TWiV 1121: SARS-CoV2 still didn't come from a lab

TWiV rebuts a recent opinion piece which falsely claims that the COVID-19 pandemic began in a lab (it began in Nature), followed by a discussion of Paride bacteriophage, which has the unsual property of being able to kill dormant, antibiotic-tolerant cells by direct lytic replication.
Show notes at www.microbe.tv...
Become a patron of TWiV at microbe.tv/con...
----------- CONNECT -----------
🎯 Subscribe! bit.ly/2HOYdNP
Instagram: @profvrr and @microbe.tv
Twitter: @profvrr
TikTok: / microbe.tv
Facebook: / thisweekinvirology
Our Podcasts: microbe.tv
Contribute: www.microbe.tv...
----------- MORE VIROLOGY -----------
•My Virology Course virology.ws/co...
•Virology Blog: www.virology.ws
•Virus Watch bit.ly/3ngvQIM
•Principles of Virology textbook amzn.to/34onDtg
----------- OUR SCIENCE PODCASTS -----------
•This Week in Virology bit.ly/30uUhrX
This Week in Parasitism bit.ly/3ndUNUZ
•This Week in Microbiology bit.ly/33tOUeO
•Urban Agriculture microbe.tv/urbanag
•This Week in Evolution bit.ly/3ne1bf5
•Immune bit.ly/2HOyCVb
•This Week in Neuroscience bit.ly/2So12Yd
•Infectious Disease Puscast bit.ly/3K4EKF0
- Who Am I? -
I’m Vincent Racaniello, Earth’s Virology Professor, and I believe that education should be free.
I’m also a professor of virology at Columbia University in New York. I’ve been doing research on viruses since 1976, and teaching virology in classrooms and online since 1999. On this KZbin channel I share videos of my lectures, podcasts, and more.
New videos are uploaded several times each week.
I do not run ads on our work as it is disruptive to learning. We depend on your support.
If you would like to support our work, go to www.microbe.tv...
MicrobeTV appreciates your donation and your support of our mission. Our budget and ongoing financial health rely on accounting for and accepting irrevocable, non-refundable donations from the public. Therefore, MicrobeTV considers all donations to be nonrefundable.
Content in this video should not be construed as medical advice.
-----------------------
#microbe #viruses #coronavirus #pandemic
-----------------------

[@lesfaby8997]

_KZbin timestamps by Les_ 02:08 Please contribute 02:23 Announcements 02:25 HBV meeting Chicago in Sept. 02:45 ASV 2024 Meeting 05:10 Alina Chan opinion piece repeating lab leak hypothesis www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/06/03/opinion/covid-lab-leak.html [I get to gift a few articles a month so here you go -Les] www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/06/03/opinion/covid-lab-leak.html?unlocked_article_code=1.yU0.SG5e.Tr5t1L62fI9y&smid=url-share/ 05:52 which prev episodes have covered the topic in much greater depth 07:29 Evidence for animal market origin.See TWiV 876, 995. 10:25 Wuhan and its lab. 14:23 21:30 Point 2 GOF funding proposed but not working on precursors 31:35 33:50 Wuhan lab folks falling ill 49:49 Point 5 53:43 55:37 57:26 59:40 Phage Paride can kill dormant, antibiotic tolerant cells of Pseudomonas aeruginosa by direct lytic replication (Nature Comm) www.nature.com/articles/s41467-023-44157-3.pdf 1:38:34 Weekly Picks Brianne 1:43:18 Rich 1:46:13 Alan 1:47:19 Jolene 1:48:17 Vincent 1:49:40 Listener Picks David - Geochron clock Peter - Mouse as a Microscope _Audio podcast Timestamps by Jolene_

[@Costa_Conn]

Thanks Les

[@Sceince007]

Thankyou

[@anthonysei]

From a logical and legal perspective, the effort in public to discredit lab leak while foia information shows internal concern and the mountains of circumstantial evidence raises legitimate question. I'll be curious how this is squared. I suspect there is a lot of confusion caused by semantics and many details are used over confidently. A debate would be most interesting. Not an endless series of one sided panels.

[@Sceince007]

Evidence for lab leak ? Yet to see one , there is none so far . Please present .

[@jameskislanko8364]

Were there "mountains" of evidence the concerns might be legitimate. Repetitive speculation is not even circumstantial "evidence." And no, data-driven conclusions cannot be decided by a debate.

