Chat message

Extracted statements

Rule-extracted, not adjudicated. The grade says what may be done with each one; read the document above before relying on any of them.

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

1. 2021-05-11 08:45 Robert F. Garry open
   Competing hypotheses have been put forward to explain the emergence of SARS-CoV-2. Natural spillover directly from a bat or via an intermediate host could have occurred via several different scenarios (Fig. 1). Likewise, severalvariations of the Lab Leak hypothesis have been proposed (Fig. 2). A dispassionate science-based discourse on the topic of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 must account for this new data revealed by the WHO study showing: 1. multiple markets were linked to the early cases, and 2. divergence of SARS-CoV-2into lineages A and B was an earlyoccurrence. These facts are represented by yellow boxes in each figure. Proponents of Lab Leak theories speculate that SARS-CoV-2 or a close progenitor was present in the Wuhan Institute of Virology or another Wuhan virology lab before the start of the COVID-19 pandemic and the appearanceof the first cases in Wuhan (Fig. 2). It has been proposed that SARS-CoV-2 was released either via an infected laboratory worker, an escaped lab animal or via waste disposal (Parisite 1, Relman 2020). Pangolins carry and appear to be naturally infected with at least two lineages of sarbecoviruses [ref]. The Guangdong strain of pangolin coronavirus carries a receptor binding domain that is highly similar to the RBD of SARS-CoV-2. Some proponents ofthe Lab Leak theory have speculated the RBD of GD pangolin was recombined via genetic engineering with the backbone of an undisclosed sarbecovirus to produce SARS-CoV-2. Alternatively, it has been suggested that anundisclosed close progenitor of SARS-CoV-2 was passaged on human cells or experimental animals (such ahumanized mice) in gain of function type experiments to adapt for human replication (Segreto and Deigin, 2020).The direct role of the Chinese military in conducting classified research on sarbecoviruses at the WIV has also been proposed (DoS). In Lab Leak scenarios diversification of SARS-CoV-2 to its two separate early lineages A and Bwould have had to occur in the laboratory setting. Lab Leak scenarios must also account for the fact that the majorityof early cases were associated with different wildlife markets in Wuhan. [shared file(s): image.png, image.png]
2. 2021-05-11 08:45 Robert F. Garry
   Discussion Lab Leak scenarios are inconsistent with several established facts regarding the origin of SARS-CoV-2. The majorityof early cases were linked to different markets that sold wildlife or wildlife products in Wuhan. All theories of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 must account for the linkage to different market engaged in wildlife trade. Theories onSARS-CoV-2 must also account for the fact that two distinct lineages of SARS-CoV-2 were distributed at different Wuhan wildlife markets. Scenarios where an infected laboratory worker, an escaped lab animal or faulty wastedisposal spread not one but two lineages of SARS-CoV-2 specifically to different wildlife markets are difficult torationalize.The original SARS outbreaks in 2003 and 2004 were linked to the wildlife trade [ref]. In contrast to Lab Leak theories, linkage of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 to wildlife or the wildlife trade provides several plausible scenarios for the appearance of SARS-CoV-2 at different wildlife markets. It fully accounts for the fact that the majority of early Wuhan COVID-19 cases were linked to different wildlife markets in a straightforward manner. It also provides asimple explanation for the fact that two different lineages of SARS-CoV-2 were linked to markets. Divergence ofSARS-CoV-2 to lineages A and B is likely to had occurred prior to the transport of infected animals to Wuhan. Subsequently, t he infected animals were distributed to different wildlife markets. Proponents of the Lab Leak theory will point out that none of the animals sold at the Huanan Market tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 (WHO Report, 2021). Although mentioned in the WHO Report, but not discussed in detail, several independent sources indicate that wildlife species susceptible to SARS-CoV-2, including civets and raccoon dogs, were sold at the Huanan market (Holmes, CNN, other). Similar species were likely to have been available topurchase at other wildlife markets in Wuhan. Certain species of animals may have been removed after the appearance of the first COVID-19 cases and the linkage of COVID-19 cases to the market, but prior to the closure ofthe Market on January 1, 2020. It should also be noted that environmental samples that did test positive were associated with the portion of the market where wildlife or wildlife products were sold. A temporal analysis of the early human cases at the Huanan market confirms the pattern of spread from the areas of the market where wildlife products were sold to other parts of the market. (WHO report, 2021).A hybrid variation of the Natural and Lab Leak scenarios suggests that SARS-CoV-2 is a natural virus that infected ascientist while doing field work or after being brought back to a laboratory where it was stored or propagated and then released accidentally (Relman, 2020; Baker, 2020). Compared to the millions of worldwide encounters ofhumans with wildlife (in the wild or on wildlife farms), including the trapping of bats for food, the exposures of limited numbers of scientists doing field work is miniscule compared to the numbers of humans exposed in nature or during wildlife trade. Thus, this hybrid scenario is of very low probability. It also fails to explain how two lineages ofSARS-CoV-2 came to be distributed at the different wildlife markets. Conclusions New data compiled by the WHO team regarding the presence of distinct lineages of SARS-CoV-2 in different Wuhan wildlife markets are inconsistent with a laboratory-based origin of SARS-CoV-2.AcknowledgmentsKristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes and Andrew Rambaut provided essential input and discussion. Work onemerging viruses in the Garry Laboratory is supported by the National Institutes of Health, the Coalition for EpidemicPreparedness Innovations, the Burroughs Wellcome Fund, the Wellcome Trust, the Center for Disease Prevention and Control, and the European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership.References [shared file(s): image.png, image.png]
3. 2021-05-11 08:46 Robert F. Garry open
   Tony needs some back-up.
4. 2021-05-11 09:12 Robert F. Garry open
   !channel The Senate hearing - just WOW - Fauci - holding his own BUT. Every Republican hitting about GoF and WIV.
5. 2021-05-11 09:28 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Can't watch that kind of bs, but not surprised.. It's sad. Bob, I'll take a look at :point_up_2:later today
6. 2021-05-11 09:46 Robert F. Garry open
   Rand Paul asked TF about Ralph Barrett [sic] at UNC. That was classic...

Full conversation →