zlacker

>>ruarai+(OP)
This article is written by a journalist who is clearly knowledgeable about safety practices and mistakes in US labs, but does not consider the extensive knowledge we have about the sequence of SARS-COV2. The preponderance of evidence supports a natural origin of the virus.

This is no way exonerates the Wuhan government from possible culpability—indeed government officials did deliberately suppress information—but this investigative opinion doesn’t pass scientific muster. Misinformation.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9

>>tbenst+Zu1
You are indeed misunderstanding the point.

Smallpox is also naturally originating virus. That doesn't prohibit it from leaking from a lab.

>>SpaceR+Zv1
The author is irresponsibility propagating a conspiracy theory and elevating its status in the public’s mind.

I’m a bioscientist. It’s frustrating to respond with evidence and in good faith, and be downvoted by those who simply disagree. But sadly it appears that the loudest voice prevails over reason.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00599-7

>>tbenst+Ky1
I, like many others, would truly like to be pointed to resources that can help me understand what would lead bio scientists to this conclusion.

Make no mistake, I am super well aware that I lack all the grounding to understand the explanation.

But can you point me in the right direction? The context surrounding what you are saying must be learnable. At least to some level.

>>whidde+RH1
Your request is admirable! Here’s how I go about gathering info:

Google “covid 19 origin evidence”, look for academic publications or scientific journalism that is well-cited & from reputable sources, eg

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-01205-5 [2] https://www.latimes.com/science/story/2020-05-09/was-the-cor... [3] https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/05/scientis... [4] https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/coronavir...

We really need to do better with scientific communication. As scientists we are evaluated too much on our communication with other scientists (ie paper publishing), while communication with the public is not weighed much for career advancement. I wish this structural problem would be discussed more so it can be addressed.

But not all of this is on the scientists. The public must do better. We can’t just blindly trust what a senator says on Fox News for political expedience, or “trust our gut”.

>>tbenst+6M1
There are other results, too. For instance ... https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/jmv.26478 "However, the SARS‐CoV‐2 host tropism/adaptation pattern has significant discrepancies compared with other CoVs, raising questions concerning the proximal origin of SARS‐CoV‐2. The flat and nonsunken surface of the sialic acid‐binding domain of SARS‐CoV‐2 spike protein (S protein) conflicts with the general adaptation and survival pattern observed for all other CoV" . https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-esca... : “There are indeed many unexplained features of this virus that are hard if not impossible to explain based on a completely natural origin.” Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University, wrote that he’d been concerned for some years about the Wuhan laboratory and about the work being done there to create “chimeric” (i.e., hybrid) SARS-related bat coronaviruses “with enhanced human infectivity.” Ebright said, “In this context, the news of a novel coronavirus in Wuhan *screamed* lab release.”

I couldn't find anything on Fox News.