3 ms·
> 1. SARS-CoV-19 doesn't have a direct predecessor virus That we know of. We do way way too little research on viruses in animals. We may never know predecesso
by justapassenger 5y ago
> 1. SARS-CoV-19 doesn't have a direct predecessor virus
That we know of. We do way way too little research on viruses in animals. We may never know predecessor in nature, and that doesn't mean it's created in a lab. Same as the fact that we don't know how universe behaved in first moments after big bang doesn't mean that god exists.
- thu2111 5y agoThe counterargument mounted by Wade and others is that the world has been searching for such a transmission path for the last year with far greater resources than normally allocated, as obviously, China would very much like to find such a path. However no such animal has been found. The lack of any discovery despite great effort is not itself proof, as you can't prove a negative, but it does seem suggestive.
- oasisbob 5y ago> but it does seem suggestive. As pointed out by others, we don't even know who COVID's patient zero is, nor whether or not an intermediate host was even required after bats. The original SARS-CoV virus has never been isolated in animals. HIV's origins in chimps is still murky. The Spanish flu wasn't Spanish, but otherwise ... And, Ebola. ? We humans aren't owed an answer, and juxtaposed against our investigative history, I don't understand how the current state of our understanding here is suggestive of anything.