4 ms·

I wrote a long post in reply to this, but HN lost it :( :( I feel that people are over-simplifying this issue greatly on both sides in this thread. Basically,

by notJim 5y ago

I wrote a long post in reply to this, but HN lost it :( :( I feel that people are over-simplifying this issue greatly on both sides in this thread. Basically, it seems like the definition of GoF is not totally agreed upon even by top scientists. A lot hinges on intent/expectations, but of course scientists can't perfectly predict what will happen with these experiments. It seems like the research referenced was not "GoF" research in the sense that it wasn't intended or predicted to cause GoF. But at the same time, going back to even 2015, there was criticism that this research was risky, even if it technically was not GoF research. Some scientists also seem to think we should be doing more GoF research to learn more before the next pandemic. These are the links I read, both of which I thought were pretty even-handed. For the record, I often think fact checking sites present totally biased nonsense, but in this case it seemed okay. https://www.factcheck.org/2021/05/the-wuhan-lab-and-the-gain-of-function-disagreement/ https://www.factcheck.org/2021/05/the-wuhan-lab-and-the-gain... Thread from an MIT researcher quoted in the article: https://twitter.com/Ayjchan/status/1370880584936001541 https://twitter.com/Ayjchan/status/1370880584936001541

lamontcg 5y ago
You still don't get SARS-CoV-2 out of any of the experiments they were doing. The experiments that have been done on chimeric viruses have been using SARS-CoV-1 or the SARS-CoV-1-presumed-progentor WIV1. RaTG13 is still 30-40 years worth of evolution away from being a SARS-CoV-2 backbone and you can't get it from randomly bolting on different hACE2 binding proteins to a RaTG13 backbone. And while the pangolin spike is closest to SARS-CoV-2 it is still not a perfect match. So they were creating chimeras from a spike they found that was similar to the pangolin spike but has never been published. And they were combining that with a backbone that they found that was RaTG13-like but similarly has never been published. Even though their prior targets have been SARS-CoV-1 and WIV1 backbones, and they skipped over RaTG13, which would have been of more interest to study because of its association with the miners, to select an RaTG13-like backone of an unpublished virus. And then presumably they did all this in HELA cell lines expressing human ACE2 and did serial passage / gain of function so it became well adapted. Then even if you have all this happen, you somehow need to get that virus up someone's nose. Because petri dishes don't cough. And we know that SARS-CoV-2 doesn't spread pretty much at all from surfaces. And you need to get a sufficient infectious dose. So someone had a party in the lab and decided to chop up a dish of proto-SARS-CoV-2 cultures and rail a line of it like it was coke or something. Or, nature does chimeric (recombination) gain of function experiments all the time, and every confined animal farm in China is a bioreactor in a lab doing stochastic serial passage experiments with "lab workers" who have never even heard of biosafety levels. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.22.427830v3 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.22.427830v3 https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(21)00709-1.pdf https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(21)00709-1.pdf https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/science/covid-lab-leak-fauci-kristian-andersen.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/science/covid-lab-leak-fa... https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/world/asia/china-covid-wuhan-lab-leak.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/world/asia/china-covid-wu... At least everyone seems to have stopped yapping about furin cleavage sites this time.
- ketamine__ 5y ago
  Your comment contradicts your previous comment. > There's no indication WIV was doing any gain of function research.
  - lamontcg 5y ago
    No it doesn't.
    - ketamine__ 5y ago
      https://mobile.twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/1405239128053227525 https://mobile.twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/14052391280532... > The work met--unequivocally--the definition of gain-of-function research of concern under the 2014 Pause.

by notJim 5y ago

lamontcg 5y ago

You still don't get SARS-CoV-2 out of any of the experiments they were doing. The experiments that have been done on chimeric viruses have been using SARS-CoV-1 or the SARS-CoV-1-presumed-progentor WIV1. RaTG13 is still 30-40 years worth of evolution away from being a SARS-CoV-2 backbone and you can't get it from randomly bolting on different hACE2 binding proteins to a RaTG13 backbone. And while the pangolin spike is closest to SARS-CoV-2 it is still not a perfect match. So they were creating chimeras from a spike they found that was similar to the pangolin spike but has never been published. And they were combining that with a backbone that they found that was RaTG13-like but similarly has never been published. Even though their prior targets have been SARS-CoV-1 and WIV1 backbones, and they skipped over RaTG13, which would have been of more interest to study because of its association with the miners, to select an RaTG13-like backone of an unpublished virus. And then presumably they did all this in HELA cell lines expressing human ACE2 and did serial passage / gain of function so it became well adapted. Then even if you have all this happen, you somehow need to get that virus up someone's nose. Because petri dishes don't cough. And we know that SARS-CoV-2 doesn't spread pretty much at all from surfaces. And you need to get a sufficient infectious dose. So someone had a party in the lab and decided to chop up a dish of proto-SARS-CoV-2 cultures and rail a line of it like it was coke or something. Or, nature does chimeric (recombination) gain of function experiments all the time, and every confined animal farm in China is a bioreactor in a lab doing stochastic serial passage experiments with "lab workers" who have never even heard of biosafety levels. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.22.427830v3 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.22.427830v3 https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(21)00709-1.pdf https://www.cell.com/cell/pdf/S0092-8674(21)00709-1.pdf https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/science/covid-lab-leak-fauci-kristian-andersen.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/science/covid-lab-leak-fa... https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/world/asia/china-covid-wuhan-lab-leak.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/world/asia/china-covid-wu... At least everyone seems to have stopped yapping about furin cleavage sites this time.

ketamine__ 5y ago
Your comment contradicts your previous comment. > There's no indication WIV was doing any gain of function research.
- lamontcg 5y ago
  No it doesn't.
  - ketamine__ 5y ago
    https://mobile.twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/1405239128053227525 https://mobile.twitter.com/R_H_Ebright/status/14052391280532... > The work met--unequivocally--the definition of gain-of-function research of concern under the 2014 Pause.