3 ms·
> there is a tremendous amount of circumstantial evidence. In other words, there's literally no scientific evidence that SARS-CoV2 and the pandemic emerged as
by pcrh 2y ago
> there is a tremendous amount of circumstantial evidence.
In other words, there's literally no scientific evidence that SARS-CoV2 and the pandemic emerged as the result of lab-based activity, either malicious or accidental. This is despite huge efforts to prove so.
There is, however, a wealth of scientific evidence that SARS-CoV2 is the result of zoonotic transmission, as has been seen for similar viruses in the past (SARS, MERS), as well as for hundreds of other pathogens throughout history.
- dist-epoch 2y ago> wealth of scientific evidence that SARS-CoV2 is the result of zoonotic transmission No there isn't. Just speculation, so in the same category with the lab-leak theory. The host animal has not been found. Nor patient zero. Isn't it interesting, that in 5 years China could put out a detailed timeline of what happened, who got infected where?
- pcrh 2y agoYou're correct that the immediate host animal hasn't been found. But that problem also applies to the lab leak hypothesis, since there's no evidence in the genome of SARS-CoV2 that it is an artificial virus. It is in fact over 95% similar to similar viruses isolated in the wild. The first patients were all associated with the market, and genetic evidence shows that the virus was circulating there for weeks (at least) before the first recognized case of covid. That is consistent with what we now know, i.e. that most SARS-CoV2 infections do not lead to severe disease.