Alina Chan Profile picture
Jan 22 8 tweets 2 min read
The lab #OriginOfCovid hypothesis does not require that no natural spillovers of SARS-like viruses occur or that 0 SARS-like viruses have furin cleavage sites in nature.

It asks why a rare SARS-like virus + FCS emerged where scientists proposed putting FCSs in SARS-like viruses.
These scientists wrote in early 2018 that they were systematically looking for rare SARS-like viruses with FCSs, and they would optimize/insert these FCSs into "low risk" SARS-like viruses to see how this could impact the virus' ability to infect and grow in human cells.
One interpretation is that, at that time in early 2018, they had already found such rare SARS-like viruses and determined that they bore cleavage sites or features approaching functional cleavage sites that could be optimized and inserted into SARS-like viruses in the lab.
The only way we are going to understand if this research pipeline led to the pandemic virus is if we get access to research records from the lab in Wuhan or possibly communications between that group and their collaborators overseas, including in the US.
Scientists have been hunting novel SARS-like viruses since the 2003 SARS outbreak and none of these published SARS-like viruses have such a FCS.

It's possible this lab collected so many 100s of SARS-like viruses they finally found one with an FCS or something similar to an FCS.
In that sense, it is very unlikely that searching around in bat caves is going to tell us whether the pandemic virus emerged in Wuhan due to the wildlife trade or research activities.

What we need to know is what happened in Wuhan in the months leading up to the outbreak.
Maybe someone can collect 10,000s of pathogen samples from animals and people across 8 countries like the Wuhan Institute of Virology lab did and one day find a SARS-like virus with a FCS.

This is not going to tell you how the pandemic virus appeared in Wuhan.
It's going to tell you that if you collect 10,000s of pathogen samples from animals and people across 8 countries, you may find a SARS-like virus with a FCS.

And it is understood that if you work with such viruses at low biosafety levels like BSL2, they can escape from the lab.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alina Chan

Alina Chan Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Ayjchan

Jan 21
I can empathize with those who say "don't talk about a lab #OriginOfCovid" because your safety + job prospects will be in danger, it might stir up geopolitical conflict, it could embolden extremists.

But it is untrue that there is not enough evidence to ask for an investigation.
As early as February 2020, scientists, both in and outside of China, were publicly and privately worrying about a lab leak origin of the pandemic.

3 years later, the WHO, the Lancet Commission, US intelligence and government all agree a lab #OriginOfCovid must be investigated.
There is no evidence in the past 3 years that would make a lab #OriginOfCovid implausible.

Would WHO, US IC+gov, Lancet Commission, and numerous reputable virologists all be asking whether this virus came from a lab if there wasn't sufficient evidence?
Read 6 tweets
Jan 19
Forms of intimidation a scientist can expect to face if they publicly ask for an investigation of a lab #OriginOfCovid

1. Accused of encouraging racist right-wing conspiracy theorists

2. Accused of being an unqualified grifter

3. Retaliation in academia

4. Threats+harassment
And most ridiculously:

5. Accused of spreading #OriginOfCovid misinformation because they don't talk enough about natural recombination in viruses.

When there is literally a 2018 research plan by Wuhan-US scientists that could have led to the creation of the pandemic virus.
When my colleagues and I said in 2020 that both natural and lab #OriginOfCovid hypotheses were viable, we had no idea the kind of s***storm we were going to get sucked into. We had no idea that this was ongoing in the background:
theintercept.com/2023/01/19/cov…
Read 6 tweets
Jan 16
New argument from natural #OriginOfCovid proponents:

The Wuhan-US scientists did not have a plan to make the pandemic virus. The experiments they proposed were clearly much more dangerous and unhinged.

Ok, suit yourselves.
The strongest hypothesis for a genetically engineered lab #OriginOfCovid is that scientists collected a new SARS-like virus that did not seem dangerous to humans and used this low-risk strain for clear gain-of-function experiments eg inserting a furin cleavage site in its spike.
This plan is literally written in the early 2018 proposal by the Wuhan and US scientists.

They would use "low risk" strains for cleavage site insertion. Nowhere in this section does it say they were going to use close relatives of known human pathogens.
documentcloud.org/documents/2106…
Read 7 tweets
Jan 14
To all the virologists and journalists asking for evidence that the pandemic virus may have been engineered in a lab, I think you missed this revelation in September 2021:
theintercept.com/2021/09/23/cor…
“Let’s look at the big picture: A novel SARS coronavirus emerges in Wuhan with a novel cleavage site in it. We now have evidence that, in early 2018, they had pitched inserting novel cleavage sites into novel SARS-related viruses in their lab.”
Put it this way, it is as if these scientists proposed to put horns on horses and 2 years later a unicorn shows up in their town. When they discover this unicorn and describe it to the public, they talk about every other feature except for the horn.
ayjchan.medium.com/the-evidence-f…
Read 5 tweets
Jan 13
This takes the 🍰
@Nature reporter asks Peter Daszak what he thinks of the cleavage site in the pandemic virus.
He says it enhances pathogenicity. Doesn't mention that he & Wuhan collaborators proposed putting these sites into SARS-like viruses in the lab.
usrtk.org/wp-content/upl…
@Nature On @TheLancet letter that condemned all conspiracy theories suggesting the virus did not have a natural origin... looks like the support from the chief editor was too strong and several of the authors did not manage to declare their COIs before the letter was published.
@Nature @TheLancet As early as May 2020 Daszak and friends had worried about being FOIA'ed and sought to evade it by using personal gmail addresses.
h/t @Rebecca21951651
Read 6 tweets
Jan 10
It's difficult to bet on whether the next pandemic will come from nature or a lab when you don't know what experiments are ongoing or will be carried out in hundreds of labs around the world.
It's difficult enough trying to find out what was happening in 1 lab in Wuhan #OriginOfCovid

Try scaling that to 100s of labs and predicting when and where lab-based outbreaks will occur.
Pathogen research today is very different than it was decades ago. Scientists are actively looking for pandemic potential pathogens and genetically modifying these live pathogens in the lab - labs often based in large metropolitan cities (and sometimes they have wet markets!).
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(