4 ms·

A recent paper suggested that there is strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of genetic engineering. source: http://virological.org/t/the-proximal

A recent paper suggested that there is strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of genetic engineering. source: http://virological.org/t/the-proximal-origin-of-sars-cov-2/398 http://virological.org/t/the-proximal-origin-of-sars-cov-2/3...

trenning 7y ago
Thanks for the link. Some cherry picked excerpts from the paper. > It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of an existing SARS-related coronavirus. As noted above, the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is optimized for human ACE2 receptor binding with an efficient binding solution different to that which would have been predicted. Further, if genetic manipulation had been performed, one would expect that one of the several reverse genetic systems available for betacoronaviruses would have been used. However, this is not the case as the genetic data shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone17. Instead, we propose two scenarios that can plausibly explain the origin of SARS-CoV-2: (i) natural selection in a non-human animal host prior to zoonotic transfer, and (ii) natural selection in humans following zoonotic transfer. We also discuss whether selection during passage in culture could have given rise to the same observed features. > Although genomic evidence does not support the idea that SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory construct, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here, and it is unclear whether future data will help resolve this issue. Identifying the immediate non-human animal source and obtaining virus sequences from it would be the most definitive way of revealing virus origins.
nexuist 7y ago
It can still be released from a lab without being genetically engineered. It is possible that they had a sample retrieved from a cave somewhere, and that is what somehow escaped. That would explain the unprecedented response. I think the conspiracy theorists are hoping for something more impressive other than "it was a lab accident." History has taught us that lab accidents are a bit more likely than we'd like to admit - see "Biohazard" by Ken Alibek. The Soviet Union (and China) had several accidental release incidents during his time in Biopreparat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Alibek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Alibek As it stands, we have no way of knowing if it came from an animal or this lab unless they tell us. Either is possible.

trenning 7y ago

Thanks for the link. Some cherry picked excerpts from the paper. > It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of an existing SARS-related coronavirus. As noted above, the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is optimized for human ACE2 receptor binding with an efficient binding solution different to that which would have been predicted. Further, if genetic manipulation had been performed, one would expect that one of the several reverse genetic systems available for betacoronaviruses would have been used. However, this is not the case as the genetic data shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone17. Instead, we propose two scenarios that can plausibly explain the origin of SARS-CoV-2: (i) natural selection in a non-human animal host prior to zoonotic transfer, and (ii) natural selection in humans following zoonotic transfer. We also discuss whether selection during passage in culture could have given rise to the same observed features. > Although genomic evidence does not support the idea that SARS-CoV-2 is a laboratory construct, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here, and it is unclear whether future data will help resolve this issue. Identifying the immediate non-human animal source and obtaining virus sequences from it would be the most definitive way of revealing virus origins.

nexuist 7y ago

It can still be released from a lab without being genetically engineered. It is possible that they had a sample retrieved from a cave somewhere, and that is what somehow escaped. That would explain the unprecedented response. I think the conspiracy theorists are hoping for something more impressive other than "it was a lab accident." History has taught us that lab accidents are a bit more likely than we'd like to admit - see "Biohazard" by Ken Alibek. The Soviet Union (and China) had several accidental release incidents during his time in Biopreparat. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Alibek https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Alibek As it stands, we have no way of knowing if it came from an animal or this lab unless they tell us. Either is possible.