folder Filed in Panspermia
Support from China for Covid from Space
Jiangwen Qu of China's Department of Infectious Disease Control joins Wickramasinghe on February Covid chapter
event April 19, 2020 comment One Comment

I love Jiangwen Qu. He lives on the other side of the planet, I’ve never even traded an email with the guy, but I could hug his neck. Here he is publishing as recently as February 16, 2019 with Dr. Wickramasinghe in a full-throated support of Covid from space.

The truth might logically come from the Chinese. The well-published data and long intellectual pedigree of virus in-fall is in the interest of today’s China. With regard to cultural culpability for the pandemic, it beats the weird animal eating hypothesis.

Unfortunately, I feel China’s own medical and astronomical community is just as likely as our own to be intellectually blinded to facts, hobbled as we all are by the Aristotelian myth of life from earth. The Chinese have operated for decades in space, but like the rest of us have yet to test properly for life or approach the search for life from a Panspermic perspective.

Nonetheless, the subject of viral in-fall has gone quickly from an obscure fifty year old intellectual debate to perhaps the last hope for the planet’s largest nation to recover its credibility. So I pray Dr. Qu gets a battlefield promotion and is ordered to Beijing to brief Chairman Xi himself. If the leader were open minded, he would marshal the miniscule resources needed by his state to collect viral genes from the stratosphere, prove Hoyle and Wickramasinghe right after all, and get his great nation off the hook.

Jiangwen Qu on ResearchGate

To Appear in Advances in Genetics (Elsevier) Volume 106

February 16, 2020

Title of the Volume /Theme: “Cosmic Genetic Evolution”

Volume Editors: Edward J. Steele PhD and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe ScD, PhD

Chapter 6. Origin of New Emergent Coronavirus and Candida Fungal Disease– Terrestrial or
Cosmic? ver#4 16.2.20
By Edward J. Steele, 1,2,3  Jiangwen Qu, 4 N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, 3,5,6 Reginald M.
Gorczynski, 7 Gensuke Tokoro, 6 Robert Temple 8
1 C.Y.O’Connor ERADE Village Foundation, Piara Waters, Perth, 6112, WA, Australia
2 Melville Analytics Pty Ltd, Melbourne, Vic, Australia
3 Centre for Astrobiology, University of Ruhuna, Matara, Sri Lanka
4 Department of Infectious Disease Control, Tianjin Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, China
5 Buckingham Centre for Astrobiology, University of Buckingham, UK
6 Institute for the Study of Panspermia and Astrobiology, Gifu, Japan
7 Department of Surgery & Immunology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
8 The History of Chinese Science and Culture Foundation, Conway Hall, London, UK

Abstract: We analyse the relevant genetic and epidemiological data of two recent and suddenly emerging diseases- the fungal disease due to Candida auris, and the common cold causing viral disease due to Coronavirus COVID-19. Analysis of all genetic, epidemiological and geophysical and astrophysical data suggest the alternate hypothesis of cosmic origins in both cases. The in-fall “signatures” are different yet distinctive implying clear Panspermic arrival of micro-organisms and viruses from space. For COVID-19 the evidence is now compelling that it arrived as a ‘pure culture’ via a meteorite, presumed carbonaceous meteorite, that struck North East China on October 11 2019. We also assume the viral dust debris carrying trillions of COVID-19 particles then made land fall in the Wuhan and related regions about a month to six weeks later. This resulted in first cases of the viral pneumonia due to COVID-19 emerging in Wuhan regions late November 2019-early December 2019. For COVID-19 the entire central region of China has been heavily physically contaminated, and that is why it has been described as a “Chernobyl-like” event. We make a number of future predictions – e.g. fragments of the meteorite viral dust cloud we think is now ( February 16 2020) on the move into the South China Sea and making spot land fall over Japan.

Excerpt from Part II of the paper on Covid

“…….3.1. Overview of the COVID-19 Epidemic The global extent of the emotion around this epidemic in the mainstream popular media, and even the scientific press (Science magazine) is disturbing. It is without parallel in our experience in this social media internet age. However it does approach the justified hysteria around the far more serious, and initially more lethal, HIV epidemic/pandemic that suddenly emerged 40 years ago.

The actual COVID-19 viral disease itself causes respiratory “common cold-like’ illness in most people with symptoms – and like many respiratory viruses often potential carriers of the diseases are asymptomatic. The infection can progress to severe pneumonia in elderly and already medically-compromised patients with other conditions (diabetes, coronary disease, etc). About 2% of all COVD-19 cases have died from pneumonia (Figure 4). Vaccines and antivirals at this time are either not yet available or have not proven very effective, but standard supportive medical care for the respiratory crisis often associated with the life threatening pneumonia and inflammatory bronchial symptoms, allows for recovery in most patients. The fact that “Recoveries” far exceed “Deaths” (Figure 4) indicates that timely medical care for this otherwise “common cold” respiratory illness must be the medical priority in the epicenter of the infection in Wuhan and nearby regions in China. We believe this medical care is being implemented throughout China.But it is the origin of this new emergent virus disease which has raised the most angst. It is explosively centred on Wuhan, which appears to be the epicenter. And it appeared suddenly without warning. The theory that it jumped from bats via snakes to humans is implausible (below).

