which is one of the rules of this cooking method. Each ingredient in the culinary version of shrimp cakes is calculated to balance the flavor and nutritional value. Some diners may not be familiar with the recipe-based accuracy, as each person’s taste is different.

“Bom introduces molecular cuisine into traditional dishes, using familiar ingredients to suit a wide range of Vietnamese diners. The restaurant also wants young guests to feel the traditional taste from a modern perspective. The dishes here apply basic techniques so that customers can easily accept and learn about this interesting culinary trend ”, Mr. Duong shared about the innovation of traditional dishes by processing methods. modern.

“The kitchen becomes a miniature laboratory when chefs create dishes according to the method of molecular cuisine”, Mr. Duong said. At the “laboratory” in Bom Gastronomy, chefs apply desconstructed and faux caves techniques to create the modern version of shrimp cakes.

First of all, it must be deconstructed. This is a technique that changes the structure and shape of the original dish, creating a completely new version but still ensuring the original taste. When applied deconstructed, the chef does not wrap the whole shrimp in the dough but chopped and divided it into 2 parts. The base of the cake is minced shrimp coated with crispy flour, the top layer is sautéed minced shrimp.

In the traditional version, the sauce is the liquid in a bowl to add seasoning. To the molecular culinary version, fish sauce is condensed into a fixed gel layer directly onto the cake thanks to the faux caves technique. Here’s how to make a solution in the form of a liquid glue. The liquid is held by a thin, viscous, non-melting gel film. Instead of dipping shrimp cakes with their own sweet and sour fish sauce, the molecular cuisine version has fused the sauce with the other ingredients.

To make fish sauce gel, the chef uses normal fish sauce, adding gelatin to thicken. The ingredients are carefully weighed so that the gel layer is not too loose or too thick, has a transparent texture, a deep yellow honey color.

This way of processing is completely different from the traditional shrimp cake making steps. The original dish consists of 3 separate crust, filling and sauce. When processing, the chef will prepare the ingredients in pieces, the cake is wrapped in dough and then fried until golden crispy. Cake is served with sweet and sour fish sauce.

In the molecular culinary version, the chef prepares fresh shrimp, peels and then purees it. The shrimp meat is mixed with eggs, purple onion, garlic, salt and pepper spices, shaped into a flat circle, rolled over the fried dough and deep fried until both sides are golden. The remaining ground shrimp meat is also rounded, flat, steamed, then pan-fried.

Separating 2 parts of shrimp is lettuce. The top part is carrot and perilla leaves. All are fixed with a bamboo toothpick. The dish’s molecular culinary spirit lies in the fish sauce gel droplets decorated on the perilla leaf layer.

The innovative version of the shrimp cake is simply decorated with layers of ingredients stacked on top of each other. The crust is the crispy fried shrimp, followed by the rounded lettuce layer, followed by the pan-fried shrimp. The top layer is perilla leaf dotted with 3 drops of honey-colored, transparent fish sauce gel.

The fish sauce gel drops on the perilla leaves make the dish more prominent, stimulating the taste buds.

The chef instructed me to eat by holding a bamboo toothpick, bringing the whole piece of cake into my mouth in one go. If chopped or eaten separately, it will be difficult to recognize the flavor of this dish like the original version.

Even though it’s finger food (the appetizer is small in size), I found the shrimp cake to be quite large to eat in one piece. I cut the cake in half from the top with a knife, fixed the spilled ingredients with a fork. The chopped portion is still 2 layers of shrimp, raw vegetables and fish sauce gel.

The taste of the dish reminded me of the times I sat down to eat shrimp cakes at the West Lake sidewalk restaurant. This time I also eat shrimp cakes, but in a more luxurious place with dark space, yellow lights, candles, knives and forks on the table, there is a attentive service staff.

Unlike a plate of golden yellow cake on a plastic plate, with a basket of raw vegetables and a bowl of garlic and chili sauce, the shrimp cake at Bom Gastronomy is placed in a polite white ceramic plate, neatly trimmed vegetables, dipping sauce. are beautiful gel drops.

Before enjoying it, I expect the taste of the dish to be similar to the original version. However, this cake does not have the traditional sweet potato so the new flavor lacks sweetness. In return, the shrimp meat tastes well even though it has been minced. Deep-fried shrimp coated with flour, pan-fried shrimp reminds me of fried dishes. The dish does not create a greasy feeling because raw vegetables balance the flavor.

In the traditional version, the delicious shrimp cake or not depends largely on the dipping sauce. Likewise, the fish sauce gel portion forms the soul of a molecular cuisine version of shrimp cake. This gel layer has a strong taste of salty fish sauce, clear the smell of garlic and chili spices, adding sweetness of sugar. It is this gel sauce that makes me feel similar to traditional shrimp cakes.

It is difficult to judge which version of the cake is better because each type of processing has its own characteristics.

If you like the feeling of eating hot cakes, biting crunchy dough blended with sweet potato pulp, chewing an intact shrimp flavored with fish sauce, you should choose the original version of shrimp cake.

If you are curious about the modern culinary trend, want to experience a dish that exceeds the standards of traditional rules, dine in a luxurious space, you should immediately try shrimp cake in molecular cuisine.

For diners who choose to enjoy the taste of modern cuisine, chef Bom Gastronomy suggests that after appetizing with shrimp cakes, diners can order more Bom Iberico, Mushroom Ravioli and a glass of Bom signature cocktail.

These are all typical dishes of the molecular culinary approach. Iberico pork dish is served with sweet potato and melon jelly (cantaloupe jelly). This type of jelly was made from the edible paper method. Jelly includes potato powder, soybeans, fresh fruit color and flavor, creating a combination that is not ideal but the opposite flavor stimulates the taste of diners.

The Mushroom Ravitol is the wonton soup of Italy. The texture of this dish is just foam. There is also another cooking technique of molecular cuisine called foam (sauce whisk). The foam has a fragrant, smoked, smoked meat flavor that melts right when it touches the tip of the tongue.

The chef introduces the restaurant’s signature cocktail, inspired by his trip to Da Lat (Lam Dong). The glass of water brings a familiar tamarind scent in the new wine taste, creating an attractive sweet and sour taste.

In a modern space with traditional features from the image of Bom, mo fan to bronze drums decorated in the restaurant, Bom Gastronomy is the ideal place for diners to explore the taste of Vietnamese food, refreshing by modern cooking method.