Kristian G. AndersenGeverifieerd account

This made my day

I'm a smart and curious person with legitimate questions. You have/had a prime opp to educate me/others. Instead I feel as if I've wandered into an exclusive club of mean kids. Your prof has a legit image prob right now, and IMO you've settled on a poor repair strategy here.

You wrote: "This leaves the insertion of polybasic cleavage site to occur during human-to-human transmission. Hence, this scenario presumes a period of unrecognized transmission in humans between the initial zoonotic event and the acquisition of the polybasic cleavage site."

Again, I'll ask. How likely is that scenario? Since the claim is being made that CV19 'likely came from nature' I'd like to know the odds. How often do CVs pick up insert sequences while in humans? AFAIK none so far in the post-pandemic seqs despite millions of infections?

So @K_G_Andersen , your answer is "it evolved naturally". But labs have been manipulating CORONAVIRUSES sequences without any trace (thanks to "no see'm" technology) for at least 15 years. How can you know for sure ? Cf. book Coronavirus Replication and Reverse Genetics (2005)

Nature is the biggest lab in the world. By huge numbers of orders of magnitude. To assume this is a laboratory introduced change in the face of all the facts and evidence is just nonsensical.

Ref 14 was Virology 350, 358–369 (2006): "we introduced a furin recognition site at single basic residues within the putative S1–S2 junctional region" "we mutated the wild-type SARS-CoV glycoprotein to construct a prototypic furin recognition site (RRSRR)" Lab "doable" in 2006.