4 ms·

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 d

by 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.
  - DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
    They didn't delete RaTG13. The WIV published a Nature article describing RaTG13 in early 2020, identifying it as the (then) closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2. Far from destroying or hiding data, the WIV is the institute that publicized the existence and highlighted the importance of RaTG13.
lamontcg 5y ago
RaTG13 is decades of evolution away from SARS-CoV-2. You don't get from RaTG13 in 2018 to SARS-CoV-2 in late 2019 in a lab or in nature. You don't get that from serial passage and you don't get that from gain of function in a lab, or any kind of lab created chimera. You get it from serial passage over decades of time through probably hundreds of millions of animals in a natural gain of function experiment.
- ratg13 5y ago
  RATG13 was brought back to the lab in 2015. Sars-CoV-2 was more or less stable when it emerged into human populations, indicating it was already adapted to humans or humanized animals, and none of hundreds of millions of wild animals that could have brought this about have been found. We can handwave all this away, but it makes me uncomfortable.
  - lamontcg 5y ago
    You don't get adapted to human via spreading through hACE2 expressing mice. You get adapted to humans via serial passage through humans. > none of hundreds of millions of wild animals that could have brought this about have been found. Based on the headline article it sounds to me like China has found them but they're not releasing that information publicly. It is probably an important factory farmed animal in China and they do not want to shut down the trade or have international pressure force them to shut down the trade. It may be as politically attractive to them as the idea that Obama should have shut down pig farming and ban bacon and pork chops if the 2009 H1N1 pandemic had been 10 or 100 times worse.
    - philliphaydon 5y ago
      Prob shouldn’t be eating meat from China anyway. Due to the lack of regulations the animals are not given vaccines and such to prevent known illnesses in livestock. Tho there was an article a few years ago which said this is changing, some farms are now taking the hit on cost to vaccine their livestock as people are avoiding the meat in favour of imported meat for safety.

by ratg13 5y ago

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.
- DiogenesKynikos 5y ago
  They didn't delete RaTG13. The WIV published a Nature article describing RaTG13 in early 2020, identifying it as the (then) closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2. Far from destroying or hiding data, the WIV is the institute that publicized the existence and highlighted the importance of RaTG13.

lamontcg 5y ago

RaTG13 is decades of evolution away from SARS-CoV-2. You don't get from RaTG13 in 2018 to SARS-CoV-2 in late 2019 in a lab or in nature. You don't get that from serial passage and you don't get that from gain of function in a lab, or any kind of lab created chimera. You get it from serial passage over decades of time through probably hundreds of millions of animals in a natural gain of function experiment.

ratg13 5y ago
RATG13 was brought back to the lab in 2015. Sars-CoV-2 was more or less stable when it emerged into human populations, indicating it was already adapted to humans or humanized animals, and none of hundreds of millions of wild animals that could have brought this about have been found. We can handwave all this away, but it makes me uncomfortable.
- lamontcg 5y ago
  You don't get adapted to human via spreading through hACE2 expressing mice. You get adapted to humans via serial passage through humans. > none of hundreds of millions of wild animals that could have brought this about have been found. Based on the headline article it sounds to me like China has found them but they're not releasing that information publicly. It is probably an important factory farmed animal in China and they do not want to shut down the trade or have international pressure force them to shut down the trade. It may be as politically attractive to them as the idea that Obama should have shut down pig farming and ban bacon and pork chops if the 2009 H1N1 pandemic had been 10 or 100 times worse.
  - philliphaydon 5y ago
    Prob shouldn’t be eating meat from China anyway. Due to the lack of regulations the animals are not given vaccines and such to prevent known illnesses in livestock. Tho there was an article a few years ago which said this is changing, some farms are now taking the hit on cost to vaccine their livestock as people are avoiding the meat in favour of imported meat for safety.