4 ms·
You have two #1's, and 2 #2's, so it's a bit hard to respond to any of those clearly. I will first address the second #1, and note that your point is very har
by hcknwscommenter 5y ago
You have two #1's, and 2 #2's, so it's a bit hard to respond to any of those clearly.
I will first address the second #1, and note that your point is very hard to understand here. COVID-19 has been found in multiple places "in the wild." It's been found in racoon dogs, which were known to be sold at the Wuhan wet market. It even seems to be endemic in certain geographic areas of the U.S. deer population now, which makes me think this thing is never going away.
Regarding your point #3, I think 100s of miles for an animal reservoir of a closely related virus, where the animal is capable of flight, is not so far?
Regarding your point #4, I just don't get it. Yes, we don't know who patient zero is. Are you trying to imply that patient zero is being obfuscated by the government for some nefarious reason?
Regarding your first point #1, as a (former) protein engineer, I can assure you that viral engineering is just not a thing. It is not currently possible according to the brightest minds to just engineer a virus to have any particular infectious biological behavior in a host. Generally, we can engineer viruses to knockout core functions and thereby weaken them or render them non-replicative or non-infective. Sometimes we can engineer viruses to change their tropism (the cells they infect). But taking say a bat virus and combining with a different virus (SARS?), adding a few key mutations, and ending up with a weapon or something is just science fiction.
Could we use directed evolution? Maybe, but you can't just apply some sort of selective pressure in a cell culture that is applicable to actual human infectivity/morbidity/etc.
IMO The only "lab leak" hypothesis that makes any sense at all, was that someone just **ked up, the dice rolled horribly badly (like the worst outcome out of 10^64 possible outcomes), and it all went pear shaped. But it's a lot more likely an infected racoon dog at the wet market scratched or breathed on someone.
- dnautics 5y ago> IMO The only "lab leak" hypothesis that makes any sense at all, was that someone just *ked up, the dice rolled horribly badly (like the worst outcome out of 10^64 possible outcomes), and it all went pear shaped. This is really not that unlikely. Probably someone designed something like 2^10-ish different recombinant grafts from related coronaviruses, with various design parameters, and the selective pressure was "oh it was actually infectious enough to infect the careless postdoc pulling the 100 hour workweek". Surely 1 out of 2^10 is likely to be more transmissible than the parent bat strain. These days (aka 10 years ago) with molecular biology, 2^6 is not unreasonable to do by hand, by a well-trained undergrad intern, in three months. Oh and hey... out of 2^6 we discovered one GOF with higher normalized output than its parent. Citation (disclaimer, I supervised the intern, so it's possible I'm a three-sigma-above-median intern manager): https://bmcbiochem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2091-15-10 https://bmcbiochem.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2...