4 ms·

That's inaccurate. Bat coronaviruses that were close to SARS-COV-1 were indeed found in a cave in Yunnan, but that doesn't mean SARS-CoV-1 literally evolved rig

That's inaccurate. Bat coronaviruses that were close to SARS-COV-1 were indeed found in a cave in Yunnan, but that doesn't mean SARS-CoV-1 literally evolved right there or that it first spread to humans in the region - who then somehow carried it to Guangdong, where the actual outbreak occured. SARS-CoV-1 was also found in civets in Guangdong sold at a wildlife market. It is unknown whether the first human transmission went through civets or through bats, but the local civets probably didn't take a trip to Yunnan to get infected. Either way, it doesn't make a difference whether it is Yunnan, Guangxi or Guangdong, those are the areas where these bats live and where you would expect a human transmission to occur. You wouldn't expect it to occur in Wuhan. That's not my personal assessment, that's the assessment of the virologist that personally led the expedition to that Yunnan cave - I quoted her in my previous reply.

joshuamorton 6y ago
> Bat coronaviruses that were close to SARS-COV-1 were indeed found in a cave in Yunnan, but that doesn't mean SARS-CoV-1 literally evolved right Actually my understanding is that that is, in general, the scientific consensus on the matter (including from the scientist you quoted in your prior reply) > or that it first spread to humans in the region - who then somehow carried it to Guangdong Correct, this is unlikely. The leading theories are that an intermediate animal, like a civet for CoV-1 and perhaps pangolins for CoV-2 were the infection vector. > Either way, it doesn't make a difference whether it is Yunnan, Guangxi or Guangdong, Well yes, yes it does. Guangdong and Wuhan are similarly distant from Yunnan. If, as the consensus appears to be, the virus started out in Yunnan, traveling to Wuhan via an animal intermediary is no less likely than traveling to Guangdong via an animal intermediary. > You wouldn't expect it to occur in Wuhan. I made no such claim. I made the claim that the transmission vector for Cov-1 and cov-2 were similar. That they both started in Yunnan and travelled east hundreds of miles via some method, likely a combination of bat migration/movement, civet/pangolin migration/movement, and human movement of captured animals. If you read the updated article, you'd find that she no longer believes the virus could have leaked from her lab, since > its genetic sequence does not match any her lab had previously studied.[0] Of course, she could be pressured into silence by the Chinese government. [0]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-chinas-bat-woman-hunted-down-viruses-from-sars-to-the-new-coronavirus1/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-chinas-bat-wo...
- gridlockd 6y ago
  > Actually my understanding is that that is That is not my understanding, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, given a statement of hers to that effect. > Guangdong and Wuhan are similarly distant from Yunnan Yes, but Guangdong and Yunnan are bat country, unlike Wuhan. Could it have spread through other wildlife? Yes. I'm not ruling that out at all, I never have. I'm pointing out that somehow the dominant narrative is the one that appears relatively unlikely even in the assessment of a leading expert. > I made the claim that the transmission vector for Cov-1 and cov-2 were similar. That they both started in Yunnan and travelled east hundreds of miles via some method, likely a combination of bat migration/movement, civet/pangolin migration/movement, and human movement of captured animals. As a reminder, this is your original claim: "Bat caves in Yunnan are full of potentially dangerous coronaviruses, but the farmers living close to the caves are already immune to the strains they're in frequent contact with, so the only way for an outbreak to get big is by long-distance transportation carrying the virus somewhere else." > If you read the updated article, you'd find that she no longer believes the virus could have leaked from her lab It may well be true that it didn't come from her lab, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is several miles away from the seafood market. However, the Wuhan CDC is right next to the seafood market and they performed experiments with hundreds of live bats there[1]. A likely vector could've been improperly disposed lab garbage. [1] https://img-prod.tgcom24.mediaset.it/images/2020/02/16/114720192-5eb8307f-017c-4075-a697-348628da0204.pdf https://img-prod.tgcom24.mediaset.it/images/2020/02/16/11472...
  - joshuamorton 6y ago
    I'm not sure who you're quoting, but it's not me. As for the claim that the Wuhan cdc is tight next to the seafood market, I direct you to this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23096524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23096524 which thoroughly and completely debunks those claims.
    - gridlockd 6y ago
      > I'm not sure who you're quoting, but it's not me. Indeed, I oversaw that it was "yorwba" who put that comment into "our" thread, not you. My apologies. > As for the claim that the Wuhan cdc is tight next to the seafood market, I direct you to this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23096524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23096524 which thoroughly and completely debunks those claims. That's not a "thorough and complete" debunking, that's an erroneous assessment regarding the functions and location(s) of the Wuhan CDC, based on a cursory glance at websites. A little bit more research would've revealed that the Wuhan CDC indeed was performing experiments on bats and that it has several facilities (including one near the seafood market). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovnUyTRMERI&feature=youtu.be&t=86 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovnUyTRMERI&feature=youtu.be... https://map.baidu.com/poi/%E6%AD%A6%E6%B1%89%E5%B8%82%E7%96%BE%E7%97%85%E9%A2%84%E9%98%B2%E6%8E%A7%E5%88%B6%E4%B8%AD%E5%BF%83/@12720508.588819638,3561711.948140599,17.39z?uid=5325f5ab08c15717fea7781e&info_merge=1&isBizPoi=false&ugc_type=3&ugc_ver=1&device_ratio=2&compat=1&querytype=detailConInfo&da_src=shareurl https://map.baidu.com/poi/%E6%AD%A6%E6%B1%89%E5%B8%82%E7%96%...