The same angst over viral origins was also evident when HIV, SARS, MERS, Ebola , and ZIKAV suddenly appeared on the scene. We will not deal with these earlier diseases as their origins , in our considered opinion, are far less clear cut than COVID-19 and case numbers for COVID-19 as of February 14 2020 are shown in Figures 3 and 4. The epidemic is centred on the city of Wuhan, in the central Hubei province of China. From about mid -January the Chinese government ordered the complete quarantine and lockdown of Wuhan and wider region around the city in Hubei province, affecting 50-100 million people. ABC News in Australia estimates Coronavirus COVID-19 has affected 500 million people in China under lockdown (Updated Sat 15 Feb 2020, 1:29am). A problem with all these reports is the lack of detailed information that led officials to such an extraordinary quarantine decision. We speculate later on this.

At the time of writing, the case incidence of this newly discovered Coronavirus is passing through 60,000 and > 99.99% of all cases, almost exclusively, are Chinese. From reports of cases that exited Wuhan by aircraft in late January to other countries, including Australia, the disease does not appear to be spread in a sustained by person-to-person infection, although there are clearly apparent cases of person -to-person spread elsewhere (in UK and Europe, BOX1 ). Nevertheless, there is clear consensus that this disease is centred on China. The Johns Hopkins University COVID-19 case density maps are extremely informative. These are in Figures 5,6 and 7.

To put one interpretation on the striking case patterns in Figures 5-7 , particularly the symmetrical pattern in Figure 7, one could liken the image to that of a viral bomb explosion which took place near or over Wuhan, with subsequent fall -out of the disease causing viral particles to land on millions of people either laterally or from above. Some of those infected
would, by virtue of age/comorbid factors, be susceptible and succumbed to respiratory illness.

Paradoxically, asymptomatic patients can be efficient “spreaders” of the disease. This is contrary to normal expectations as usually the infected potential spreader would display overt and full blown disease (and the coughed-up aerosols from such a patient would be dense with viral particles).

3.2. Detailed Analysis of COVID-19 Epidemic

We now analyse all reliable genetic, epidemiological and geophysical and astrophysical data. This data supports our hypothesis that COVID-19 arrived via a meteorite, a presumed relatively fragile and loose carbonaceous meteorite, that struck North East China on October 11 2019. This is at odds with the main stream expert “Infectious Disease” opinion of traditional person-to-person spread of an infectious endemic disease such as, for example, Cholera (Vibrio cholerae). We assume the viral debris and particles made land fall in the Wuhan and related regions about a month to six weeks later resulting in first cases of the viral pneumonia caused by COVID-19 emerging in Wuhan regions late November 2019-early December 2019 (Huang et al, 2020,12 Cohen 2010). This hypothesis is consistent with the patterns shown in Figure 7. Moreover, our hypothesis makes a discrete set of predictions, that are explored in our conclusions.

We argue first that massive region-wide physical contamination with potentially trillions of infective COVID-19 viral particles occurred in central China – contaminating buildings, roadways, cars and factory equipment, vegetation, surface water pools, people (and their clothes, body parts such as hair, skin, personal affects, mobile phone, keys , wallets etc) as well as wild and domestic animals, etc. This explains the actions of the Chinese Government who are acting in a manner consistent with their being in receipt of information from region-wide sampling to detect COVID-19 RNA sequences in swabs from physical objects, people and animals (via Real time PCR).

The recent paper by Huang et al., (2020) and the extremely important news commentary by Cohen in Science (Cohen 2020) highlights many unusual aspects of the outbreak of COVID-19. The evidence demonstrates that many cases of disease (about 30% of case reports) arose in locations unconnected with the Wuhan seafood and meat market, and the total tally continues to increase. Phylogenetic analyses of COVID-19 (previously named nCov-2019) sequences show little by way of sequence variation indicating low mutation rates, closely approximating what would be expected for a pure culture of a single infecting and replicating sequence affecting disease cases (Andersen 2020, Lu et al 2020). These facts, combined with the global epidemiological data, suggests little or no really sustained human-to-human transmission thus far (e.g. latest reports by the Australian Department of Health). We acknowledge that there are apparent exceptions e.g. the “super-spreader” from Singapore, via the French Alps, and then to a UK GP surgery reporting mild symptoms, resulting in the GPs also getting the disease (BOX 1).

