COVID-19 Records

Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.1093 [SLACK_001307] · slack_pm:msg:11378

Page text: p.1093 · original PDF

Date
2022-02-16 13:47
Type
chat message · slack
recipient
Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker
Kristian G. Andersen
Topics
Furin cleavage site and molecular featuresProximal Origin paper

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

Straight from our paper - "The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 inhumans. Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses innature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible"

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.

StatementGradeAttributionStance
Straight from our paper - "The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 inhumans. own voice, substantive speaker_own asserts
However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses innature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible" quoted / not their view quoted_external inside quotation marks asserts

In context

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

  1. 2022-02-16 13:39 Kristian G. Andersen open
    It doesn't if you're a reasonable person. However, just two examples: "SARS-CoV-2 genome data" > how can you decide it's natural based on genome data alone? "pangolins became available, which clearly showed that some of the unusual features found in SARS-CoV-2 were also found in nature" > so your conclusions are based only on the pangolin data?
  2. 2022-02-16 13:42 Edward C. Holmes open
    I have to say I disagree.
  3. 2022-02-16 13:44 Edward C. Holmes open
    Your lawyers letter says "This was indicative of the view of Dr. Andersen and his co-authors that it was impossible toprove or disprove specific hypotheses as to the origins of SARS-CoV-2" while the PO paper actually says "we do not believe that any type of laboratory based scenario is plausible".
  4. 2022-02-16 13:46 Edward C. Holmes open
    To me that's a straight contradiction
  5. 2022-02-16 13:47 Kristian G. Andersen
    Straight from our paper - "The genomic features described here may explain in part the infectiousness and transmissibility of SARS-CoV-2 inhumans. Although the evidence shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a purposefully manipulated virus, it is currently impossible to prove or disprove the other theories of its origin described here. However, since we observed all notable SARS-CoV-2 features, including the optimized RBD and polybasic cleavage site, in related coronaviruses innature, we do not believe that any type of laboratory-based scenario is plausible"
  6. 2022-02-16 13:51 Edward C. Holmes open
    Right, but we do actually then state that no laboratory-based scenario is plausible.
  7. 2022-02-16 13:52 Edward C. Holmes open
    If I were on the other side I would then ask why you wrote this second sentence?
  8. 2022-02-16 13:54 Kristian G. Andersen open
    Well, that's the genius of that sentence - it says "we do not _*believe*_ that any type of laboratory based scenario is_*plausible*_". "Not plausible" does not mean "impossible".
  9. 2022-02-16 13:54 Andrew Rambaut open
    not-plausible to me means has a non-zero probability but still small

Full conversation →