[@wcbibb]

Why cling to a conclusion of a lab origin theory that is only based upon suspicions. At 58.02, the experts discussed this issue. Many believe in a lab origin of HIV/ AIDS. Some believe that the Devil pops up from underground. I believe that the moon is made of blue cheese.

[@Logotic]

The only thing a debate proves is who is the better debater.

[@Sceince007]

@@Logotic true . Also when did debates become part of science ? Debate is valid when people are discussing opinions . Science is fact based . Discuss studies and facts .

[@Debramuise]

Unfortunately doctors, in many countries like Canada, ignore what patients are telling them. My neighbour worked in a hospital and had a terrible lung infection for 3 months before COVID was announced. Not one doctor looked any further. I love your show by the way. It helps me sleep at night. ❤️

[@briancase6180]

Despite this having been covered multiple times on twiv, i welcome it again. Go twiv! The recent beyond the noise episode is also good.

[@normanswazo8586]

This presentation is entirely one-sided with one “choir” echoing the natural spillover hypothesis. Why not bring Alina Chan and others into a discussion and debate on the points in question? I agree with Chan that the probability is higher for a lab incident than for a zoonotic. Vince interviewed Daszak years ago about research undertaken on SARS-CoV. That interview for me raised many questions about what EcoHealth, Baric, and WIV were doing-especially given such research at WIV being conducted at BSL-2 labs. I agree further with former CDC Director Redfield who also opines the probability for a lab leak is higher than for a natural spillover. Chinese authorities have obfuscated from the outset and have blocked all efforts to have a proper forensic investigation such as R. Ebright argued is essential to settle the question of origins. Have a proper debate and, as some have suggested, write your counter to Chan’s opinion piece and publish it.

[@thedrunkenchefs4577]

Why? Because that would not help further their narrative.

[@alohaworld]

Conspiracy monger weighs in

[@AlbertMark-nb9zo]

You do realize that since the earlier SARS spillover, there was a collective effort to gather sample from animals in the area for the next pandemic. So where did you expect that work to take place, if not in WIV?

[@shannond.4129]

Why have experts debate a lady who wrote a whole book of BS?

[@Rodrifuuu]

These are good old friends, there is no space for proper discussion or evidence here.

[@eyelashedbla5994]

In evaluating scenarios involving engineered sites, it’s crucial to treat exceptions as just that-EXCEPTIONS not the norm. We must integrate probability into our analyses, maintaining a discerning approach to what is likely versus what is merely possible. Among the four main lineages of betacoronaviruses (A, B, C, and D): 1) Lineage B betacoronaviruses, which include SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2, generally do not feature a furin cleavage site. SARS-CoV-2 is an EXCEPTION within this group, possessing a furin cleavage site at the S1/S2 boundary in its spike protein, which is considered unusual for this lineage and is a significant factor in its enhanced transmissibility compared to other coronaviruses like SARS-CoV. 2) Lineage A betacoronaviruses (like HCoV-OC43 and HCoV-HKU1) also LACK a furin cleavage site in their spike proteins. 3) Lineage C and D betacoronaviruses, less studied compared to lineages A and B, have NOT typically been identified with prominent furin cleavage sites, although specific studies may provide more detailed insights as new viruses are discovered and characterized within these groups. Overall, the presence of furin cleavage sites is NOT common across all betacoronaviruses and is seen as a notable feature primarily in SARS-CoV-2 within the context of the current pandemic. This feature enhances the ability of the virus to infect human cells, making it a significant target for gain of function, and that is why it was proposed in the grant application.

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

The FCS, while interesting from a research viewpoint, is something of a red herring. It's certainly not the smoking gun that the man-made/lab-leak conspiracists think it is.

[@erik_carter_art]

Would you be willing to pen an op-ed to submit to the NYT rebutting Chan's claims? I hope they would publish it.

[@riok6234]

Or maybe just interview the author who wrote the article and talk about what you agree and disagree about?

[@PK779able]

Hopefully they would ask them to not ignore Weissman (2024) showing ascertainment bias in early case data or new genomes from Lv et al (2024) showing a single point of emergence rather than multiple spillover is more likely. Not to mention Jesse Bloom's papers showing the market samples don't show a link between susceptible animals and SARS-COV-2 genetic material.

