3 ms·

It's worth noting that the paper this article is based on is somewhat contested. For example "There are several serious flaws with their findings and interpret

It's worth noting that the paper this article is based on is somewhat contested. For example "There are several serious flaws with their findings and interpretation." [1] "The authors’ misinterpretation of MJNs fosters misconceptions, inaccuracies, and misrepresentations of fundamental phylogenetic principles."[2] [1] https://www.pnas.org/content/117/23/12522 https://www.pnas.org/content/117/23/12522 [2] https://www.pnas.org/content/117/23/12518 https://www.pnas.org/content/117/23/12518

mikem170 5y ago
Thank you for those links. I appreciate the new inputs. ("Sampling bias and incorrect rooting make phylogenetic network tracing of SARS-COV-2 infections unreliable" and "Median-joining network analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genomes is neither phylogenetic nor evolutionary") Do you think that these conflict with the statement Forster made that "I would be a bit careful about pinpointing a place (of origin), because we don't have many samples from the early phase," he says. "But it seems to me we shouldn't restrict ourselves to Wuhan when looking for the origin." [0]. They did have a variety of samples, enough to throw doubt on where the origin was, right? I brought this up just to point out that it is not a foregone conclusion that Wuhan was the location of the first covid-19 cases in humans. Do you think that is an incorrect statement? [0] https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-05-13/scientist-suggests-coronavirus-originated-outside-of-wuhan https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-05-...
- codewench 5y ago
  I believe it's worth continued study, however my understanding is that the Chinese government has been somewhat reluctant to allow these sorts of studies to occur. Personally I'm suspecting an accidental leak of non-engineered (eg, naturally occurring) virus is the most likely cause, if only due to the actions of the CCP. That said, I'm an engineer and have no training in virology or infectious disease studies, so my opinion is basically worthless.
  - mikem170 5y ago
    The original article pointed out that the Chinese were sercretive about SARS also, referncing this NYTimes article [0]. It seems like an interesting leap to assume the lab leak is the most likely cause, when there is so much precedent for natural spillover, even antibody sampling which seem to indicate that millions of people per year may be catching various coronaviruses from bats [1], let alone other mammals like civits, pangolins, etc. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/13/weekinreview/china-discovers-secrecy-is-expensive.html https://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/13/weekinreview/china-discov... [1] https://www.vox.com/2020/4/23/21226484/wuhan-lab-coronavirus-china https://www.vox.com/2020/4/23/21226484/wuhan-lab-coronavirus...

mikem170 5y ago

Thank you for those links. I appreciate the new inputs. ("Sampling bias and incorrect rooting make phylogenetic network tracing of SARS-COV-2 infections unreliable" and "Median-joining network analysis of SARS-CoV-2 genomes is neither phylogenetic nor evolutionary") Do you think that these conflict with the statement Forster made that "I would be a bit careful about pinpointing a place (of origin), because we don't have many samples from the early phase," he says. "But it seems to me we shouldn't restrict ourselves to Wuhan when looking for the origin." [0]. They did have a variety of samples, enough to throw doubt on where the origin was, right? I brought this up just to point out that it is not a foregone conclusion that Wuhan was the location of the first covid-19 cases in humans. Do you think that is an incorrect statement? [0] https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-05-13/scientist-suggests-coronavirus-originated-outside-of-wuhan https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-05-...

codewench 5y ago
I believe it's worth continued study, however my understanding is that the Chinese government has been somewhat reluctant to allow these sorts of studies to occur. Personally I'm suspecting an accidental leak of non-engineered (eg, naturally occurring) virus is the most likely cause, if only due to the actions of the CCP. That said, I'm an engineer and have no training in virology or infectious disease studies, so my opinion is basically worthless.
- mikem170 5y ago
  The original article pointed out that the Chinese were sercretive about SARS also, referncing this NYTimes article [0]. It seems like an interesting leap to assume the lab leak is the most likely cause, when there is so much precedent for natural spillover, even antibody sampling which seem to indicate that millions of people per year may be catching various coronaviruses from bats [1], let alone other mammals like civits, pangolins, etc. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/13/weekinreview/china-discovers-secrecy-is-expensive.html https://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/13/weekinreview/china-discov... [1] https://www.vox.com/2020/4/23/21226484/wuhan-lab-coronavirus-china https://www.vox.com/2020/4/23/21226484/wuhan-lab-coronavirus...