Excellent. For a (only slightly) less technical argument, my favorite supporting the lab leak hypothesis is that the animal species to which SARS-CoV-2 was best adapted at the time of its discovery is the human species. This virus does not replicate in any of the animal species present at the wet market, nor in bats... The ability to infect a species correlated with the binding affinity of Spike for the ACE2 receptor of that species. And the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein had few mutations in the first few months of the virus propagation, in contrast to the situation with SARS-CoV in 2002-2003 when its Spike sequence evolved quickly to adapt to its new host, again indicating that SARS-CoV-2 was already well adapted to humans at the beginning of 2020.
If only an understanding of statistics and the epistemological limits you outlined were the only barriers to knowing the basis of lab leak knowledge claims to be valid.
There are many other barriers that are institutionalised.
One barrier is the ludicrous assertion from the US Intelligence Community that the research related to lab leak of SARS-CoV-2 was not part of biological warfare efforts…
The US Intel Community has made such illogical assertions in the past;
That Russia must be supplying Chemical Weapons to Laos and Vietnam…the suspect yellow spots found on alleged victims was actually shown to be Bee-shit…but the basis of mutual suspicion drove years of biological warfare research on all sides.
That Iraq had a current, instead of historical, Biological Warfare program active…even through with the simplest of epistemological tools the weapons inspectors had first understood there was a BW program…but from there the complex meeting of confirmation bias and again deep suspicion of malicious intent clouded judgement of evidence sourced…
The US IC was convinced…and they were wrong.
And now, where the Civil Military fusion of Beijing’s current leadership is obvious and pervasive, and has been for some time…where even in the ever expanding Information Domain of warfare the affinity for this domain for Biological Warfare is an unwavering trend that makes the introduction of Artificial Intelligence systems to this highly sensitive data set a dystopian nightmare…and a reminder that people are important.
The US Intel Community are a group of people and their assessment that Research programs related to SARS-CoV-2 lab leak are not Biological Warfare is simply illogical and even in the light of Dual Use Research of Concern schematic is simply seeing one side of the contributing assumptions in dangerous and morally hazardous fair weather thinking.
The global intellectual community, and the global Intelligence Community, will slowly try and address this fair weather assumption of the US Intelligence Community that is so important to the methodological settings of COVID origin research…and yet to address these sets of confirmation biases and conflicts of interest is very much more complicated than a simple case of teaching and explaining Bayesian Methods…even in the setting of as yet incomplete data sets.
COVID origin is knowable because people know things and they are still unable or unwilling to share what they know.
But slowly, step by step, we will get there.
Thank you for your ongoing work in this area of concern.
Please look at a map of northern Brazil. In these four locations in April of 2020, São Gabriel do Cachoeira, Manaus, Santarem and Belem, the first peak of excess mortality attributed to the so-called coronavirus happened SIMULTANEOULSY. In other words, the so-called virus spread INSTANTLY across thousands of miles of river, where the slow boat is generally the only way to go. The same thing happens in January of 2021.
Excellent analysis and writing, Alex. It's always a pleasure to read any article you write -- you explain things so well. Your combination of specialized knowledge and top-notch communication skills is very rare.
You convinced me years ago of a lab origin, so this latest analysis just hammered on a nail that has already been driven flush. But I should say that my feeling is that Bayesian methods help in constructing hypotheses or identifying suspects, but they are not helpful as proof. Bayesian methods are too speculative and subjective to test out a theory.
Proof is needed to support the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 came from a lab, but proof is hard to come by. Unfortunately, some people are too quick to present rumor as fact, like when journalists Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi, and Alex Gutentag, reported that Ben Hu, Yu Ping, and Yan Zhu were the earliest people to become infected with SARS-CoV-2 in fall 2019.
Since China is not cooperating it looks like we will never have proof of the lab leak theory or the natural spillover theory, and that's a shame. But that doesn't mean we can assume the lab leak is true. We don't even have a suspect in a case. There's no direct evidence to tie Shi Zhengli, for example. personally to the outbreak. It's all indirect and weak.
But your analysis about reverse genetic systems and other evidence should be enough for even natural spillover theorists to be concerned about gain-of-function research on viruses with pandemic potential. Tony Fauci, if he was a better man and scientist, would be using his still formidable clout to put together an Asolimar-type conference for people to discuss the issues. Sadly, he won't.
Now, try to figure out the probability of this happening in real life for the so-called novel coronavirus, with such a non-specific set of symptoms and an unreliable PCR testing platform. Our local ecology hero José Alexandre Filizola Diniz Filho has nothing to say about this. Nada.
Wow, Al, you've nailed it. Your PhD specialization feels like benevolent destiny when paired with your conscious choice and dedication to apply what you know as you have. Multileveled; astonishingly well done.Your case for restrictions builds in tandem.
