3 ms·
That's why it would be unknown origin, not zoonosis. They don't default to picking one over the other in the absence of evidence for either.
by manigandham 6y ago
That's why it would be unknown origin, not zoonosis. They don't default to picking one over the other in the absence of evidence for either.
- sudosysgen 6y agoIf you are trying to do a bayesian analysis, you need a prior probability. That is, what it would be expected to be, without your analysis. This would be zoonosis. There is never absence of evidence for zoonosis, because by association all other viruses came to be via zoonosis. So, before you do any further investigation, it's the default. And then, when you do, zoonosis is already the null hypothesis as it was the most likely before you being your further investigation.