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
You keep reposting this Nature article but it is vacuous. There are many "guilt by association to Trump", "false equivalency to outrageous conspiracy theories", etc. and other non-good-faith argumentation that the author relies upon. This does not give confidence in her motives.

There are a few much more substantive sites with analysis into the genetics and circumstances around the virus, which emerged since the April 2020 which your Nature article cites as its primary source.

Here's a direct debunk of that article: https://harvardtothebighouse.com/2020/03/19/china-owns-natur...

That author has written a more extensive article with much more information around the lab itself: https://harvardtothebighouse.com/2020/01/31/logistical-and-t...

And here is an analysis of RaTG13, the closest relative of SARS-CoV-2, as a "smoking gun":

https://spark.adobe.com/page/7BVPjWfEJgQYB/