joshuamorton 6y ago

> Bat coronaviruses that were close to SARS-COV-1 were indeed found in a cave in Yunnan, but that doesn't mean SARS-CoV-1 literally evolved right Actually my understanding is that that is, in general, the scientific consensus on the matter (including from the scientist you quoted in your prior reply) > or that it first spread to humans in the region - who then somehow carried it to Guangdong Correct, this is unlikely. The leading theories are that an intermediate animal, like a civet for CoV-1 and perhaps pangolins for CoV-2 were the infection vector. > Either way, it doesn't make a difference whether it is Yunnan, Guangxi or Guangdong, Well yes, yes it does. Guangdong and Wuhan are similarly distant from Yunnan. If, as the consensus appears to be, the virus started out in Yunnan, traveling to Wuhan via an animal intermediary is no less likely than traveling to Guangdong via an animal intermediary. > You wouldn't expect it to occur in Wuhan. I made no such claim. I made the claim that the transmission vector for Cov-1 and cov-2 were similar. That they both started in Yunnan and travelled east hundreds of miles via some method, likely a combination of bat migration/movement, civet/pangolin migration/movement, and human movement of captured animals. If you read the updated article, you'd find that she no longer believes the virus could have leaked from her lab, since > its genetic sequence does not match any her lab had previously studied.[0] Of course, she could be pressured into silence by the Chinese government. [0]: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-chinas-bat-woman-hunted-down-viruses-from-sars-to-the-new-coronavirus1/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-chinas-bat-wo...

gridlockd 6y ago
> Actually my understanding is that that is That is not my understanding, but I'm willing to be convinced otherwise, given a statement of hers to that effect. > Guangdong and Wuhan are similarly distant from Yunnan Yes, but Guangdong and Yunnan are bat country, unlike Wuhan. Could it have spread through other wildlife? Yes. I'm not ruling that out at all, I never have. I'm pointing out that somehow the dominant narrative is the one that appears relatively unlikely even in the assessment of a leading expert. > I made the claim that the transmission vector for Cov-1 and cov-2 were similar. That they both started in Yunnan and travelled east hundreds of miles via some method, likely a combination of bat migration/movement, civet/pangolin migration/movement, and human movement of captured animals. As a reminder, this is your original claim: "Bat caves in Yunnan are full of potentially dangerous coronaviruses, but the farmers living close to the caves are already immune to the strains they're in frequent contact with, so the only way for an outbreak to get big is by long-distance transportation carrying the virus somewhere else." > If you read the updated article, you'd find that she no longer believes the virus could have leaked from her lab It may well be true that it didn't come from her lab, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which is several miles away from the seafood market. However, the Wuhan CDC is right next to the seafood market and they performed experiments with hundreds of live bats there[1]. A likely vector could've been improperly disposed lab garbage. [1] https://img-prod.tgcom24.mediaset.it/images/2020/02/16/114720192-5eb8307f-017c-4075-a697-348628da0204.pdf https://img-prod.tgcom24.mediaset.it/images/2020/02/16/11472...
- joshuamorton 6y ago
  I'm not sure who you're quoting, but it's not me. As for the claim that the Wuhan cdc is tight next to the seafood market, I direct you to this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23096524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23096524 which thoroughly and completely debunks those claims.
  - gridlockd 6y ago
    > I'm not sure who you're quoting, but it's not me. Indeed, I oversaw that it was "yorwba" who put that comment into "our" thread, not you. My apologies. > As for the claim that the Wuhan cdc is tight next to the seafood market, I direct you to this comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23096524 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23096524 which thoroughly and completely debunks those claims. That's not a "thorough and complete" debunking, that's an erroneous assessment regarding the functions and location(s) of the Wuhan CDC, based on a cursory glance at websites. A little bit more research would've revealed that the Wuhan CDC indeed was performing experiments on bats and that it has several facilities (including one near the seafood market). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovnUyTRMERI&feature=youtu.be&t=86 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ovnUyTRMERI&feature=youtu.be... https://map.baidu.com/poi/%E6%AD%A6%E6%B1%89%E5%B8%82%E7%96%BE%E7%97%85%E9%A2%84%E9%98%B2%E6%8E%A7%E5%88%B6%E4%B8%AD%E5%BF%83/@12720508.588819638,3561711.948140599,17.39z?uid=5325f5ab08c15717fea7781e&info_merge=1&isBizPoi=false&ugc_type=3&ugc_ver=1&device_ratio=2&compat=1&querytype=detailConInfo&da_src=shareurl https://map.baidu.com/poi/%E6%AD%A6%E6%B1%89%E5%B8%82%E7%96%...