A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
Just the fact that they got sequences at all from environmental samples (some of which they grow in culture) means that there was quite a bit of virus there. Hard to see how this much virus comes from probably more or less healthyhumans taking a stroll in the market to pick up some food for dinner.
-
shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-03-15 at 10.28.45 am.png
-
Under this scenario it's impossible to disprove anything.
-
Agreed - but as far as the rainbow goes you've got to be kidding - I talked to an NBC reporter - Denise Chow -last week for about an hour wherein I used the term "lab magic." Chow's credible and actually one of the two NBC reporters that were allowed to visit WIV last year. Chow - not a lab leak fan by any means. Pretty sure she was goingto talk to Alina though - I dunno - I might have mentioned Alina was an idiot or something to that effect.
-
2021-03-14 16:38
Edward C. Holmes
The question ought to be 'what evidence would proponents of the lab escape theory accept as disproving lab escape?'
-
SC2 in an animal should do it. Having a virus positive environmental sample from under a cage is damn close. No other way that virus could have gotten there except from the animals in the cage.
-
Need to think a bit more about the lineage A and B conundrum, but I think that too is consistent. Closer look at the Market associated environmental and human sample sequences in the context of the smoking dog will be revealing Ithink.
-
I've been very careful not to mention the smoking dog to any reporters yet, but looking forward to the opportunity when the report is dropped.
-
I agree - that you would do it. I would they accept any positive SC2 in an animal? Yes, best not mention the smoking dog yet...