Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.999 [SLACK_001213] · slack_pm:msg:10419

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

If there is anything suspicious - better that we say it and then address it. If there isn't then we can let it blow over.

In context

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

2021-09-21 08:01 Kristian G. Andersen open

IMO we really _do_ need to take a close look at what's described in this grant and look back at our (now expanded)alignments to see if anything pops up. E.g., Bob mentioned that there are differences in Laos bat vs SC2 when itcomes to N-linked glycans, which isn't particularly reassuring - that's the kind of work described on page 11.
2021-09-21 08:05 Andrew Rambaut open

I agree - need to stay on top of this.
2021-09-21 08:05 Kristian G. Andersen open

Yes - this can't (shouldn't) be dismissed out of hand.
2021-09-21 08:06 Andrew Rambaut

If there is anything suspicious - better that we say it and then address it. If there isn't then we can let it blow over.
2021-09-21 08:06 Kristian G. Andersen open

Exactly. I suspect it'll be the latter.
2021-09-21 08:08 Andrew Rambaut open

Me too. But it really isn't beyond plausibility that someone went ahead and tried some of this stuff. We just need tore-convince ourselves it is coincidence.
2021-09-21 08:10 Kristian G. Andersen open

Correct - that's the problem. There's a big difference between "the lab was working on bat CoVs" to "the lab wasmodifying bat CoVs using features we see being unique to SC2".
2021-09-21 08:10 Andrew Rambaut open

Key question is - would anyone chose to put the FCS we see in SC2 in and put it out of frame.