4 ms·
> All it really takes is to go and look for them They did, the closest sample is still Ra4991/RaTG13 which was found in a Wuhan mine and transported to the Wuh
by hunterb123 5y ago
> All it really takes is to go and look for them
They did, the closest sample is still Ra4991/RaTG13 which was found in a Wuhan mine and transported to the Wuhan virology lab before the outbreak.
Not aware of another confirmed sample found that is closer to SARS-CoV-2:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RaTG13 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RaTG13
- jiocrag 5y agoExactly. Parent poster is spewing a line without evidence. Please cite discoveries of respiratory viruses with “weird features” on par with SARS-cov2.
- johncena33 5y agoI think the parent poster was talikng about BANAL virus discovered in Laos, which apparently is closest to SARS-CoV2, but it doesn't have Furin Cleavage Site. > The Laos study offers insight into the origins of the pandemic, but there are still missing links, say researchers. For example, the Laos viruses don’t contain the so-called furin cleavage site on the spike protein that further aids the entry of SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses into human cells. From [1]. So yes, the claim made by the parent poster is patently false. [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02596-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02596-2
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- benpiper 5y agoIndeed. They've been looking for the intermediate host for 2 years and have not found anything close to SARS-CoV-2. Contrast that with the fact that they found the intermediate host for the first SARS within just a few months of that outbreak.
- caperfee 5y ago> Not aware of another confirmed sample found that is closer to SARS-CoV-2 Paraphrasing from this article: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02596-2 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02596-2 > BANAL-52 is 96.8% identical to SARS-CoV-2; one section in BANAL-103 and BANAL-52 could have shared an ancestor with sections of SARS-CoV-2 less than a decade ago. > RaTG13 is 96.1% identical to SARS-CoV-2 and the two viruses probably shared a common ancestor 40–70 years ago.
- hunterb123 5y ago> The results, which are not peer reviewed, have been posted on the preprint server Research Square It's a CCP propaganda piece. I find that "study" pretty fishy, the results would have been easy to verify if true. Same as the CDC study they tried to use against Israel's study for natural immunity.
- mrtesthah 5y agoOnce you let ideology infiltrate your reasoning, you’re no longer doing science. Just because you don’t like the implications of a particular piece of research doesn’t mean you get to dismiss it.
- hunterb123 5y agoThat's not what I said. I said it should be easy to peer review but it hasn't been. That's a very common ask especially among HN, is it not? https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=peer%20review&sort=byPopularity&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que... From my perspective it looks dubious and the only goal is to shift attention away from the RatG13 sample.
- bmn__ 5y ago> Wuhan mine correction: Yunnan mine It is exceedingly important that you get all facts right. Much depends on this.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- hunterb123 5y agoSorry yes, typo. Thank you! Very important because it was transported across the country to the lab. If it was natural the outbreak would be in and between Yunnan and Wuhan, not Wuhan as the epicenter.