Goo summary by @danengber, with one little issue.
The Lab-Leak Theory Meets Its Perfect Match - The Atlantic theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
The Lab-Leak Theory Meets Its Perfect Match - The Atlantic theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/…
The odds are not driven by a distance argument but by a location exclusivity argument.
In a well connected world, it is not difficult for a virus to find its way to a perfect place for a superspreader event, be it a Wuhan market or Wuhan itself.
In a well connected world, it is not difficult for a virus to find its way to a perfect place for a superspreader event, be it a Wuhan market or Wuhan itself.
The odds are driven by the location of the initial breakout out of all places, with regards to the putative causative agent.
For wildlife trade zoonosis a market makes perfect sense, but there are 100+ cities in China with wet markets, transport hubs and 1mln+ people.
For wildlife trade zoonosis a market makes perfect sense, but there are 100+ cities in China with wet markets, transport hubs and 1mln+ people.
At the same time at least 50% of the Chinese research on bat coronaviruses, with all the lab activity and samplers coming back, was done in Wuhan - of all places.
Hence the exclusivity argument has a *much* larger effect on the research-related scenario that on the market one.
Hence the exclusivity argument has a *much* larger effect on the research-related scenario that on the market one.
I put all this in many threads such as this one:
https://twitter.com/gdemaneuf/status/1462373941461209090
@threadreaderapp compile
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
