COVID-19 Records

Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.1093 [SLACK_001307] · slack_pm:msg:11381

Page text: p.1093 · original PDF

Date
2022-02-16 13:54
Type
chat message · slack
recipient
Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker
Kristian G. Andersen

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

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".

In context

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

  1. 2022-02-16 13:46 Edward C. Holmes open
    To me that's a straight contradiction
  2. 2022-02-16 13:47 Kristian G. Andersen open
    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"
  3. 2022-02-16 13:51 Edward C. Holmes open
    Right, but we do actually then state that no laboratory-based scenario is plausible.
  4. 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?
  5. 2022-02-16 13:54 Kristian G. Andersen
    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".
  6. 2022-02-16 13:54 Andrew Rambaut open
    not-plausible to me means has a non-zero probability but still small
  7. 2022-02-16 13:54 Kristian G. Andersen open
    Yup
  8. 2022-02-16 13:54 Andrew Rambaut open
    As Kristian says - the categorical bit is 'any'
  9. 2022-02-16 13:55 Edward C. Holmes open
    My problem your letter is that it ends with the its impossible to prove/disprove statement whereas the paper has more.

Full conversation →