4 ms·
From their list of the five strongest arguments for a lab leak: > 4) Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) researchers were sick with a COVID-like virus in the fal
by tzs 2y ago
From their list of the five strongest arguments for a lab leak:
> 4) Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) researchers were sick with a COVID-like virus in the fall of 2019, months before COVID-19 was discovered at the wet market.
> 5) By nearly all measures of science, if there was evidence of a natural origin it would have already surfaced.
For #4, how do you tell that from an ordinary flu? Virus researchers get the flu about as much as everyone else does and WIV employed several hundred people. Having a few of them sick at any given time is not unusual.
For #5, they are overestimating how easy it is to find origins of viruses. SARS took 5 years. The 2013 Ebola outbreak origin still hasn't been found. It took until 2016 to track down the origins of the 2009 swine flu pandemic. For novel viruses the norm to finding where they came from is between "years" and "never".
- tripletao 2y ago> For #5, they are overestimating how easy it is to find origins of viruses. SARS took 5 years. SARS-1 took about a year to find a proximal zoonotic host. The reservoir host took much longer, but the proximal host is the important part (and still hasn't been found for SARS-CoV-2). https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5241a2.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5241a2.htm You're right about Ebola and the 2009 flu. I think it's likely that SARS-CoV-2 arose from a research accident, but I don't think the COVID Select Subcommittee's arguments are very good.