2 ms·
There's at least one study that disqualifies the market as the epicenter. I think the reason people want it to be the market is then it's obviously an accident
by caseysoftware 7y ago
There's at least one study that disqualifies the market as the epicenter. I think the reason people want it to be the market is then it's obviously an accident or ignorance, not a malicious act.
> The paper, written by a large group of Chinese researchers from several institutions, offers details about the first 41 hospitalized patients who had confirmed infections with what has been dubbed 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV). In the earliest case, the patient became ill on 1 December 2019 and had no reported link to the seafood market, the authors report.
[snip]
> Lucey says if the new data are accurate, the first human infections must have occurred in November 2019—if not earlier—because there is an incubation time between infection and symptoms surfacing. If so, the virus possibly spread silently between people in Wuhan—and perhaps elsewhere—before the cluster of cases from the city’s now-infamous Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was discovered in late December.
Ref: https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/wuhan-seafood-market-may-not-be-source-novel-virus-spreading-globally https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/wuhan-seafood-market...
- Izkata 7y ago> There's at least one study that disqualifies the market as the epicenter. Yeah, that's basically what I'm asking. There's a seemingly-obvious candidate that's just right there, that I remember hearing of a month or so ago, that's not even offered as a possibility now.