6 ms·

> If it was sequenced in early 2020, it may have been contaminated from experiments carried out by researchers trying to learn more about the emerging virus. T

> If it was sequenced in early 2020, it may have been contaminated from experiments carried out by researchers trying to learn more about the emerging virus. That seems like--by far--the most probable explanation. I'm not even sure if it would need to have been researchers studying Covid--it could just have been that the technician handling the samples was infected and contaminated the samples accidentally, or that the equipment had previously been used with samples unknowingly contaminated with Covid. In fact, that could have been the case even if it was sequenced in December 2019, since Covid was already spreading in the population at that time.

323 5y ago
The interesting part is that this sample sequence seems more ancient than the most ancient one made public by China so far.
- jacknews 5y ago
  Exactly, maybe I'm missing something, but how could this be a result of testing the virus once it had spread, unless these samples represent a virus that reverted back to an intermediate stage.
actually_a_dog 5y ago
Yes, and that's supported (albeit weakly) by the fact that 3 researchers at the Wuhan lab became sick with flu-like symptoms in November 2019: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210524/wuhan-lab-researchers-illness https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210524/wuhan-lab-researche...
- snickerbockers 5y ago
  That doesn't necessarily mean anything, I also became sick with flu-like symptoms in November 2019. 3 people could very well be one guy showing up to work when he should've called in sick and then coughing at a meeting.
- weaksauce 5y ago
  > 3 researchers at the Wuhan lab became sick with flu-like symptoms in November 2019 So 3 out of 300 researchers probably got the flu during flu season? is that low or high for a typical facility of 300 people during flu season? (300 as of 2014 maybe more now? https://www.nature.com/articles/nj0447 https://www.nature.com/articles/nj0447) > He said the lab was “very well-run” and the researchers didn’t show evidence of COVID-19 antibodies. That counters the assertion that it was covid. Let's pretend that they did in fact have covid and the antibody tests were wrong or they are lying. Is it that surprising that they would get it if it was the ground 0 for covid which spread like wildfire there regardless of original origin?
  - tzs 5y ago
    I think people imagine that the way virus research labs work is that when you start a research program you go into the lab, and then you stay in the lab 24/7 until your research is done, having no contact with people other than fellow researchers working on the same project. When your research is done, you go through decontamination and quarantine before being let out. In reality, of course, it is like most other jobs. You arrive in the morning, work for the day, and go home. You break for lunch. Maybe you have lunch in a lunch room or cafeteria the employer provides, maybe you go out. In either case you are around plenty of other people. Your chances of getting colds and flu during cold and flu season as a worker at a virus lab or about the same as the chances of any other worker at a similar sized white collar job in the same city.
- roywiggins 5y ago
  I guess the real question is, how many came down with flu symptoms in November 2018? Or 2017?
  - phyalow 5y ago
    Or how many were deleted from the Wuhan institutes website and memory-holed permanently. Look up Huang Yanling a WIV researcher who dissapeared off the face of the earth in December 2019. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/covid-19-coronavirus-wuhan-virus-lab-scientist-thought-to-be-patient-zero-still-missing/VA4TIO726U7P36ZQG2WLHDDTNA/ https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/covid-19-coronavirus-wuhan-...
api 5y ago
Here's what I wonder: what if the people associated with the Wuhan lab don't even know if it was a lab leak? What if they couldn't even prove it was if it was, or vice versa? That could explain a rush to downplay a lab leak too. It wouldn't be "oh crap we leaked a deadly virus." It would be "oh crap... wait... did we leak a deadly virus?" followed by over a year of them quietly attempting to figure out what happened and not being sure. One of the things I've learned in this life is: never assume malice when stupidity, ignorance, or carelessness is a sufficient explanation. Maybe they don't know if it was leaked because they didn't keep clear records or a complete history of samples. Of course this is almost scarier: the idea that we are doing GOF research that's dangerous in such a way that it could blow up without us really even knowing what happened. At least if a chemical plant or nuclear reactor blows up it's obvious what blew up.
- eklitzke 5y ago
  If it was a lab leak, presumably the people at the Wuhan lab would have DNA sequences on the coronavirus strains they were experimenting with. Even if they weren't doing this on a regular basis one would have to imagine that they would have inventoried and sequenced the coronavirus samples they had in their lab soon after COVID-19 was identified in the public.
  - dada78641 5y ago
    This is what I always found difficult to reconcile with the idea of it being a lab leak. We know what viruses the lab was working with, and SARS-CoV-2 wasn't one of them. If the outbreak came from their lab, why was the virus completely unknown to them? It's a science institute that was openly publishing its findings like any other. It couldn't have been pre-emptively covered up either, unless they knew ahead of time this virus was going to leak (that is to say, they leaked it intentionally) and then we're no longer in reality. Maybe there's something I'm missing, and please explain it to me if you can, but with that in mind I never quite got how the lab leak idea can add up.
    - tripletao 5y ago
ratg13 5y ago
RATG13 was sequenced in 2018. The only place this virus was emerging, was in a lab. Even if this were true and they were studying covid post-outbreak, where did all of their samples of these precursor viruses go? And why are they covering them up?
- derbOac 5y ago
  The idea that in 2020 maybe they were continuing to conduct GOF research on SARS-CoV-2, with everything going on, and then being so sloppy as to infect antarctic soil samples is better... I guess? I'd think the nature of the three mutations in between circulating virus and bat coronavirus maybe lowers the odds of it being postpandemic but maybe not.
  - ratg13 5y ago
    I am not implying GOF at all, please don't twist my words. I am merely pointing out that if you were to study the virus after it emerged, you would be studying SarsCoV2. If the lab were working with a precursor to the virus (in any fashion), it is perfectly reasonable to question where that sample came from.
- ImaCake 5y ago
  Does your single-issue account mean to suggest that sequencing a close-ish relative of COVID in 2018 means they were growing it in a lab? I can‘t think of a good explanation that would link sequencing to lab experiments. RATG13 is 96% similar to Sars-cov-2 which means there is a staggering 1200 mutations between them. For reference, Delta and Omicron are both about 40-70 mutations away from OG Sars-COV-2. And that‘s after 2 very good years for Sars-COV-2 evolution!
  - ratg13 5y ago
    My username is just a coincidence. I create a new account every few months and I've never used this one to discuss this topic. The only points I am trying to get across are (1) This lab was working with a precursor to the virus we know and it's perfectly reasonable to ask where the sample came from (2) The fact that they deleted this sequence and also RATG13 and others leads one to believe that these aren't innocent mistakes and are worth investigating further to determine why they are going to such lengths to destroy data.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
notahacker 5y ago
The original paper, which is more informative and less spin-heavy, suggests an infected technician or PCR test of a virus sample were relatively unlikely to be the source. It also suggests there were likely samples taken from at least three different infected hosts, one of which was a southeast Asian human and two of which are common lab animals and cell cultures known to have been used for published studies of SARS-COV-2. This is of course consistent with a novel virus discovered in humans being tested in animal cell cultures (whether before China had publicly acknowledged COVID-19, or in January when it was publicly disclosed and it's known that SARS-COV-2 being studied in animal cell cultures) as well as the more sensational scenario https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1330800/v1 https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1330800/v1

