3 ms·

Thanks. This will be an interesting read. It looks like the author here doesn't really discuss how SARS-CoV-2 got its furin cleavage site. The Bulletin article

by dqv 5y ago

Thanks. This will be an interesting read. It looks like the author here doesn't really discuss how SARS-CoV-2 got its furin cleavage site. The Bulletin article [0] seems to think that's significant while Dr. Duehr kind of brushes it off. I'd love to know what his theory is. Obviously Dr. Duehr's paper predates The Bulletin article by almost exactly a year. [0]: https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/ https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-peop...

mikem170 5y ago
Section 2.3 of the reddit post [0] (titled: "And if it were created in a lab, SARS-CoV-2 would have been engineered by an idiot") mentions covid having a polybasic cleavage site, which is suboptimal for humans (the "ford focus" of cleavage sites), but binds to many other species (ferrets, cats, chimps, etc), along with a promiscuous and somewhat unstable spike protein to bind to those diverse ace2 receptors, meaning this was most likely made by nature, jumping through animal populations. The article you linked seemed to mention furin cleavage sites in a hypothetical context, unless I'm missing something. [0] https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did_not_come_from_the_wuhan_institute_of/fqpby1u/ https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did...
- dqv 5y ago
  Section 2.3 and Dr. Duehr's whole post has a major issue: it assumes intentionality. We have to step away from the intentionality lens being projected onto the lab leak hypothesis. It is possible and even likely that, if it leaked from a lab, it was not malicious in intent. In the lab leak scenario, the viruses infection optimality is only relevant insofar as its able to infect at all. The only reason optimality would be brought into question is if it the virus were intentionally designed to hurt millions of people. That's more my question. Why haven't we found the progenitor of the furin cleavage site in one of the mentioned animal populations?
  - mikem170 5y ago
    He covered accident lab release in Question 4 [0]. He mentions that the WIV lab is well respected, well funded, well equipped, there was public logging of all relevant bat samples, along with parallel samples sent to other labs, lab workers were not the first who were sick, and there's genetic evidence that the virus did not originate in Wuhan. Dr. Duehr links to a reference that talks about the cleavage site [1], which concluded that "Acquisition of the furin cleavage site might be viewed as a ‘gain of function’ that enabled a bat CoV to jump into humans and begin its current epidemic spread" [0] https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did_not_come_from_the_wuhan_institute_of/fqpccr1/ https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did... [1] https://www.virology.ws/2020/02/13/furin-cleavage-site-in-the-sars-cov-2-coronavirus-glycoprotein/ https://www.virology.ws/2020/02/13/furin-cleavage-site-in-th...
    - dqv 5y ago
      Shi herself says that WIV isn't solely a BSL-4 lab and that coronaviruses were handled in BSL-2 prior to the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak [0]. The idea that SARS-CoV-2 couldn't have "grown" (again: ignore intentionality) in the lab shouldn't be discounted. I'm also skeptical of other virologists sticking up for WIV due to social pressure. It would be detrimental to virology everywhere if virologists started giving credence to this idea that samples in the lab may not have been handled perfectly. It's a natural social response to try to defend your profession. What we do have records of is that Shi was researching RaTG13, the closest ancestor we know of to SARS-CoV-2 [1]. A question I want to find the answer to is how samples assumed to have low risk of infectivity to humans were being handled. [0]: https://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/Shi%20Zhengli%20Q%26A.pdf https://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/Shi%20Zhengli... [1]: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/03/08/josh-rogin-chaos-under-heaven-wuhan-lab-book-excerpt-474322 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/03/08/josh-rogin...

by dqv 5y ago

mikem170 5y ago

Section 2.3 of the reddit post [0] (titled: "And if it were created in a lab, SARS-CoV-2 would have been engineered by an idiot") mentions covid having a polybasic cleavage site, which is suboptimal for humans (the "ford focus" of cleavage sites), but binds to many other species (ferrets, cats, chimps, etc), along with a promiscuous and somewhat unstable spike protein to bind to those diverse ace2 receptors, meaning this was most likely made by nature, jumping through animal populations. The article you linked seemed to mention furin cleavage sites in a hypothetical context, unless I'm missing something. [0] https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did_not_come_from_the_wuhan_institute_of/fqpby1u/ https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did...

dqv 5y ago
Section 2.3 and Dr. Duehr's whole post has a major issue: it assumes intentionality. We have to step away from the intentionality lens being projected onto the lab leak hypothesis. It is possible and even likely that, if it leaked from a lab, it was not malicious in intent. In the lab leak scenario, the viruses infection optimality is only relevant insofar as its able to infect at all. The only reason optimality would be brought into question is if it the virus were intentionally designed to hurt millions of people. That's more my question. Why haven't we found the progenitor of the furin cleavage site in one of the mentioned animal populations?
- mikem170 5y ago
  He covered accident lab release in Question 4 [0]. He mentions that the WIV lab is well respected, well funded, well equipped, there was public logging of all relevant bat samples, along with parallel samples sent to other labs, lab workers were not the first who were sick, and there's genetic evidence that the virus did not originate in Wuhan. Dr. Duehr links to a reference that talks about the cleavage site [1], which concluded that "Acquisition of the furin cleavage site might be viewed as a ‘gain of function’ that enabled a bat CoV to jump into humans and begin its current epidemic spread" [0] https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did_not_come_from_the_wuhan_institute_of/fqpccr1/ https://old.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/covid19_did... [1] https://www.virology.ws/2020/02/13/furin-cleavage-site-in-the-sars-cov-2-coronavirus-glycoprotein/ https://www.virology.ws/2020/02/13/furin-cleavage-site-in-th...
  - dqv 5y ago
    Shi herself says that WIV isn't solely a BSL-4 lab and that coronaviruses were handled in BSL-2 prior to the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak [0]. The idea that SARS-CoV-2 couldn't have "grown" (again: ignore intentionality) in the lab shouldn't be discounted. I'm also skeptical of other virologists sticking up for WIV due to social pressure. It would be detrimental to virology everywhere if virologists started giving credence to this idea that samples in the lab may not have been handled perfectly. It's a natural social response to try to defend your profession. What we do have records of is that Shi was researching RaTG13, the closest ancestor we know of to SARS-CoV-2 [1]. A question I want to find the answer to is how samples assumed to have low risk of infectivity to humans were being handled. [0]: https://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/Shi%20Zhengli%20Q%26A.pdf https://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/Shi%20Zhengli... [1]: https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/03/08/josh-rogin-chaos-under-heaven-wuhan-lab-book-excerpt-474322 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2021/03/08/josh-rogin...