Even this data can be explained as evidence of spread mainly by viral contamination of physical objects rather than direct “cough in your face” human to human spread. Thus current data suggest that the human-to-human spread rate is unusually low, and likely depends on close proximity and a high dose of virus delivered at very close quarters. The
“lethality” or “death rate” from this or any other epidemic disease increases in older patients with pre-morbid factors, so wider global estimates yield a death rate at 2% of infected (Figure 4) . All these basic facts now appear agreed.

The initial traditional explanation of the new epidemic of COVID-19 is that it jumped from bats (possibly via snakes) to humans and then spread by human-to-human infection contact, mutating at a high rate. This explanation is inconsistent with the current data. Indeed Jon Cohen the respected Science magazine journalist reports that the head of the Huang et al (2020) study when interviewed said:

“Bin Cao of Capital Medical University, the corresponding author of The Lancet article and a pulmonary specialist, wrote in an email to ScienceInsider that he and his coauthors “appreciate the criticism” from Lucey (Daniel Lucey, an infectious disease specialist at Georgetown University confirmed the epidemic could not possibly be caused by visits to the Wuham seafood and meat market).

“Now It seems clear that [the] seafood market is not the only origin of the virus,” he wrote. “But to be honest, we still do not know where the virus came from now.” (our italics)

Indeed Dr Bin Cao speaks for all mainstream medical and epidemiological professionals around the world – no formal traditional explanation can be provided for the origins of COVID-19. Thus Andrew Rambaut, Professor of Molecular Evolution at the University of Edinburgh tweeted: “Don’t think any epidemiologist is still thinking that a non-human animal reservoir has had anything to do with the nCoV-2019 epidemic since December. Certainly the genome data doesn’t support that.” (reported in (Heidi Han and Kieran Gair,
Associated Press, The Australian newspaper Jan 27 2020).

Thus, when we combine all the available facts we cannot rule out a viral in-fall event targeting the Wuhan province and the wider region around it as an equally viable, indeed to our mind preferable, explanation as the primary cause of the epidemic. This would fit with the admittedly heterodox view of viral pandemics first proposed by Hoyle and Wickramasinghe as far back as 1978 (Hoyle & Wickramasinghe 1979, Hoyle & Wickramasinghe 1990, Wickramasinghe et al 2003, Wickramasinghe et al., 2019). This concept accords with the theory of cosmic biology for which growing evidence have recently been presented in the Chapters of this book and in recent peer-reviewed papers where all the main extant evidence has been reviewed. It is consistent with the Hoyle-Wickramsinghe thesis (Steele et al., 2018, 2019a,b). Our theory thus posits a sporadic input of cosmic bacteria, viruses and other micro-organisms that has the potential to interact with evolving terrestrial life forms, causing terrestrial diseases and further adaptive evolution on Earth.

3.3. Link with a Direct Strike of Meteorite Over Central- North East China, October 11 2020 In the case of the current coronavirus epidemic in China it is interesting to note that an exceptionally bright fireball event was seen on October 11 2019 over Sonjyan City in the Jilin Province of NE China (See Figure 8). It is tempting to speculate that this event had a crucial role to play in what is now unfolding in and throughout China. Indeed, the match with the Johns Hopkins University case incidence patterns is so striking it is difficult to easily dismiss this as a chance correspondence of patterns, in both time and place. e.g. Figure 7.

If a fragment of a fragile and loosely held carbonaceous meteorite carrying a cargo of trillions of viruses/bacteria and other primary source cells (for the cosmic replication of the COVID-19 virus), entered the mesosphere and stratosphere at high speed ~30km/s, its inner core which survived incandescence would have been dispersed in the stratosphere and troposphere. Indeed, it could easily have been fragmenting and dispersing its contents before the ignition of the fireball event. The fall time through the atmosphere of 1-10 micrometre-sized solid particles could range from a few months to well over a year on the basis of straightforward calculations (e.g. in the Appendix of Hoyle & Wickramasinghe 1979 “Diseases from Space”). Because dispersal at ground level depends on the vagaries of meteorology and precipitation the deposition of virus at ground level is expected to be patchy in regard to both time and place. This is certainly consistent (thus far) with what has happened in relation to the new COVID-19 coronavirus epidemic between November 2019 and the present day (15 February 2020).

Following the initial deposition of infective particles in a small localised region (e.g. Wuhan, Hubei province, China) particles that have already become dispersed over a wider area in the troposphere will fall to ground in a randomized manner, a process possible occurring over a timescale of 1-2 years, until the initial inoculant of the infective agent is drained. This accords well with many new strains of viruses including influenza that have appeared in recent years (Wickramasinghe et al., 2019).

