4 ms·

I cited the US congress commission report[1]. It further explained in full report[2]. In short: 1) WIV proposed to modify CoV virus to infect humans in same w

I cited the US congress commission report[1]. It further explained in full report[2]. In short: 1) WIV proposed to modify CoV virus to infect humans in same way as SARS CoV2 using BSL-2 lab to save costs (see screenshot). BSL-2 means that protective masks are not required. 2) No such variation of CoV virus is found in nature. 3) Paper written by Dr. Baric and Dr. Shi which describes how to perform that insertion of furin cleavage sites into SARS CoV. So, arguments in favor of accidental leak from Chines WIH lab are strong. However, I'm biased against Russia (it saves lot of time), so I see few more arguments in favor of accidental leak from Chinese «Vector» lab in Koltsevo (Novosibirsk), which then transferred to Wuhan by Wuhan military police after shared military training with Russian military police in Koltsevo, because «Vector» BSL-4 lab had major incident (small bang and fire which broke windows, then doors are broken and equipment is stolen by Russian military looking for a fire) few weeks before that training. Paper with instructions was published, so it was open knowledge, so Russians may tried to reproduce it in preparation to the war. [1]: https://oversight.house.gov/release/final-report-covid-select-concludes-2-year-investigation-issues-500-page-final-report-on-lessons-learned-and-the-path-forward/ https://oversight.house.gov/release/final-report-covid-selec... [2]: https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2024.12.04-SSCP-FINAL-REPORT-ANS.pdf https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/2024.... [3]: https://meduza.io/en/news/2024/12/19/trump-s-ukraine-envoy-nominee-keith-kellogg-says-assassination-of-russian-general-igor-kirillov-was-not-a-good-idea-at-all https://meduza.io/en/news/2024/12/19/trump-s-ukraine-envoy-n...

__MatrixMan__ 2y ago
The trouble with the "not found in nature" business is that we have found far less than 1% of of the viral features that exist in nature. If you go pick a random subset of a randomly selected viral genome and determine its function, you're virtually guaranteed to have found something in nature which--until then--was not found in nature. We only bother doing that kind of research after a virus has started making people sick because it's expensive. It's called a spillover event and not a spillover status quo because it's new to us. To argue that it's manmade because we didn't see it coming is a gross overestimation of man's ability to make such things and of his ability to anticipate them. Even if we can glue things together that we found in nature, the threatening part is not the glue. The rest appears to be politics and has no bearing on what science might learn from COVID. Especially the first link, which reads more like a bunch of people patting their boss on the back in hopes that they don't get fired and nothing like the result of any kind of research. Nevermind their conflict of interest, what would congresspeople know about it in the first place? Some may release viruses of surprising structure on purpose or by accident, and nature does it also. That makes it relevant to understand ways to prevent and mitigate the impact of such events, but the nationalities of the people involved just doesn't impact the science in any way. I would be interested in reading the paper about the furin cleavage. Are you sure your link 3 is going to the right place?
- oneshtein 2y ago
  This article https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7836551/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7836551/ has good explanation about furin cleavage site. Basically, it just fragment of genetic code, which allows virus to fuse with human cells much more easily. It more interesting HOW this fragment get there. Recombination with an other virus is ruled out, so only 3 options are left: 1) virus evolved in an animal (none found), 2) virus evolved in a human (none found), 3) virus created in a lab (paper exists with exact instruction how to do it). Yes, third link is not correct. It just catches my attention, because if Russians did it (accidentally or not) then general Kirilov must be responsible for it, so the link between Kellog (Trump) and Kirilov (Putin) surprised me.
  - __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
    Figure 6 shows that the emergence of the site has also occurred in many of SARS-COV-2's relatives, and their positions in the family tree indicate that these were independent evolutions, not a trait passed on ancestor-wise. Do you suppose that the other such cases happened in a lab also? Or could it be that evolution favors the adaptation because it makes for a fitter virus?
    - oneshtein 2y ago
      Of course, it can be evolution of the virus like in all cases before SARS CoV2, but no animal reservoir, where this evolution happened, is found. Viruses are not alive, so evolution cannot be performed without a chain (tree) of host animals and/or humans. However, in this case, it looks like it was jump, not evolution. At one point of time we see the virus in wild without ability to easily infect humans, then at another point in time we see the almost same virus, but perfectly adapted to infect humans, and nothing between them. If this was an evolution in the wild, then thousands, maybe millions, of "almost SARS CoV2" cases should surface after years of search. They are not found, thus evolution happened in a closed environment, like a secret cave or a biolab.
      - __MatrixMan__ 2y ago

__MatrixMan__ 2y ago

The trouble with the "not found in nature" business is that we have found far less than 1% of of the viral features that exist in nature. If you go pick a random subset of a randomly selected viral genome and determine its function, you're virtually guaranteed to have found something in nature which--until then--was not found in nature. We only bother doing that kind of research after a virus has started making people sick because it's expensive. It's called a spillover event and not a spillover status quo because it's new to us. To argue that it's manmade because we didn't see it coming is a gross overestimation of man's ability to make such things and of his ability to anticipate them. Even if we can glue things together that we found in nature, the threatening part is not the glue. The rest appears to be politics and has no bearing on what science might learn from COVID. Especially the first link, which reads more like a bunch of people patting their boss on the back in hopes that they don't get fired and nothing like the result of any kind of research. Nevermind their conflict of interest, what would congresspeople know about it in the first place? Some may release viruses of surprising structure on purpose or by accident, and nature does it also. That makes it relevant to understand ways to prevent and mitigate the impact of such events, but the nationalities of the people involved just doesn't impact the science in any way. I would be interested in reading the paper about the furin cleavage. Are you sure your link 3 is going to the right place?

oneshtein 2y ago
This article https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7836551/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7836551/ has good explanation about furin cleavage site. Basically, it just fragment of genetic code, which allows virus to fuse with human cells much more easily. It more interesting HOW this fragment get there. Recombination with an other virus is ruled out, so only 3 options are left: 1) virus evolved in an animal (none found), 2) virus evolved in a human (none found), 3) virus created in a lab (paper exists with exact instruction how to do it). Yes, third link is not correct. It just catches my attention, because if Russians did it (accidentally or not) then general Kirilov must be responsible for it, so the link between Kellog (Trump) and Kirilov (Putin) surprised me.
- __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
  Figure 6 shows that the emergence of the site has also occurred in many of SARS-COV-2's relatives, and their positions in the family tree indicate that these were independent evolutions, not a trait passed on ancestor-wise. Do you suppose that the other such cases happened in a lab also? Or could it be that evolution favors the adaptation because it makes for a fitter virus?
  - oneshtein 2y ago
    Of course, it can be evolution of the virus like in all cases before SARS CoV2, but no animal reservoir, where this evolution happened, is found. Viruses are not alive, so evolution cannot be performed without a chain (tree) of host animals and/or humans. However, in this case, it looks like it was jump, not evolution. At one point of time we see the virus in wild without ability to easily infect humans, then at another point in time we see the almost same virus, but perfectly adapted to infect humans, and nothing between them. If this was an evolution in the wild, then thousands, maybe millions, of "almost SARS CoV2" cases should surface after years of search. They are not found, thus evolution happened in a closed environment, like a secret cave or a biolab.
    - __MatrixMan__ 2y ago