"All the work that has been done on the virus, and trying to identify its origin continue to point towards a natural reservoir of this virus and similar viruses in bat populations”, says @Peterfoodsafety. “But … a direct jump from bats in the city of Wuhan is not very likely."
-
Show this thread
-
Team evaluated four hypotheses, says
@Peterfoodsafety. “We sat down and went through these different hypotheses, one by one, and assessed the likelihood by putting forwards arguments for and arguments against such hypotheses. And then assessing the likelihood of each of them."1 reply 28 retweets 68 likesShow this thread -
The 4 hypotheses: 1. direct zoonotic spillover 2. spillover from an intermediary host species that might have allowed virus to adapt more 3. introduction via food chain, for example from frozen products 4. lab-related incident
10 replies 94 retweets 191 likesShow this thread -
"Our initial findings suggest that the introduction through an intermediary host species is the most likely pathway”, says
@Peterfoodsafety. But direct spillover and food chain also need some more investigation.9 replies 73 retweets 120 likesShow this thread -
“However, the findings suggest that the laboratory incident hypothesis is extremely unlikely to explain introduction of the virus into the human population”, says
@Peterfoodsafety suggests the team will not further follow-up that hypothesis with more studies.17 replies 71 retweets 135 likesShow this thread -
Do I understand this correctly? (Emphasis: I have no comment/assertion on lab accident hypothesis.) The team is asserting that they can *rule out* lab screw-up but *not* frozen food? That it's plausible that SARS-CoV-2 was introduced into China through frozen food from elsewhere?
9 replies 10 retweets 82 likes -
No and no. If I got it right: -they deem the lab incident very unlikely because SARS-cov-2 is not similar enough with virii studied in the lab; -Frozen food may be responsible for the *spread* of the virus across China, up to a food market.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @edw_tweet @zeynep and
The takeaway is that the virus may not have been generated by live animals at the wet market of Wuhan, but in a farm far away (but close from bat populations) whose food was then brought to the market.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @edw_tweet @zeynep and
Starving Engineer Retweeted Kai Kupferschmidt
Starving Engineer added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @edw_tweet @zeynep and
Starving Engineer Retweeted Kai Kupferschmidt
Starving Engineer added,
Kai KupferschmidtVerified account @kakape"All the work that has been done on the virus, and trying to identify its origin continue to point towards a natural reservoir of this virus and similar viruses in bat populations”, says@Peterfoodsafety. “But … a direct jump from bats in the city of Wuhan is not very likely."Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
So what are the odds that I don't see Kai's other tweets in the thread that I need them pointed out to me in response to a question?
-
-
Replying to @zeynep
Sorry, I was just pointing at them again to stress/lean on them. Twitter is bad at referencing (especially multiple links form the same source: only one has a preview).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @edw_tweet @zeynep
The WHO team is not thinking it was "introduced into China through frozen food from elsewhere [than China]", but that it spread from another place *within China* (close to natural bat habitats) to the market (and other markets) through frozen food.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.