Figure 8. The public record of this meteorite strike can be found at the Space.com website in an article by Tariq Malik, on October 13 2019 “Brilliant Midnight Fireball Lights Up Sky Over Northeast China” The October event is described at: https://www.space.com/china-midnight-meteor-brilliant-fireball-october-2019.html

The possible link of sunspots with pandemics has been discussed over many years (Wickramasinghe et al., 2017, 2019, Qu & Wickramsinghe 2017, 2018) and is worthy of brief further discussion. The present cycle (interface between cycles 24 and 25, Figure 2) has seen the lowest minimum for well over a century with many sunspot free days recorded in the last months of 2019. Sunspot minima are associated with a weakening of the interplanetary magnetic field near the Earth, which in turn allows easy ingress of Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) and electrically charged bacteria and viruses to the Earth. The mutagenic role of GCRs can cause genetic changes in already circulating viruses. But in respect of COVID-19, it is primarily an enhanced flux of new infective particles released by the exploding meteoroid that may follow this particular sunspot minima that is of importance. We argue that a perfect storm over China is paying out before our eyes, a meteorite delivering COVID-19 particles corresponding with a very significant Sunspot Minimum cycle. It raises the important issue: “How would other
densely populated countries have reacted to, and handled, this event involving COVID-19?” Only the vagaries of chance caused this meteoroid to explode over China.

4. Conclusions
We conclude by noting some predictions and expectations:

• We expect the pattern of further spread of the new coronavirus COVID-19 to be dictated mostly by primary in-fall until a high level of person-to-person infectivity might possibly be achieved and the virus then acquires the status of an endemic virus.
• Viral contamination of the “environment” in the most general sense explains most of the apparent contagion e.g. news reports like in BOX 1 (below).
• The possibility cannot be ruled out that the Diamond Princess cruise ship in the South China Sea was contaminated by a fragment of the main COVID-19 dust cloud. Similar inexplicable events appeared to happen for ships at sea during the 1918-1919 Spanish Flu Pandemic (Hoyle & Wickramasinghe 1979).
• Furthermore, other drifting COVID-19 smaller dust clouds that have not as yet made land fall may target remote island and other communities, as was also the case during the 1918-1919 Spanish Flu Pandemic (Hoyle & Wickramasinghje 1979, and see Appendix report on Japan cases)
• Given the low mutation rate and the very wide apparent in-fall infectivity pattern (Figure 7), we predict is this pure viral culture has already innoculated millions of Chinese citizens (as well as potentially millions of wild and domestic animals in China) inducing protective adaptive immune responses (Acquired Herd Immunity) on a very large scale.
• Accordingly, development of a so called “COVID-19 vaccine” which is much in the news at the time of writing would be a waste of public tax-payer funds if mounted on the scale envisaged by governments and national centers for disease control.
• We thus expect the decline of the epidemic (peaking and declining at time of writing) to be
driven by this mass natural vaccination process now underway in China. So the suddenly emerging COVID-19 epidemic, like many similar suddenly emerging human epidemics in the past (SARs, MERs) ZIKAV), is expected to rapidly end by the self-limiting process of wide spread herd immunity.
• We predict that the incidence of serum antibodies specific for COVID-19 will be wide-spread in the Chinese population in the coming months. Millions will be potentially immunised for life against future infections with COVID-19.
• How long will COVID-19 remain potentially infective in the physical environment? Clearly for some time – given that over the space of a month or so many cases appeared rapidly, spread by environmental contamination in our view, and not by traditional person-to-person generated aerosols at the height of the donor’s infection. This is consistent with those news reports out of China: “ As the death toll rose to 80, China said , increasing concerns about the potential the
virus was infectious even before symptoms were visible rapidity of its spread.” (Heidi Han and Kieran Gair, Associated Press, The Australian newspaper Jan 27 2020)

Postscript:

As this Chapter was submitted to the publisher an authoritative news despatch from Japan reports sporadic outbreaks across the country with no direct link with China (Appendix). Further, in early February we tried to alert the world on our interpretation of the origins of COVID-19 with many of the same arguments and analyses listed in this Chapter. One succinct
letter was sent to The Lancet, and the other was a more general article for a wider lay readership , to The Australian newspaper – both articles were rejected by the editors . The archived PDFs of both articles can be found at the viXra.org site under accession numbers URLs viXra:2002.0039 and http://viXra.org/abs/2002.0039?ref=11076818 , and
https://vixra.org/abs/2002.0118

Acknowledgement: We thank Professor Sanjaya Senanayake for bringing the Candida auris
data to our attention and for discussions.

Chairman Xi Chandra Wickramasinghe China covid-19 from space disease from space Jiangwen Qu Ted Steele

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Cancel Post Comment