There is absolutely no evidence of gain-of-function research causing the pandemic in the articles you posted. The only proof that the pandemic was caused by gain-of-function research would be if the lab was raided and they found vials of coronavirus stocks, each with successive mutations showing the evolution from the bat viruses they were working with to SARS-CoV-2.
The Wuhan Institute is a BSL-4 lab studying corona viruses.
Why wouldn’t they use that common research technique to study vaccine efficacy? I’m not saying that’s what happened, but at least now we can discuss it without being censored, like on Facebook.
As I just stated - A theory I saw about how COVID may have escaped from the Wuhan lab - #262 by Tfletch1
And?
Do you have any evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is the result of gain-of-function research performed at the WIV? Any at all?
Do you have any evidence that covid-19 is the result of a natural vector? Has the step between bats and humans been identified? The animal-human vector of most other SARS-caused disease outbreaks has been identified fairly early (within a year).
So you don’t have any evidence?
Neither do you. What’s your point?
My point is that you’ve brought forward no evidence for your claims. Not only that, you keep making claims and linking articles as if they support your claims, but it turns out that they are completely unrelated.
If you want to throw things at a wall and see if anything sticks, carry on.
My “claim” is that the origins of covid-19 should be further investigated, to help prevent another pandemic. The articles I posted are relevant only if you read and understand them. Not sure where you’re coming from.
But I did read them and they’re not relevant at all. Did you perhaps forget to read them yourself?
You stated:
Then linked to an article from said BBC which said absolutely nothing whatsoever about gain of function research at WIV. Nothing.
Then you stated:
When you have yet to put forth any evidence whatsoever regarding such research being done at WIV. How can they do something more carefully when we don’t really have any reasonable evidendence that they are doing it all?
Next up you state:
Most other? Exactly how many other SARS-caused disease outbreaks do you think there have been? Prior to this one we have SARS-CoV-1 and… Well, that’s actually it, isn’t it? They finally traced it back to the likely original, and zoonotic, source about 14 years after the fact. That’s even apparent in the one-box from your wikipedia link. See the dates of 2002-2004 for the outbreak and 2017 for final trace of the transmission from its source? Those aren’t a year apart. So, we have a single other outbreak which was traced 14 years later and no other outbreaks whatsoever. Where do you get the idea that there have been multiple outbreaks and that they have been identified within a year?
Gain-of-function research on corona viruses doesn’t happen. MERS wasn’t tied to a camel, and SARS wasn’t traced to a colony of cave-dwelling bats.
Keep on reading CNN.
Re-reading the SARS page, you’re right. It took 13 years to find the natural vector for SARS. My only point all along has been that covid-19 could have escaped from a BSL-4 lab. Yeah, I don’t have proof, but sometimes circumstantial evidence shouldn’t be ignored. If covid-19 did actually escape from a lab, it’s prudent to find out how it happened and prevent it from happening again. If you were actually interested, you would look up references. Why wouldn’t a BSL-4 lab do gain-of-function research on a corona virus that has killed in the past?
Edited to add… Sorry about the CNN comment…
“Could have escaped from a lab” and “was engineered” (via gain of function, for example) are two completely separate things. The first is a possibility that almost no one denies, although one that is not currently favored by the vast majority of virologists for any number of reasons. The second is an accusation that has been denied by the appropriate government entities of both China and the US. The best evidence against the second is also that if that is what was done, it was done very poorly.
From here:
In March 2020, a group of renowned evolutionary virologists analyzed the genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 and found it was overwhelmingly likely that this virus had never been manipulated in any laboratory. Like the earlier coronaviruses SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, they theorized, it “spilled over” from its natural reservoir host (bats) to a new one (humans). Viruses jump species frequently, with unpredictable consequences. Often a virus hits an evolutionary dead end if it cannot adapt to the new host rapidly enough to be transmitted again. Sometimes, however, it can. Clues that reveal this scenario can be found by analyzing the sequence of the virus genome, and that’s exactly what this study did.