323 5y ago

The interesting part is that this sample sequence seems more ancient than the most ancient one made public by China so far.

jacknews 5y ago
Exactly, maybe I'm missing something, but how could this be a result of testing the virus once it had spread, unless these samples represent a virus that reverted back to an intermediate stage.

actually_a_dog 5y ago

Yes, and that's supported (albeit weakly) by the fact that 3 researchers at the Wuhan lab became sick with flu-like symptoms in November 2019: https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210524/wuhan-lab-researchers-illness https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210524/wuhan-lab-researche...

snickerbockers 5y ago
That doesn't necessarily mean anything, I also became sick with flu-like symptoms in November 2019. 3 people could very well be one guy showing up to work when he should've called in sick and then coughing at a meeting.
weaksauce 5y ago
> 3 researchers at the Wuhan lab became sick with flu-like symptoms in November 2019 So 3 out of 300 researchers probably got the flu during flu season? is that low or high for a typical facility of 300 people during flu season? (300 as of 2014 maybe more now? https://www.nature.com/articles/nj0447 https://www.nature.com/articles/nj0447) > He said the lab was “very well-run” and the researchers didn’t show evidence of COVID-19 antibodies. That counters the assertion that it was covid. Let's pretend that they did in fact have covid and the antibody tests were wrong or they are lying. Is it that surprising that they would get it if it was the ground 0 for covid which spread like wildfire there regardless of original origin?
- tzs 5y ago
  I think people imagine that the way virus research labs work is that when you start a research program you go into the lab, and then you stay in the lab 24/7 until your research is done, having no contact with people other than fellow researchers working on the same project. When your research is done, you go through decontamination and quarantine before being let out. In reality, of course, it is like most other jobs. You arrive in the morning, work for the day, and go home. You break for lunch. Maybe you have lunch in a lunch room or cafeteria the employer provides, maybe you go out. In either case you are around plenty of other people. Your chances of getting colds and flu during cold and flu season as a worker at a virus lab or about the same as the chances of any other worker at a similar sized white collar job in the same city.
roywiggins 5y ago
I guess the real question is, how many came down with flu symptoms in November 2018? Or 2017?
- phyalow 5y ago
  Or how many were deleted from the Wuhan institutes website and memory-holed permanently. Look up Huang Yanling a WIV researcher who dissapeared off the face of the earth in December 2019. https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/covid-19-coronavirus-wuhan-virus-lab-scientist-thought-to-be-patient-zero-still-missing/VA4TIO726U7P36ZQG2WLHDDTNA/ https://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/covid-19-coronavirus-wuhan-...

