Slack / Private Message Drop — page 869

As I wrote here: https://virological.org/t/early-appearance-of-two-distinct-genomic-lineages-of-sars-cov-2-in-different -wuhan-wildlife-markets-suggests-sars-cov-2-has-a-natural-origin/691, genetic evidence adds further support that the wildlife markets played a key role in the COVID-19 pandemic. Two early lineages of SARS-CoV-2 (A & B) were each associated with cases at different live animal markets. Linkage of the origin of SARS-CoV-2 to wildlife or the wildlife trade fully accounts for the fact that the majority of early Wuhan COVID-19 cases were linked to different wildlife markets in a straightforward manner. Scenarios where a lab leak led to infections in different wildlife markets are difficult to rationalize. ``` [2021-05-25 13:05:47] [Robert Garry] Some variations on a hybrid (natural/lab leak) scenario suggest that SARS-CoV-2 is a natural virus that infected a scientist while doing field work resulting in mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic spread or that after being brought back to a laboratory SARS-CoV-2 was released unknowingly, but not successfully cultured or otherwise manipulated. Compared to the millions of worldwide encounters of humans with wildlife, including the trapping of bats for food, the number of high-risk exposures of scientists doing field or laboratory work with samples from wildlife is miniscule. [2021-05-25 13:06:38] [Robert Garry] Certainly we need to continue to investigate the origins of SARS-CoV-2. My colleagues and I have not stopped doing so since we wrote Proximal Origins. Indeed a urgent international investigation, which perforce must include China (that's where the "interesting" bats are), is necessary to fill remaining gaps in our knowledge of coronaviruses diversity. We need to "follow the animals" and explore every possible point of entry of potentially coronavirus infected animals into Wuhan, especially focused on the wildlife trade for food and traditional medicine. If - as some have argued - we should focus attention on an unsubstantiated hypothesis of lab leak, this would be a serious mistake. The world would be left much more vulnerable to future pandemics. Sure "investigate" the lab. But, arm-waving about a forensic investigation ( whatever that means) is not helpful. It's not even clear to me what the proponents of a "forensic" lab investigation hope to find. IMO notebooks from Shi's lab, sick days of WIV personnel, freezer inventories listing samples are not going to be informative in any way. What other scientific data or even other data do the Lab Leak proponent hope to uncover? Ironically, most "forensic" investigations at least those on TV involve looking at the DNA. Excepting the fact that it's RNA not DNA, we already did this in Proximal Origins. It would be nice to have additional information on the early case of SARS-CoV-2 patients in Wuhan, but this paper: March 26, 2020 N Engl J Med 2020; 382:1199-1207 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa2001316 was very granular and clearly pointed to the wildlife trade as the origin of the virus. [2021-05-25 13:07:56] [Robert Garry] Yes, eventually the origin of SARS-CoV-2 will be described. A close progenitor in a bat or perhaps more likely another animal host will eventually be uncovered. Sometimes you get lucky (as in the first SARS) and other times not. [2021-05-25 13:13:02] [Kristian Andersen] This is great Bob! Let's have that be the response from you :wink:. I especially love this part: "Ironically, most "forensic" investigations at least those on TV involve looking at the DNA. Excepting the fact that it's RNA not DNA, we already did this in Proximal Origins" [2021-05-25 13:23:46]