[@alohaworld]

Don't think a Dunning Kruger conspiracist fraud like her deserves a rebuttal.

[@alohaworld]

@@riok6234 She's not a virologist.

[@brendanmay9585]

@@alohaworld and no one on the twice team is a public health specialist focussed on tracing viruses.

[@HeyMJ.]

Thank you for walking through the article and addressing each point w/hard facts incl historicals re research, methods, sources, milestones, socio-political & stats. The links & time stamps are also very-much appreciated!

[@brendanmay9585]

Which facts? I saw no single fact that proved anything one way or the other. I did see a lot of informed opinions. I have no doubt that everyone here is well educated and informed. But I also know that there were many well educated people who make incorrect Analysis the whole pandemic.

[@mwizanyimbiri2253]

From Africa Zambia, I recently started following microbetv ,this has been so exciting🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉

[@rjlchristie]

Thank you to those courteous enough to communicate temperature in Celsius, so that the majority of the world can relate to it.

[@robertjamieson4802]

Chan did not submit this contention as a scientific paper. It would not likely have passed peer review. Key papers are ignored or omitted. (see TWIV 876). This is a good example of cherry picking, straw man and exclusion of pertinent research. Publish it?

[@GaryVolts]

@@robertjamieson4802 Proximal Origins wasn’t peer reviewed either. It’s a “letter” in the editorial section.

[@millieortiz-vk5qq]

Can't you see it? DNA synthesis was used to express an RNA protein; that is, RNA to DNA to express a cancer resistant property, or so they thought.

[@xponeke2440]

It seems the TWIV team are heavily invested in their own narrative. Why cannot this be dicussed impartially in a bipartisan manner? Is there that much vested self-interest involved?

[@ericlarsen9830]

Bipartisan lol. both parties agree you should sign your childrens lives over to the government for their next war

[@Sceince01]

@@xponeke2440 so what’s bipartisan ? Nuts and scholars ? Where is the evidence for lab leak ? So far n body has presented any .

[@GaryVolts]

@@xponeke2440 ya, millions of dead people can have that effect

[@riok6234]

Remember when the mRNA covid vaccine was 100% safe and 100% effective 🙂

[@Sceince01]

lol 100 % safe and effective ? You make that lie up . With such low integrity you must be an antivaxer

[@tomasbengtsson5157]

Stop posting misleading statements. There was never a claim that any vaccine is 100% safe or 100% effective. That’s why you do safety and efficacy studies before a vaccine is released. If you want to know the actual number you can read the manufacturers reports. They are public.

[@smbogan]

Literally no one ever said that.

[@DarthRock]

I never remember since that is one of the classic antivax talking point BS

[@riok6234]

@@DarthRock My reply to @smbogan apparently got deleted by ? Please type in "covid vaccine safe and effective" in youtube and you will find many, many videos supporting my statement.

[@mforever8019]

Virologists have become hyper-partisan to a very uncomfortable hypothesis that they have trouble discussing. Most of the world knows what's most likely to what your field has become too biased to see. This bias needs to be addressed going forward because it makes the field more dangerous.

[@shannond.4129]

It’s almost as if you didn’t listen to them…

[@mforever8019]

@@shannond.4129 It's almost like you have gotten caught up in their BS. *Holds hand & explains basic logic * What the natural zoonosis side needs to have evidence are infected animals with the precursor and a path to Wuhan that makes more sense than a virus hunt or strong evidence the infection was present somewhere pre-Wuhan. Minus that....Everything that we have that's "evidence" for zoonotic origins is not unexpected in the presence of a lab leak and we can't say the same the other way.

[@RonJeremysJapsEye]

They sounded pretty comfortable to me. Maybe a little exasperated having to keep doing it. Much like me reading some of the clown comments on display in the chat

[@PK779able]

​@@shannond.4129Jesse Bloom, Etienne Decroly, David Relman, James Le Duc David Fisman, David Baltimore, David Heymann consider its unclear either way. WHO is still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs.

[@GaryVolts]

@@mforever8019 accidentally triggering a pandemic that kills millions of people can have that effect. They’re dancing for their lives to split public opinion. They’ve already lost.

