Chat message

In context

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

1. 2021-05-27 18:07 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Yeah, she's on that paper, but I don't believe that work is actually hers
2. 2021-05-27 18:08 Robert F. Garry open
   exacty! In this paper Shi and Baric make a point mutation in the HKU4 spike. Baric did it nit Shi I'm pretty sure and we're talking pseudoviruses which as the name implies are not viruses.
3. 2021-05-27 18:09 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Yup
4. 2021-05-27 18:15 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Honestly, the NYTimes article makes my blood boil. It's not "we need to consider a lab leak" - I get that and I agree with that. However, it's the false equivalence and the idea that we have no data either way - it's just not true, but I'm pretty damn sure somebody like Marc or Akiko haven't actually looked at any of it. It's just lazy - and dangerous. And where in the article are they discussing the extremely high likelihood that this came in via infected animals? Idon't see any of that - only lab, lab, lab. It's clear that people who say "I'm keeping an open mind" very clearly believe it came from a lab - they're just too afraid to admit it. At least fucking eDim is consistent on that point - I wish the Bloomshitters would be too. This whole "I'm just asking questions" leads to a bottomless well of hypotheticals,which is incredibly unhelpful.
5. 2021-05-27 18:16 Edward C. Holmes
   So, a single point mutation. No evidence of "inserting a furin cleavage site"?
6. 2021-05-27 18:16 Kristian G. Andersen open
   Correct - and it's not her work.
7. 2021-05-27 18:18 Edward C. Holmes open
   :+1:
8. 2021-05-27 18:56 Robert F. Garry open
   on the shit scale Zimmer's NYT is about 6 or 7 - most of the rest are 10s
9. 2021-05-27 18:58 Robert F. Garry open
   Except for Amy - 0 on the shit scale

Full conversation →