zlacker

>>datafl+(OP)
There is an interesting peer reviewed paper published last month with analysis of existing facts about the origin of covid-19. A part from their conclusion:

More than a year after the initial documented cases in Wuhan, the source of SARS-CoV-2 has yet to be identified, and the search for a direct or intermediate host in nature has been so far unsuccessful.

The low binding affinity of SARS-CoV-2 to bat ACE2 studied to date does not support Chiroptera as a direct zoonotic agent. Furthermore, the reliance on pangolin coronavirus receptor binding domain (RBD) similarity to SARS-CoV-2 as evidence for natural zoonotic spillover is flawed, as pangolins are unlikely to play a role in SARS-CoV-2′s origin and recombination is not supported by recent analysis.

At the same time, genomic analyses pointed out that SARS-CoV-2 exhibits multiple peculiar characteristics not found in other Sarbecoviruses.

A novel multibasic furin cleavage site (FCS) confers numerous pathogenetically advantageous capabilities, the existence of which is difficult to explain though natural evolution...

source: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10311-021-01211-0

>>novaRo+ep
This is covered in detail in the article. To me the smoking gun in this article is the linked video of Daszak saying "we have now found... over 100 new SARS-related coronaviruses, very close to SARS...some of them get into human cells in the lab, some of them can cause SARS disease in humanized mice models...these are a clear and present danger". I've been aware of this for many months after reading this tweet [1] which says essentially the same thing.

[1] https://twitter.com/PeterDaszak/status/1197631383470034951?s...