If you're asking about the [Corman-Drosten] PCR, as far as I can tell, there was no single sequence used in the design. Martin Neil has commented on this as well (though I am not speaking for him).
"We used known SARS- and SARS-related coronaviruses (bat viruses from our own studies as well as literature sources) to generate a non-redundant alignment (excerpts shown in Annex). We designed candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assays before release of the first sequence of the Wuhan virus. Upon sequence release, three assays were selected based on their matching to the Wuhan virus as per inspection of the sequence alignment (Figures 1 and 2)"
"We used known SARS- and SARS-related coronaviruses (bat viruses from our own studies as well as literature sources) to generate a non-redundant alignment (excerpts shown in Annex). We designed candidate diagnostic RT-PCR assays before release of the first sequence of 2019-nCoV. Upon sequence release, the following assays were selected based on their matching to 2019-nCoV as per inspection of the sequence alignment and initial evaluation (Figures 1 and 2).
Both versions say,
"For oligonucleotide design and in-silico evaluation we downloaded all complete and partial (if >400 nucleotides) SARS-related virus sequences available at GenBank by January 1st, 2020. The list (n=729 entries) was manually checked and artificial sequences (lab-derived, synthetic etc.), as well as sequence duplicates removed, resulting in a final list of 375 sequences. These sequences were aligned and the alignment used for assay design. The alignment was later complemented by sequences released from the Wuhan cluster. All presently release sequences match the amplicons (Figure 2). An overview of oligonucleotide binding sites in all unique sequences of bat-associated SARS-related viruses is shown in the appendix."
[In The Smoking Man emails] @MartinNeil9 asked, "Which exact genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 was Dr Drosten using on January 13th when he picked the primer sequences?"
I still don't know [and] remain unclear as to which/how many sequences "Wuhan virus"/"2019-nCoV" represents.
Before the COVID event, I had never heard the term "variant" with respect to respiratory illness.
"Strain"? Yes - with respect to influenza.
What is the difference between a "variant" and a "strain"?
"According to Berlin virus researcher Christian Drosten, the new pathogen circulating in China is a Sars virus similar to that of the Sars pandemic 2002/03. 'It's the same type of virus, only in a different variant,' said the director of the Institute of Virology at the Charité in Berlin."
If we assume that the SARS-1 virus wasn't "novel" either, is it possible that SARS-CoV-2 is simply (in evolutionary terms) the 13-year "slightly changed" version of SARS-1?
I think this would work conceptually regardless of what one thinks these things are -- or whether one believes they are "in the air" or simply "circulate" (wink wink) WITHIN us and are effects, not causes.
I'm not claiming to understand the biological ins and outs of what I'm proposing here...just trying to take these people at their word, and use it to interrogate the claims.
Due to sequence homology, there is consistent cross-reactivity w/SARS-CoV-1 across tested assays and instances of cross-reactivity with other human coronaviruses.
Other observations/?s:
In October 2012, the U.S. National Select Agent Registry Program declared “SARS-coronavirus” a select agent, i.e., a bacterium, virus or toxin that has the potential to pose a severe threat to public health and safety. On what basis?
SARS is among the diseases that can fast-track a WHO PHEIC. [It] seems to me "the coronavirus" allegedly causing a spreading-illness outbreak in Wuhan "had" to be a SARS-CoV.
@drtaubraun as you're aware, the U.S. did not use the C-D PCR and had its own.*
I can get back to you if you're interested, but I recently noticed some things that suggest the U.S. developed its test from the sequence of the missing-in-action Snohomish Man.
I'm not clear as to why people say a single sequence from a Wuhan patient informed everything. Maybe I'm overlooking something obvious?
*In my opinion, the "debacle" involving the early CDC tests was staged and intentional.
For those unsure as to what I mean by the C-D test being rooted in social media rumor, see explanations here: https://www.woodhouse76.com/p/yes-corman-drosten-et-al-designed