Slack / Private Message Drop — page 149
of 1123 pages · Bates SLACK_000363
← p.148 p.150 → · this page in the original PDF · package
[Andrew Rambaut]
It is curious that B&MG people can sit on boards but it is up to B&M what they do with their money.
[2020-08-29 13:06:20]
[Kristian Andersen]
This is actually pretty interesting - I missed this previously. Furin sites and rapid passage... [shared file(s): Screen
Shot 2020-08-29 at 1.05.04 PM.png]
[2020-08-29 15:33:30]
[Eddie Holmes]
We await the paper, but the key point is that (they claim) these were SARS-CoV related. To me, this makes perfect
sense: obviously, prior to the pandemic they would have been most interested in viruses related to the known
human pathogen (SARS-CoV) rather than to random bat viruses in a completely different part of the tree. That said,
the Embevoviruses (e.g. HKU-1) more often have furin sites and seem to be more often rodent associated. Does
make you think about rodent hosts.
[2020-08-29 15:41:02]
[Kristian Andersen]
To me the main interest is that they have a rodent model where SARS-CoV-2 can grow very rapidly. Previously we
have talked about "passage in animals" and concluded that that type of work would have required e.g., ferrets, which
would have been a lot harder. But having a mouse colony with human ACE2s make large-scale culturing
experiments with something like SARS-CoV-2 easy.
But yeah, this type of work was all part of the EgoHealth grant, so no surprises that they had the models. But on the
question of "could they have performed large-scale culturing models in animals", where we had previously leaned
"very unlikely" that's now "very likely" - having this type of mouse available makes a big difference. Doesn't change
anything, but need to keep this in mind.
[2020-08-29 15:45:48]
[Eddie Holmes]
True, but I don't see how a passage in a mouse model would produce a virus so well adapted to humans and with
that RBD. Makes no sense to me at all. I'm leaning more toward the idea that it was circulating in humans for a while
but was undetected....one lineage then exploded in Wuhan.
[2020-08-29 15:53:23]
[Kristian Andersen]
That's the key here - that mouse model is using the human ACE2 receptor, so it'd be a perfect fit - plus the
acquisition of furin sites during rapid passage as we discussed in the paper (as is seen for flu). Can't be dismissed
out of hand as what she's saying in her answer that they were doing exactly those types of experiments. Doing that
type of work with a novel (bat) CoV would constitute a non-trivial risk for sure - she does not mention whether this is
BSL-2 or BSL-3, but likely the former.
But I'm glad you're now leaning towards the "pre-circulation" theory - now we just need to have Andrew come
around to that :wink:
[2020-08-29 16:02:43]
[Eddie Holmes]
Fair point about ACE2, but the RBD is very different to SARS-CoV. To me, if the furin cleavage site is active in cell
culture then it is also likely to be active in evolution. This also means that she and and a lot of people of lying. Why
admit to this stuff in interview if something dodgy had happened? Also, there is absolutely NO intelligence and NO
chatter about them doing these experiments. People talk about their work and there would be no reason to cover it
up then.
[2020-08-29 16:05:36]
[Kristian Andersen]
Yup, totally agree - and this to me really is becoming the strongest argument - if they were fiddling around with
SARS2 prior to the pandemic, then surely something would have leaked by now? I mean, we have even had
whistleblowers contact us! Yet, nothing - totally zero. I know China has an oppressive regime, but keeping
This is our OCR of the page, with running headers and footers removed. The
Committee's PDF
is authoritative; quote from it. Machine-readable, including the uncleaned
text: /api/page/slack_pm/149
Records on this page
| Record | Date | Type | Pages |
|---|---|---|---|
| slack_pm:msg:01527 | 2020-08-28 | chat message | 148–149 |
| slack_pm:msg:01528 | 2020-08-29 | chat message | 149 |
| slack_pm:msg:01529 | 2020-08-29 | chat message | 149 |
| slack_pm:msg:01530 | 2020-08-29 | chat message | 149 |
| slack_pm:msg:01531 | 2020-08-29 | chat message | 149 |
| slack_pm:msg:01532 | 2020-08-29 | chat message | 149 |
| slack_pm:msg:01533 | 2020-08-29 | chat message | 149 |
| slack_pm:msg:01534 | 2020-08-29 | chat message | 149–150 |