It is unlikely. The samples collected would be checked for fragments.
Most likely its something novel that's been thawing out from climate change.
That or a unique modified form of an existing chemical, or something else that hasn't been considered. There's some real fringe stuff out there in chemistry that open a whole can of what-ifs, that mainstream science might scoff at and not study seriously.
Something like this might be the cause, albeit very unlikely, still there are things stranger than fiction.
Spitballing here, Water has Memory, where an EM, or NQR signal of extremely dilute substance or dissolved chemical can cause certain unnatural forms of molecules to stabilize in aqueous solutions, or alternatively impart its effects because water mimics the nature of the dissolved substance for a time at higher concentrations than may be detectable.
There were a number of scientists looking into these anomalies, including a Nobel laureate, but they were all largely discredited without rational basis or support by those doing the discrediting.
> It is unlikely. The samples collected would be checked for fragments.
It is not straightforward to identify a new virus that is not closely related to known human viruses. You cannot just “check for it.” It is largely an unsolved problem, and there are likely a huge number of common viruses that frequently infect humans that still remain undiscovered. When we sequence real world DNA and RNA there is a whole bunch of mysterious stuff that is unexplained, and may include many undiscovered viruses, and bacteria.
I don't agree about the rest of the stuff you mentioned. In fact, there are academics actively studying things like what you mentioned- including Gerald Pollack at UW, but the reality of these phenomenon are more complex than the popular conspiracy theory level explanations imply, and there is no reason to think they lead to things like what you are claiming. Look here: https://www.pollacklab.org/
I used to feel the same about science unfairly rejecting fringe ideas, and that was part of my motivation to become a scientist... but after becoming one I found it is mostly not true. Plenty of scientists openly study and consider stuff like this and are not "discredited" - the reality is a bit more mundane, that the conspiracy theory versions of these stories are just lacking so much nuance that they have little to no relation to the actual research.
You can see from Pollacks' website above that he has a big problem with fraudulent products using his name and likeness to claim some medical benefit, which neither he or his research actually support.
I had read and heard that many places had started using preliminary tools like Lucaprot that scan viral dark matter retrieved using nano-pore sequencers to identify the sequences and common secondary structures of proteins which all viruses need to replicate, to automate detection of new viruses. Is this not widespread?
I'm aware of Pollack's research, but as you said he's suffered reputational harm which started when he began that research. The stories surrounding Luc Montagnier and Benviste, were pretty poorly handled, and they both were somewhat discredited for merely pointing out undiscovered anomalies that merited further investigation.
Nature sent their hatchet man James Randi, who has been known for discrediting people, sometimes without sound basis especially in cases where the underlying mechanism is not understood.
There is something to be said that When you suddenly can't get any funding because you published something which no one else had found in a methodological scientific way, that could be duplicated; that tends to gives teeth to those calling something conspiracy theory, where it seems more like a conspiracy practice.
Every little quirk we find, can potentially be used in an engineered solution to get to some amazing outcome not previously considered. Quantum dot based technologies are an example of this, from what I've read with regards to their history.
Yes, that is the process basically for new virus discovery- sequencing and then looking for similarity to known viral sequences. That is still an expensive and time consuming research project, and it fails if the virus is too different to identify any sequence homology. We still find a lot of DNA and RNA we can’t make any sense of in almost every sequencing experiment- there’s a ton of stuff out there undiscovered and unexplained. I suspect a lot of currently mysterious diseases and health problems may have viral origins.
That’s why I’m saying we can’t rule out a virus here easily- not until some other cause is proven.
You can also have more complex mechanisms that also involve a virus plus generic or environmental factors- for example the recent finding that implicates HSV in Alzheimers, despite the fact that most people with the virus still never get Alzheimers.
A lot of those claims about water physics used to market homeopathy are based on real experimental observations- see the link in my other reply, water really does do some strange and complex stuff.
But the problem is that these observations do not actually support the claims of homeopathy at all- the attempt at connecting the two is entirely nonsense. I like to try to be open minded about fringe science and medical ideas... but homeopathy really takes the cake, and is the type of total nonsense that gives the rest of that type of stuff a bad name.
Most likely its something novel that's been thawing out from climate change.
That or a unique modified form of an existing chemical, or something else that hasn't been considered. There's some real fringe stuff out there in chemistry that open a whole can of what-ifs, that mainstream science might scoff at and not study seriously.
Something like this might be the cause, albeit very unlikely, still there are things stranger than fiction.
Spitballing here, Water has Memory, where an EM, or NQR signal of extremely dilute substance or dissolved chemical can cause certain unnatural forms of molecules to stabilize in aqueous solutions, or alternatively impart its effects because water mimics the nature of the dissolved substance for a time at higher concentrations than may be detectable.
There were a number of scientists looking into these anomalies, including a Nobel laureate, but they were all largely discredited without rational basis or support by those doing the discrediting.