A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
Apparently according to Francis Collins: "Jesse Bloom has just submitted to BioRxiv (attached)." So not up there yet. @Andrew Rambaut
-
and this just in from JB to the email chain (foias R' us) By the way, I just wanted to add one last piece of information prior to the meeting that might be relevant. Because the e-mail Steve Sherry found from Wuhan University about the request to delete PRJNA612766mentioned deleting two projects, I pointed my pipeline that is currently scanning for SRA deletions to that range ofSRRs. It appears that the other largest chunk of contiguous deleted accessions of SARS-CoV-2 sequencing is fromSRR11313377 to SRR11313509, which comes immediately after the PRJNA612766 accessions. I suspect that this might be the other sequencing project that Wuhan University requested to delete in their e-mail to the SRA? It mightbe informative if NCBI is able to confirm that just so we know that we have the both project deletions covered before meeting tomorrow. I'm not going to have time to properly analyze the runs from SRR11313377 to SRR11313509 before tomorrow, buton an extremely cursory glance nothing looks that striking from those runs. Some of them contain the mutationA15090T which is not a mutation that I've come across before in early-ish isolates, but there isn't obvious significance of that mutation as the identity is A in most of the closely related bat coronaviruses (other than PrC31).-- Jesse Bloom Associate Professor, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center Investigator, Howard Hughes Medical Institute
-
Is this science? "It therefore seems likely the sequences were deleted to obscure their existence. Particularly in lightof the directive that labs destroy early samples (Pingui 2020) and multiple orders requiring approval of publicationson COVID-19 (China CDC 2020; Kang _et al._ 2020a), this sug- gests a less than wholehearted effort to trace early spread of the epidemic."
-
The direction to destroy the samples was from Jan 3rd 2020. It's got nothing to do with covering origins, and all to dowith controlling the message. The pangolin stuff is actually from the USRTK from last year.
-
2021-06-19 16:03
Robert F. Garry
"Finally, both plausible putative progenitors require that an early mutation to SARS-CoV-2 was a reversion towards the bat coron- avirus outgroups (either C18060T or C29095T) on a branch that subsequently gave rise to multiple distinct descendants." WAIT is this true - I thought WA1 was T18060 so bat-like.
-
Well, Jesse has gone full-on conspiracy. I can well imagine people deleting data because they were shit scared what the state would do to them. And he's right that China want to control the message on origins...they are particularly keen that it is not China.
-
What does he think they were trying to cover up? That there was something that was one SNP closer to a bat virus that hadn't even been sequenced by then?
-
Unless it was !!!
-
Yes, and it would mean that someone did in China did some very detailed analysis very quickly and spotted this themselves. I can't see that they data deletion is specific to what the data actually says.