4 ms·

Updated Assessment on COVID-19 Origins: https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Declassified-Assessment-on-COVID-19-Origins.pdf https://www.dni.gov

by spzx 5y ago

Updated Assessment on COVID-19 Origins: https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Declassified-Assessment-on-COVID-19-Origins.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/Declass...

simonh 5y ago
Short version - until we find a candidate progenitor virus in an animal population, which enables us to work out a likely route of transmission to humans, we don't have enough information to know.
- garmaine 5y ago
  Which we won’t it it was bred in a lab. Hence, we won’t know.
  - simonh 5y ago
    Even if it was bred in a lab, it must have been bred from something. That version of the virus can't be massively different from Cov-19.
    - diamondo25 5y ago
      So you could say that this virus is kind of alien[1]? [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alien https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alien
    - guilhas 5y ago
      In the Fauci emails, a reply from a scientist, in the beginning of the pandemic, states a "recipe" on how the virus could have been changed in a lab
      - scotty79 5y ago
        They probably meant RNA code of the virus. Since if you know it you can produce it in a lab and introduce it into cells and they will manufacture functional copies of the virus. It's not a recipe to create virus in a lab. It's a recipe to manufacture copies of the virus in a lab.
        drran 5y ago
        SARS CoV grows on VERO substrate, so it's relatively easy to make mutations of the virus. Here is example for IBV CoV: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2898227/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2898227/
    - BobbyJo 5y ago
      > That version of the virus can't be massively different from Cov-19. Yes it can. Labs specifically study, and propagate, mutations. A lab can do in years what might take nature decades. If it did originate from a lab, we very likely would never find a close enough progenitor in nature to know where things started (what strain the lab started with).
      - simonh 5y ago
        We can trace mutation histories of viruses very extensively, the tools and techniques for this are now pretty sophisticated, so that's not necessarily an insurmountable obstacle. There is a probabilistic aspect to this though. If we happen to find the exact wild virus population Cov-19 originated from (whether it then mutated naturally or in a lab) then I think we'll nail it. On the other hand if we just find an adjacent population that diverged from the actual Cov-19 source some time ago it could be harder to pin down the route.
- kjaftaedi 5y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
  - lima 5y ago
    Why? The report explains the position quite well - lacking other data, finding a progenitor virus is the most likely to confirm a natural origin.
    - kjaftaedi 5y ago
      Such a premise begins with the assumption the origin is natural. Just because China refuses to cooperate (as stated by the article), does not mean that trying to find a natural cause is the only way to resolve the issue. It's a bit misleading as well as the vast majority of the agencies mentioned in the article do not believe in a natural origin. >The ODNI report said four U.S. spy agencies and a multi-agency body have "low confidence" that COVID-19 originated with an infected animal or a related virus.
      - simonh 5y ago
        >Such a premise begins with the assumption the origin is natural. Unless the virus was literally constructed using base chemicals from the ground up entirely artificially, something that as far as we know has never been done and the technology for which doesn't yet plausibly exist, the virus must have a natural progenitor from which it either evolved, was bred or was engineered. That does not exclude the possibility that the virus was engineered from a progenitor virus in a lab and is "artificial" in that sense. So yes you are technically correct (which of course is the best correct), but could you be more clear what you mean by natural, and what alternatives you think are being excluded?
        kjaftaedi 5y ago
        >could you be more clear what you mean by natural, and what alternatives you think are being excluded Natural = produced by nature We know for a fact that coronaviruses were being engineered in unsafe BSL2 lab conditions literally blocks away from the epicenter of the outbreak. With China's refusal to cooperate, they are asking you to believe that this is all merely coincidence. https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-...
- roenxi 5y ago
  Although I think, from skimming the report, there is probably enough information to say that this (1) wasn't intentional and (2) is possibly a lab leak. That is enough to say that it will probably happen again in our lifetime from an actual lab leak. We have the technology, the world is large, there are a lot of foolish researchers in it. We need to be more prepared to curtail or cease international travel.
  - ashwagary 5y ago
    If intentional, would China shoot itself in the foot by releasing a deadly virus in its own major cities and infect potentially millions/billions? Or would the US and its allies release a virus it knowingly funded (for plausible deniability) in a state it constantly calls its 'greatest adversary & threat' during the 2019 war games? One of these seems more likely than the other to an objective observer since this isn't the first time the US and its allies have engaged in chemical & bio-warfare against the Chinese. The foreign aircraft carriers and war ships surrounding the Chinese coast are perhaps yet another clue...
  - lborsato 5y ago
    It has already happened multiple times previously in our lifetime: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC403836/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC403836/
- scotty79 5y ago
  Since the next best species that the virus can spread among (apart form humans) is civets then we should probably start huge research on viruses carried by them and we'll probably find the progenitor and most likely learn a lot of interesting things along the way.
redis_mlc 5y ago
I read the report. It's missing around half the known facts (Wuhan hospitals full around Sept. 2019, Wuhan already on lockdown during Military Games, covid-19 genome had to be leaked from Australia, deleted databases, etc.)

