zlacker

[parent] [thread] 4 comments
1. Pepe1v+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-05-07 08:25:13
From the OP, it appears that scientists knew exactly where to insert a furin cleavage site:

>“Since 1992 the virology community has known that the one sure way to make a virus deadlier is to give it a furin cleavage site at the S1/S2 junction in the laboratory,” writes Steven Quay, a biotech entrepreneur interested in the origins of SARS2.

replies(2): >>ximeng+F1 >>matzab+T1
2. ximeng+F1[view] [source] 2021-05-07 08:41:36
>>Pepe1v+(OP)
The problem is knowing how to put in the furin cleavage site, and generally if it's done in the lab it's done by copying a particular sequence from an existing virus as scientists can't predict how to do it themselves (without copying) with current state of knowledge.
3. matzab+T1[view] [source] 2021-05-07 08:42:55
>>Pepe1v+(OP)
That's such a mischaracterisation, I don't even know where to start. That Quay-guy obviously searched for "furin" on pubmed, found some papers (that don't even say that - and most definitely not for any coronaviruses) and thought it fit his thesis. If only viruses and infections were that simple!
replies(2): >>pas+A2 >>nyolfe+uG1
◧◩
4. pas+A2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-05-07 08:50:29
>>matzab+T1
Could you still start somewhere and explain it a bit please? Thank you very much!
◧◩
5. nyolfe+uG1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-05-07 19:47:33
>>matzab+T1
he left out the most damning part:

> “At least 11 gain-of-function experiments, adding a furin site to make a virus more infective, are published in the open literature, including [by] Dr. Zhengli Shi, head of coronavirus research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”

[go to top]