With the publication of the Science letter, the Overton window for discussion of "lab leak" hypothesis has shifted dramatically. We now have mainstream scientific opinions that largely range between "lab leak can be dismissed" and "both zoonosis and lab leak are viable". 1/8
-
-
What is the evidence of natural zoonosis? The wet market has already been disproven. Zero serological evidence of prior circulation in Wuhan. Zero serological evidence of anyone in wuhan being infected by batcovs before the Dec. 2019 outbreak...
-
As
@trvrb pointed out, it happens often and the evidence is very consistent with a zoonotic outbreak driven by one of many potential sources - Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
For clarity, still zero evidence of natural zoonosis correct? We have been unable to find the intermediary host (despite 15mos of searching. Was found in less than 12months for cov1 and mers). Unable to find any serological footprint of early variants, or any batcovs, in wuhan.
-
1/2 At the same time, we know cov2 contains a rare codon dimer CGGCGG that couldn't have been acquired through wild recombination (not present in covs in same subgenera), and that is used in laboratory infectivity studies including one carried out at WIV. We know its proteome
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I’ll put a plug in again for this TWIV episode about the origin of COVID. No new evidence of a lab leak and plenty of evidence for natural spillover.https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-762/
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I don't understand why we need to know one way or another. Can't we just go forward as if lab leak happened and expend whatever resources we need to to make sure it never happens again? Even if it didn't happen, we'd still be better off. Is this about getting "justice"?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Evidence for lab:1 Lab leak happens. 2 since relatively few wild corona viruses have been sampled and sequenced it appers that RaTG13 is a very close match. 3 there is a virus lab in Wuhan+outbreak started in Wuhan=can't be coincidence since I know only those 2 things about China
-
That - as has been written above - is not evidence . It is arguing along the lines of "Could be..." & "Possible, no ?" .
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
Exactly. And remember the people at the lab said they didn’t do it and didn’t share access to anything they were doing. So that’s pretty strong on the other side. Usually people don’t hand over incriminating evidence of their own volition. We’ll likely never know unfortunately.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.