by spzx 5y ago

simonh 5y ago

Short version - until we find a candidate progenitor virus in an animal population, which enables us to work out a likely route of transmission to humans, we don't have enough information to know.

garmaine 5y ago
Which we won’t it it was bred in a lab. Hence, we won’t know.
- simonh 5y ago
  Even if it was bred in a lab, it must have been bred from something. That version of the virus can't be massively different from Cov-19.
  - diamondo25 5y ago
    So you could say that this virus is kind of alien[1]? [1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alien https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/alien
  - guilhas 5y ago
    In the Fauci emails, a reply from a scientist, in the beginning of the pandemic, states a "recipe" on how the virus could have been changed in a lab
    - scotty79 5y ago
      They probably meant RNA code of the virus. Since if you know it you can produce it in a lab and introduce it into cells and they will manufacture functional copies of the virus. It's not a recipe to create virus in a lab. It's a recipe to manufacture copies of the virus in a lab.
      - drran 5y ago
        SARS CoV grows on VERO substrate, so it's relatively easy to make mutations of the virus. Here is example for IBV CoV: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2898227/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2898227/
  - BobbyJo 5y ago
    > That version of the virus can't be massively different from Cov-19. Yes it can. Labs specifically study, and propagate, mutations. A lab can do in years what might take nature decades. If it did originate from a lab, we very likely would never find a close enough progenitor in nature to know where things started (what strain the lab started with).
    - simonh 5y ago
      We can trace mutation histories of viruses very extensively, the tools and techniques for this are now pretty sophisticated, so that's not necessarily an insurmountable obstacle. There is a probabilistic aspect to this though. If we happen to find the exact wild virus population Cov-19 originated from (whether it then mutated naturally or in a lab) then I think we'll nail it. On the other hand if we just find an adjacent population that diverged from the actual Cov-19 source some time ago it could be harder to pin down the route.
kjaftaedi 5y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
- lima 5y ago
  Why? The report explains the position quite well - lacking other data, finding a progenitor virus is the most likely to confirm a natural origin.
  - kjaftaedi 5y ago
    Such a premise begins with the assumption the origin is natural. Just because China refuses to cooperate (as stated by the article), does not mean that trying to find a natural cause is the only way to resolve the issue. It's a bit misleading as well as the vast majority of the agencies mentioned in the article do not believe in a natural origin. >The ODNI report said four U.S. spy agencies and a multi-agency body have "low confidence" that COVID-19 originated with an infected animal or a related virus.
    - simonh 5y ago
      >Such a premise begins with the assumption the origin is natural. Unless the virus was literally constructed using base chemicals from the ground up entirely artificially, something that as far as we know has never been done and the technology for which doesn't yet plausibly exist, the virus must have a natural progenitor from which it either evolved, was bred or was engineered. That does not exclude the possibility that the virus was engineered from a progenitor virus in a lab and is "artificial" in that sense. So yes you are technically correct (which of course is the best correct), but could you be more clear what you mean by natural, and what alternatives you think are being excluded?
      - kjaftaedi 5y ago
        >could you be more clear what you mean by natural, and what alternatives you think are being excluded Natural = produced by nature We know for a fact that coronaviruses were being engineered in unsafe BSL2 lab conditions literally blocks away from the epicenter of the outbreak. With China's refusal to cooperate, they are asking you to believe that this is all merely coincidence. https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-...
roenxi 5y ago
Although I think, from skimming the report, there is probably enough information to say that this (1) wasn't intentional and (2) is possibly a lab leak. That is enough to say that it will probably happen again in our lifetime from an actual lab leak. We have the technology, the world is large, there are a lot of foolish researchers in it. We need to be more prepared to curtail or cease international travel.
- ashwagary 5y ago
  If intentional, would China shoot itself in the foot by releasing a deadly virus in its own major cities and infect potentially millions/billions? Or would the US and its allies release a virus it knowingly funded (for plausible deniability) in a state it constantly calls its 'greatest adversary & threat' during the 2019 war games? One of these seems more likely than the other to an objective observer since this isn't the first time the US and its allies have engaged in chemical & bio-warfare against the Chinese. The foreign aircraft carriers and war ships surrounding the Chinese coast are perhaps yet another clue...
- lborsato 5y ago
  It has already happened multiple times previously in our lifetime: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC403836/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC403836/
scotty79 5y ago
Since the next best species that the virus can spread among (apart form humans) is civets then we should probably start huge research on viruses carried by them and we'll probably find the progenitor and most likely learn a lot of interesting things along the way.

redis_mlc 5y ago

I read the report. It's missing around half the known facts (Wuhan hospitals full around Sept. 2019, Wuhan already on lockdown during Military Games, covid-19 genome had to be leaked from Australia, deleted databases, etc.)