2 ms·

The last section quotes the most promising bit of epidemiology I've seen on the origin of the epidemic, but alters the explanation of what happened a bit. The

by ouid 6y ago

The last section quotes the most promising bit of epidemiology I've seen on the origin of the epidemic, but alters the explanation of what happened a bit. The article suggests that the gain of function was accomplished via passaging of the samples that the miners obtained, but the key point in the paper that is being cited is that the gain of function happened entirely inside the miner's lungs. How did WIV get samples of this virus? Well, they harvested the thymuses of at least one of the miners, which then contained the fully passaged virus, no laboratory passaging necessary. Why didn't this cause an outbreak in 2013? Initially, the virus was not infectious to humans without the kind of megadose that the miners received, and by the time it had evolved enough affinity for human ACE2 receptors, all of the medical staff involved in the care of the patients were extremely careful. I'm just paraphrasing the paper that is cited in the articles conclusion. It's worth a read, and NYmag gets some of the details wrong. https://www.independentsciencenews.org/commentaries/a-proposed-origin-for-sars-cov-2-and-the-covid-19-pandemic/ https://www.independentsciencenews.org/commentaries/a-propos...

js2 6y ago
The author is a novelist[1], not a subject matter expert on viruses. It's frustrating to have the author add his opinion. This sort of thing: > But in the climate of gonzo laboratory experimentation, at a time when all sorts of tweaked variants and amped-up substitutions were being tested on cell cultures and in the lungs of humanized mice and other experimental animals, isn’t it possible ... I confess to having skimmed the article except for the final two sections, but the subject matter expert[2] I see quoted has this to say: > Baric said he still thought the virus came from bats in southern China, perhaps directly, or possibly via an intermediate host, although the smuggled pangolins, in his view, were a red herring. The disease evolved in humans over time without being noticed, he suspected, becoming gradually more infectious, and eventually a person carried it to Wuhan “and the pandemic took off.” Then he said, “Can you rule out a laboratory escape? The answer in this case is probably not.” So the SME thinks it's zoonotic. But proving it's zoonotic is not currently a question science can answer (apparently), and the SME is being responsible by saying so. The author is taking advantage of that fact (IMO) to write this long-form piece. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholson_Baker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholson_Baker [2] https://www.med.unc.edu/microimm/directory/ralph-baric-phd-1/ https://www.med.unc.edu/microimm/directory/ralph-baric-phd-1...

by ouid 6y ago

js2 6y ago

The author is a novelist[1], not a subject matter expert on viruses. It's frustrating to have the author add his opinion. This sort of thing: > But in the climate of gonzo laboratory experimentation, at a time when all sorts of tweaked variants and amped-up substitutions were being tested on cell cultures and in the lungs of humanized mice and other experimental animals, isn’t it possible ... I confess to having skimmed the article except for the final two sections, but the subject matter expert[2] I see quoted has this to say: > Baric said he still thought the virus came from bats in southern China, perhaps directly, or possibly via an intermediate host, although the smuggled pangolins, in his view, were a red herring. The disease evolved in humans over time without being noticed, he suspected, becoming gradually more infectious, and eventually a person carried it to Wuhan “and the pandemic took off.” Then he said, “Can you rule out a laboratory escape? The answer in this case is probably not.” So the SME thinks it's zoonotic. But proving it's zoonotic is not currently a question science can answer (apparently), and the SME is being responsible by saying so. The author is taking advantage of that fact (IMO) to write this long-form piece. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholson_Baker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholson_Baker [2] https://www.med.unc.edu/microimm/directory/ralph-baric-phd-1/ https://www.med.unc.edu/microimm/directory/ralph-baric-phd-1...