The study carefully examined whether key elements of the virus, particularly the spike protein on its surface, appeared engineered. They did not. The spike didn’t optimally bind to its receptor, ACE-2, and the interaction between the two proteins was unpredictable even using the most advanced computer algorithms. Another key feature often cited as evidence of laboratory origin is the furin cleavage site, where the spike protein is cut in half to “activate” viral material for entry into cells. The viruses most closely related to SARS-CoV-2 don’t have this site, but many others do, including other human coronaviruses. The furin site of SARS-CoV-2 has odd features that no human would design. Its sequence is suboptimal, meaning its cleavage by the enzyme furin is relatively inefficient. Any skilled virologist hoping to give a virus new properties this way would insert a furin site known to be more efficient. The SARS-CoV-2 site has more of the hallmarks of sloppy natural evolution than a human hand. Indeed, a timely analysis last year showed convincingly that it is a product of genetic recombination, a natural feature of coronavirus replication and evolution.
Because there doesn’t appear to be any evidence of them researching SARS-CoV-2 as they were pretty laser focused on SARS-CoV-1 (in case there is any confusion, this and SARS-CoV are the same thing).
From here (again):
The Wuhan institute’s most recent chimeric virus used a very different coronavirus as its genetic backbone. Looking at the body of research produced there, it’s clear that scientists were laser-focused on the bat viruses related to SARS-CoV, which spurred research on coronaviruses worldwide after it emerged in 2003 because of its pandemic potential. There’s just no trace of SARS-CoV-2 in the lab, and if the SARS-CoV-2 progenitor or its building blocks weren’t in the lab before the pandemic, the pandemic could not have started there — even accidentally.
Also, as noted above, the supposed funding for this gain of function research on SARS-CoV-2 wasn’t actually for that purpose at all, according to the US government.
You’re free to discuss hypotheticals all day long, but when you make what appear to be implications, you need to back them up with actual evidence, not random links to things that either state the opposite of your claim or are irrelevant. Me, I’ll wait until I see some actual evidence (if that ever happens) before I assign blame.
None of what you’ve posted proves covid-19 didn’t escape from a lab.
The Wuhan Institute of Virology has studied bat corona viruses for years and their potential to ultimately infect humans. Again, why wouldn’t they use gain-of-function techniques to study corona viruses? Can you show me proof covid-19 didn’t escape from a lab?
Oh for fuck’s sake. Seriously?
I’m done with you, as you’ve shown a complete unwillingness to actually read your own cites as well as find anything relevant to your claims.
Fair enough.
Moderating to EastUmpqua:
The rules that apply in this forum are the same as those that apply in General Questions, with the proviso that they must also be related to the COVID-19 pandemic.
You have not shown evidence for your assertions, or even a cite that indicates a significant number of experts agree with the positions about which you are speculating.
Please read responses to your posts carefully and be prepared to back up your assertions.
Not a warning.
You never have to prove a negative. The ordinary is that SARS-CoV-2 came from nature just as the vast majority of novel viral outbreaks throughout history and prehistory. The lab leak claim is the extraordinary. That doesn’t mean it’s impossible. It just means that it is unusual.
Everyone should read the whole linked article from Nature. It addresses every point brought up by more than one thread in this forum. The main points are the following:
-
Emerging infectious diseases (including from coronaviruses) originate in animals all the time
-
It is not unusual for origin investigations to take years because they’re not easy.
-
It’s not unusual to have a lab that studies a virus that is near the natural reservoirs for simple convenience (eg. Ebola and Marburg virus labs in Africa).
-
Furin cleavage sites are not remotely suspicious since they occur throughout the coronavirus genera. David Baltimore admits he misspoke.
Hi, I’ve been readng this thread from the start. I just didn’t feel the need to post til now. I implore you not to leave the thread. Some one is making claims without any evidence. You are doing IMO an excellent job of calling them on it. If you leave, somebody else (and I fear it will be me) will have to do it and I doubt they’ll do anywhere as good an thorough a job.
While I appreciate the kudos, I was not a participant in this thread until it was reawakened by the poster that is posting said claims. They were just so wrong that I didn’t feel like letting that be the final word in the thread. @Tfletch1 had been doing and continues to do a yeoman’s job of fighting the ignorance here and was doing so before it even caught my attention. Thanks to @Aspenglow reinforcing the ground rules, I’ll probably stick around myself.
I’ve also seen your responses in similar cases and I’m pretty sure you’d do wonderfully in my stead (in actuality, probably much better than I).