[@WauwieF]

Before this episode, I was convinced of the virus not being lab born. But the more "evidence" you try to bring to the listeners attention, the more I doubt it. For example, why could a lab born virus not be able to mutate so fast that you have multiple strains (after who knows how long?) next to each other, but a wild born one can? And why is the locality any indicator? Only people who were close to the market at that time must have had exposure? 1. The virus is transmissible AF, so it could have traveled with people. 2. We don't know how long it already lingered before people even got aware of it so it could have traveled in hosts to wherever at that point. 3. To this day we have seen many many people who are completely asymptomatic so those who didn't even feel sick could have carried the virus to who knows where. Plus, is it really hard to believe that in a country which shuts itself off to the outside as much as possible and suppresses its citizens, a revelation like this could have maintained concealed? Then the scientists would not even had to lie, they simply did not communicate their findings/work. In a time, where a Mr. P. can convince hundreds of millions that a war against country U. is not a war but some kind of minuscule mission, it seems completely plausible to me. You probably have a big urge to debunk incorrect "science" but please, stop it with this one at least. You discussed it ad nauseam and you only ever give those people a bigger stage than they would (deserve) otherwise. So do yourselves and us a favour and leave it at that. It's like the quote "For those who believe, no proof is necessary, for those who don't believe, no proof is possible." Ye ye, science is not a believe, but in the end people do "believe" science or they don't, same with conspiracies.

[@Sceince01]

Wombat you have managed to tel us that you are clueless . Your post is hilarious and makes zero Dominic sense an DC many things posted are contrary to facts

[@AlbertMark-nb9zo]

If the virus is contagious AF, as you put it, why did it wait until it got to the market to effect other people and create clusters of cases. Instead of family units, then schools, and other gathering places. A Korean christian spread it like wildfire just attending church, early in the pandemic.

[@jamesmadison4834]

I was just thinking how nice would it be to have an episode that references past episodes about and comprehensively addresses the lab leak theory. I have many friends whom are sure that SARS-CoV2 originated in a lab and they all have short attention spans so they would be unwilling to listen to multiple episodes of TWiV but I might perhaps be able to get them to listen to one episode, this will be that episode I refer to. Thank You TWiV team this episode especially beneficial to the fight against misinformation!

[@Sceince007]

There is good one ( not TWIV) that has Eddie , Michael Worobey and Kirsten , 2.5 hours . That one is very scientific and totally worth it .

[@lukeplant7077]

@@Sceince007 thanks I appreciate it, I wonder if anyone has done a version of this debunking for 5 yr olds. That would definitely reach misinformed folks a lot easier.

[@Logotic]

​@@lukeplant7077 😂😂😂 Thanks for that!

[@GaryVolts]

@@jamesmadison4834 sadly, you’re the one misinformed

[@jamesmadison4834]

​@@GaryVoltsCan you get me the correct information?

[@ThisTooShallPass2030]

it was accidentally made in a lab, accidentally released - as always, the truth is deeply unpopular

[@moosefighta2000]

Maybe not accidentally made.. and maybe not accidentally released either (anyone remember the China/Taiwan debacle?)

[@ThisTooShallPass2030]

@@moosefighta2000 with covid-19, it was the case. no bad intentions. What happened in that debacle?

[@emerraldx]

and yet there is zero evidence for this so why do so many people believe it? You have to make even more leaps of faith and whole bunch more deliberate conspiracies to come to this conclusion while ignoring plenty of research papers showing the opposite -

[@shannond.4129]

Bring evidence.

[@ThisTooShallPass2030]

​@@shannond.4129 In 2022 I know someone who still believes in the WMDs lies. It is almost 2 decades old and he still doesn't know the truth behind government & news media deception so war industry could profit. Evidence isn't the issue, the issue is a desire to learn the truth. Not everyone wants to learn new information, easier to just trust officials and hype

[@truthordare5438]

Rich Read the lyrics to Jackson Browne's BEFORE THE DELUGE and STANDING IN THE BREACH or really, any of his songs

[@evafaym]

Wow. Fascinating to see this groups firm opinion... despite evidence to the contrary at several levels. The group psychology is the most interesting aspect of this discussion.Where is the critical thinking and exploring the many aspects of gray? Where is the interest in the questions and consideration rather than laughing at or demeaning peoples comments as 'conspiracy' and denial. No dialogue or debate... Given we are at a time where so much research is intentionally hidden from view or even fabricated, yet there is no scepticism on the data despite the extent of misinformation and censorship. Which is understandable given the implications of the lab leak and cascade of harms we are still suffering.