Excellent. For a (only slightly) less technical argument, my favorite supporting the lab leak hypothesis is that the animal species to which SARS-CoV-2 was best adapted at the time of its discovery is the human species. This virus does not replicate in any of the animal species present at the wet market, nor in bats... The ability to infect a species correlated with the binding affinity of Spike for the ACE2 receptor of that species. And the SARS-CoV-2 Spike protein had few mutations in the first few months of the virus propagation, in contrast to the situation with SARS-CoV in 2002-2003 when its Spike sequence evolved quickly to adapt to its new host, again indicating that SARS-CoV-2 was already well adapted to humans at the beginning of 2020.
Wow!
If only an understanding of statistics and the epistemological limits you outlined were the only barriers to knowing the basis of lab leak knowledge claims to be valid.
There are many other barriers that are institutionalised.
One barrier is the ludicrous assertion from the US Intelligence Community that the research related to lab leak of SARS-CoV-2 was not part of biological warfare efforts…
The US Intel Community has made such illogical assertions in the past;
That Russia must be supplying Chemical Weapons to Laos and Vietnam…the suspect yellow spots found on alleged victims was actually shown to be Bee-shit…but the basis of mutual suspicion drove years of biological warfare research on all sides.
That Iraq had a current, instead of historical, Biological Warfare program active…even through with the simplest of epistemological tools the weapons inspectors had first understood there was a BW program…but from there the complex meeting of confirmation bias and again deep suspicion of malicious intent clouded judgement of evidence sourced…
The US IC was convinced…and they were wrong.
And now, where the Civil Military fusion of Beijing’s current leadership is obvious and pervasive, and has been for some time…where even in the ever expanding Information Domain of warfare the affinity for this domain for Biological Warfare is an unwavering trend that makes the introduction of Artificial Intelligence systems to this highly sensitive data set a dystopian nightmare…and a reminder that people are important.
The US Intel Community are a group of people and their assessment that Research programs related to SARS-CoV-2 lab leak are not Biological Warfare is simply illogical and even in the light of Dual Use Research of Concern schematic is simply seeing one side of the contributing assumptions in dangerous and morally hazardous fair weather thinking.
The global intellectual community, and the global Intelligence Community, will slowly try and address this fair weather assumption of the US Intelligence Community that is so important to the methodological settings of COVID origin research…and yet to address these sets of confirmation biases and conflicts of interest is very much more complicated than a simple case of teaching and explaining Bayesian Methods…even in the setting of as yet incomplete data sets.
COVID origin is knowable because people know things and they are still unable or unwilling to share what they know.
But slowly, step by step, we will get there.
Thank you for your ongoing work in this area of concern.
Please look at a map of northern Brazil. In these four locations in April of 2020, São Gabriel do Cachoeira, Manaus, Santarem and Belem, the first peak of excess mortality attributed to the so-called coronavirus happened SIMULTANEOULSY. In other words, the so-called virus spread INSTANTLY across thousands of miles of river, where the slow boat is generally the only way to go. The same thing happens in January of 2021.
Excellent analysis and writing, Alex. It's always a pleasure to read any article you write -- you explain things so well. Your combination of specialized knowledge and top-notch communication skills is very rare.
You convinced me years ago of a lab origin, so this latest analysis just hammered on a nail that has already been driven flush. But I should say that my feeling is that Bayesian methods help in constructing hypotheses or identifying suspects, but they are not helpful as proof. Bayesian methods are too speculative and subjective to test out a theory.
Proof is needed to support the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 came from a lab, but proof is hard to come by. Unfortunately, some people are too quick to present rumor as fact, like when journalists Michael Shellenberger, Matt Taibbi, and Alex Gutentag, reported that Ben Hu, Yu Ping, and Yan Zhu were the earliest people to become infected with SARS-CoV-2 in fall 2019.
Since China is not cooperating it looks like we will never have proof of the lab leak theory or the natural spillover theory, and that's a shame. But that doesn't mean we can assume the lab leak is true. We don't even have a suspect in a case. There's no direct evidence to tie Shi Zhengli, for example. personally to the outbreak. It's all indirect and weak.
But your analysis about reverse genetic systems and other evidence should be enough for even natural spillover theorists to be concerned about gain-of-function research on viruses with pandemic potential. Tony Fauci, if he was a better man and scientist, would be using his still formidable clout to put together an Asolimar-type conference for people to discuss the issues. Sadly, he won't.
In Brasil, the model is this: EXCESS MORTALITY=COVID DEATH . Go ahead and see for yourself. The data is easily available: https://opendatasus.saude.gov.br/dataset/sim
Now, try to figure out the probability of this happening in real life for the so-called novel coronavirus, with such a non-specific set of symptoms and an unreliable PCR testing platform. Our local ecology hero José Alexandre Filizola Diniz Filho has nothing to say about this. Nada.
Wow, Al, you've nailed it. Your PhD specialization feels like benevolent destiny when paired with your conscious choice and dedication to apply what you know as you have. Multileveled; astonishingly well done.Your case for restrictions builds in tandem.