api 5y ago

Here's what I wonder: what if the people associated with the Wuhan lab don't even know if it was a lab leak? What if they couldn't even prove it was if it was, or vice versa? That could explain a rush to downplay a lab leak too. It wouldn't be "oh crap we leaked a deadly virus." It would be "oh crap... wait... did we leak a deadly virus?" followed by over a year of them quietly attempting to figure out what happened and not being sure. One of the things I've learned in this life is: never assume malice when stupidity, ignorance, or carelessness is a sufficient explanation. Maybe they don't know if it was leaked because they didn't keep clear records or a complete history of samples. Of course this is almost scarier: the idea that we are doing GOF research that's dangerous in such a way that it could blow up without us really even knowing what happened. At least if a chemical plant or nuclear reactor blows up it's obvious what blew up.

eklitzke 5y ago
If it was a lab leak, presumably the people at the Wuhan lab would have DNA sequences on the coronavirus strains they were experimenting with. Even if they weren't doing this on a regular basis one would have to imagine that they would have inventoried and sequenced the coronavirus samples they had in their lab soon after COVID-19 was identified in the public.
- dada78641 5y ago
  This is what I always found difficult to reconcile with the idea of it being a lab leak. We know what viruses the lab was working with, and SARS-CoV-2 wasn't one of them. If the outbreak came from their lab, why was the virus completely unknown to them? It's a science institute that was openly publishing its findings like any other. It couldn't have been pre-emptively covered up either, unless they knew ahead of time this virus was going to leak (that is to say, they leaked it intentionally) and then we're no longer in reality. Maybe there's something I'm missing, and please explain it to me if you can, but with that in mind I never quite got how the lab leak idea can add up.
  - tripletao 5y ago

ratg13 5y ago

RATG13 was sequenced in 2018. The only place this virus was emerging, was in a lab. Even if this were true and they were studying covid post-outbreak, where did all of their samples of these precursor viruses go? And why are they covering them up?

derbOac 5y ago
The idea that in 2020 maybe they were continuing to conduct GOF research on SARS-CoV-2, with everything going on, and then being so sloppy as to infect antarctic soil samples is better... I guess? I'd think the nature of the three mutations in between circulating virus and bat coronavirus maybe lowers the odds of it being postpandemic but maybe not.
- ratg13 5y ago
  I am not implying GOF at all, please don't twist my words. I am merely pointing out that if you were to study the virus after it emerged, you would be studying SarsCoV2. If the lab were working with a precursor to the virus (in any fashion), it is perfectly reasonable to question where that sample came from.
ImaCake 5y ago
Does your single-issue account mean to suggest that sequencing a close-ish relative of COVID in 2018 means they were growing it in a lab? I can‘t think of a good explanation that would link sequencing to lab experiments. RATG13 is 96% similar to Sars-cov-2 which means there is a staggering 1200 mutations between them. For reference, Delta and Omicron are both about 40-70 mutations away from OG Sars-COV-2. And that‘s after 2 very good years for Sars-COV-2 evolution!
- ratg13 5y ago
  My username is just a coincidence. I create a new account every few months and I've never used this one to discuss this topic. The only points I am trying to get across are (1) This lab was working with a precursor to the virus we know and it's perfectly reasonable to ask where the sample came from (2) The fact that they deleted this sequence and also RATG13 and others leads one to believe that these aren't innocent mistakes and are worth investigating further to determine why they are going to such lengths to destroy data.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

notahacker 5y ago

The original paper, which is more informative and less spin-heavy, suggests an infected technician or PCR test of a virus sample were relatively unlikely to be the source. It also suggests there were likely samples taken from at least three different infected hosts, one of which was a southeast Asian human and two of which are common lab animals and cell cultures known to have been used for published studies of SARS-COV-2. This is of course consistent with a novel virus discovered in humans being tested in animal cell cultures (whether before China had publicly acknowledged COVID-19, or in January when it was publicly disclosed and it's known that SARS-COV-2 being studied in animal cell cultures) as well as the more sensational scenario https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1330800/v1 https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1330800/v1