(-) control 2: the lab that was shut down for rectification after sharing the genome on Jan 11. Was focused on the NTD and RBD: "An amino acid sequence alignment of RBD sequences from WHCV, SARS-CoVs and bat SARS-like CoVs was performed"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2008-3 …
-
-
(+) control 1: "The present study for the first time (on January 21st, 2020) reported a very important mutation.. not present in the S proteins of most other Betacoronavirus (e.g. SARS coronavirus)."https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338804501_A_furin_cleavage_site_was_discovered_in_the_S_protein_of_the_2019_novel_coronavirus …
1 reply 1 retweet 9 likes -
(+) control 2 titled "The spike glycoprotein of the new coronavirus 2019-nCoV contains a furin-like cleavage site absent in CoV of the same clade" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7114094/ …pic.twitter.com/d3DVQsKJhH
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
Let's look at Dr Shi's papers. "The major differences in the sequence of the S gene of 2019-nCoV are the 3 short insertions in the N-terminal domain as well as changes in.. key residues in the receptor-binding motif compared with the sequence of SARS-CoV"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2012-7#change-history …
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
Paper 2: Even after aligning spike, they didn't see the new FCS insertion. "aligning 2019-nCoV S protein sequence with those of SARS-CoV and several bat-SL-CoVs, we predicted that the cleavage site for generating S1 and S2 subunits is located at R694/S695" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7033706/ …
1 reply 1 retweet 5 likes -
Furthermore, all 3 authors on this paper had been part of a collaboration engineering an S1/S2 FCS into a MERS-like CoV (pseudotyped) in 2015.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4524054/ …
2 replies 1 retweet 12 likes -
I'm not saying this is a smoking gun for SARS-CoV-2 being engineered. But as
@zeynep pointed out, it should at least be considered as an oddity.2 replies 2 retweets 11 likes -
Oddity, but not a coverup. You have to assume people with this much expertise understand not explicitly mentioning it in that paper isn’t going to be a coverup, given genome already available and everyone will go
as soon as they see it. Coverups have to make sense in context.1 reply 2 retweets 8 likes -
It could be a mistake omission due to panic (despite very carefully picking out nearby insertions and even looking at the very site compared to other SARSrCoVs in their collection). Or it could be a situation where they could not draw attention to it.
3 replies 1 retweet 6 likes -
Well, maybe but that assumes they assume everyone else is stupid and won’t notice the very thing most everyone noticed immediately. That’s what I mean, coverup theories need to have parsimonious explanations that match what one knows about the people involved—their understanding.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
They can’t be simultaneously unable to miss mentioning something that’s very obvious to them, and also not realize it will be very obvious to everyone else. You can assume one or the other in a coherent framework. Not both imo.
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.