3 ms·

>It wasn't uniquely adapted to humans in the beginning. Seems wrong. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-92388-5#Abs1 https://www.nature.com/articles/s

by forcry 5y ago

>It wasn't uniquely adapted to humans in the beginning. Seems wrong. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-92388-5#Abs1 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-92388-5#Abs1 >Conspicuously, we found that the binding of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein was higher for human ACE2 than any other species we tested, with the ACE2 binding energy order, from highest to lowest, being human > pangolin > dog > monkey > hamster > ferret > cat > tiger > bat > civet > horse > cow > snake > mouse. >>These findings show that the earliest known SARS-CoV-2 isolates were surprisingly well adapted to bind strongly to human ACE2, helping explain its efficient human to human respiratory transmission.

scotty79 5y ago
"Overall, given the high binding energy of S protein for pangolin ACE2, the possibility of pangolins being an intermediary vector for SARS-CoV-2 cannot be excluded" There's really no wonder that virus that spreads through human population is slightly better adjusted to humans than animal species its ancestor was infecting. It's the case of water in the puddle surprised how well the puddle shape fits the water shape. What I'm saying is that this virus is sufficiently general that it can infect multiple species with high efficiency and if hamsters were more densly connected than humans it could have been a hamster pandemic before it would become human pandemic. This virus fits us well but not uniquely well.
- forcry 5y ago
  >There's really no wonder that virus that spreads through human population is slightly better adjusted to humans than animal species its ancestor was infecting. This does not make sense to me, because I think the COVID virus was pretty stable for a long time (being an RNA virus and all that, I don't know). So the idea is that it was optimally adapted during the time of the jump to humans (of course it could have got the perfect mutation right at the time of the jump, but the chances of that happening is astronomically small), and the optimal human transmission was not acquired later when it started circulating in humans. So the only way to have this happened is if it was optimized in a GoF research in a lab.
  - scotty79 5y ago
    Virus doesn't need to be perfectly adapted to infect a species. It easily infects species other than humans. It's stable but not that stable. The variant that spread out of China was already different than the variant that initially caused trouble in China. Since then we got few new variants and that's only counting the ones that spread enough for us to notice. There are no perfect things in biology. All things are just good enough. This virus was just good enough at spreading between people that given our connectivity it spread pandemically. If the virus was was somehow uniquely well adapted to humans (which it isn't) it would be still more probable that its ancestor was just an unknown human coronavirus (other than 4 that cause some common colds) that we haven't discovered yet, because it spread completely asympthomatically. And the mutation it acquired made it slightly lethal not more infectious. I don't think that happened because then why would pangolins be better suited for it than dogs, although dogs and cats being high on the list is quite curious. And I'd be careful about reasoning that if I can't imagine any other way something could happen then it must have happened exactly the way I think it happened. It's good to be aware that no matter who I am and what I know, my ignorance always exceeds my knowledge and imagination.
    - forcry 5y ago
      >Virus doesn't need to be perfectly adapted to infect a species. To be frank, no one said so. >And I'd be careful about reasoning that if I can't imagine any other way something could happen then it must have happened exactly the way I think it happened No one is doing that either. Just that the chance of alternative is astronomically small..
      - scotty79 5y ago
        That's a weird way of saying "I believe it didn't happen like that."

by forcry 5y ago

scotty79 5y ago

"Overall, given the high binding energy of S protein for pangolin ACE2, the possibility of pangolins being an intermediary vector for SARS-CoV-2 cannot be excluded" There's really no wonder that virus that spreads through human population is slightly better adjusted to humans than animal species its ancestor was infecting. It's the case of water in the puddle surprised how well the puddle shape fits the water shape. What I'm saying is that this virus is sufficiently general that it can infect multiple species with high efficiency and if hamsters were more densly connected than humans it could have been a hamster pandemic before it would become human pandemic. This virus fits us well but not uniquely well.

forcry 5y ago
>There's really no wonder that virus that spreads through human population is slightly better adjusted to humans than animal species its ancestor was infecting. This does not make sense to me, because I think the COVID virus was pretty stable for a long time (being an RNA virus and all that, I don't know). So the idea is that it was optimally adapted during the time of the jump to humans (of course it could have got the perfect mutation right at the time of the jump, but the chances of that happening is astronomically small), and the optimal human transmission was not acquired later when it started circulating in humans. So the only way to have this happened is if it was optimized in a GoF research in a lab.
- scotty79 5y ago
  Virus doesn't need to be perfectly adapted to infect a species. It easily infects species other than humans. It's stable but not that stable. The variant that spread out of China was already different than the variant that initially caused trouble in China. Since then we got few new variants and that's only counting the ones that spread enough for us to notice. There are no perfect things in biology. All things are just good enough. This virus was just good enough at spreading between people that given our connectivity it spread pandemically. If the virus was was somehow uniquely well adapted to humans (which it isn't) it would be still more probable that its ancestor was just an unknown human coronavirus (other than 4 that cause some common colds) that we haven't discovered yet, because it spread completely asympthomatically. And the mutation it acquired made it slightly lethal not more infectious. I don't think that happened because then why would pangolins be better suited for it than dogs, although dogs and cats being high on the list is quite curious. And I'd be careful about reasoning that if I can't imagine any other way something could happen then it must have happened exactly the way I think it happened. It's good to be aware that no matter who I am and what I know, my ignorance always exceeds my knowledge and imagination.
  - forcry 5y ago
    >Virus doesn't need to be perfectly adapted to infect a species. To be frank, no one said so. >And I'd be careful about reasoning that if I can't imagine any other way something could happen then it must have happened exactly the way I think it happened No one is doing that either. Just that the chance of alternative is astronomically small..
    - scotty79 5y ago
      That's a weird way of saying "I believe it didn't happen like that."