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

how many virions can dance on the head fo a pin?

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

This group represents >99% of relevantly qualified scientists in the opinions & facts discussed here. All the dialogue has already been done & debate is not how science works.....you can debate ideas & opinions - science is settled by experiments, which can be repeated independantly to achieve the same conclusions.

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

@@howilearned2stopworrying508 Dance? none Theoretically one could fit between 200,000,000 and 500,000,000 on the head of a pin approx 2mm in diameter. But if you want a more realistic example - go for a swim at your nearest beach, take an empty 1ltr bottle with you & fill it from the ocean.That litre of seawater will contain close to 10,000,000,000 virions.

[@wendyg8536]

An intelligence test most people failed.

[@mystryfine3481]

These people are virologists. I would believe them before people who have not extensively studied and have worked in the lab with viruses.

[@heatherlawless6079]

Can we say that lab leak is completely wrong? Unless the research proves 100%, then all other theories would be “less likely statistically” in your opinion?

[@Sceince007]

Not 100% but yes extremely unlikely .

[@GaryVolts]

@@heatherlawless6079 lab leak is the only explanation consistent with all types of evidence

[@Sceince01]

@@GaryVoltslol Where is that evidence ? Why no one has ever been able to present it? Why do lab leakers lie so much ? Look at Alina Chan , all 5 points are lies . Look at yourself , have you posted anything that is not a lie ? Three other people tried to deceive us with twisted info about papers . 1: which virus did they start with ? 2: why does virus genome has two take signs of natural virus ? 3: why are all initial cases clustered around market ? 4: how did virus leak twice and each time went straight to where a zoonotic spread was supposed to occur . 5: why do multiple and authentic record clearly point at the fact that the lab did not have any virus that could be used as back bone ?

[@heatherlawless6079]

@@Sceince007 until hard numbers hit research, I’m 50/50. We don’t know anything definitive. The research that is out….. all I can think, we have some really intelligent people among us. We can do better. 90k animals tested….. I’d like to see the list and data for that honestly, but I don’t know. No real scientist or researcher will ever say 100% sure though. I never would. Not all research is being heard or seen or approved either. Correlation isn’t causation, but correlation, a strong correlation, should never be denied to researchers. Not just on this one small tiny variable in a long series of events. Just my theory. Could be so completely wrong, but….

[@Sceince007]

@@heatherlawless6079 yes your theory is completely wrong . Yes not only that no scientist will ever say 100% but no body even with common sense will say will say 100%. What did you forget than ? The 2nd more important part of it . That is No scientist or any body with common sense will also ignore a mountain of evidence and weigh a hypothesis with almost no evidence ( lab leak of natural virus ) equally with a hypothesis with a mountain of evidence ( natural origin ) . Virologists who have actually worked on origin have ALMOST completely dismissed lab creation .

[@robtherub]

The initial point seems to be that the closest thing found to it in nature is wildly different, then say, therefore not engineered. Exact opposite seems to be the case

[@tomasbengtsson5157]

No, you have the wrong conclusion.

[@GaryVolts]

@@robtherub they’re presuming incorrectly that they have a comprehensive inventory of all the viruses being worked on in the government lab of an authoritarian country that shares the facility with the Chinese military.

[@anthonysei]

Classified work is done in secret. May spin off from unclass work but it is done under complete release control. PRC military connectee ppl are not publishing or talking about parallel and classified work. The prc military has powers well beyond imagination.

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

Free the A51 Hostages they can't stop us all!

[@anthonysei]

@@howilearned2stopworrying508 not sure what that even means or how it's relevant

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

@@anthonysei the US military has powers well beyond imagination sicne the 1940s. Read about the Crash at CORONA 🛸 watch the 1970 TV show UFO which inspired Team America World Police. Classified work is done in secret but there are always leaks

[@Sceince007]

@@anthonysei lol the classified work would make changing the 1200 nucleotides possible ? What other jokes do you have in store for us ? Also that clearly means you have no evidence to claim it was lab leaked yet you wee tased so poorly that you don’t mind blaming humans way way better than yourself? lol , what jokers

[@Sceince007]

The dishonest dedication . Lol what about your integrity ? What makes you ignore overwhelming evidence ? Why are you hell bent on making a real Life super hero Dr Fauci ? Your last 10 generation put together have not half the good work he does in year ? 😀

[@sorenzollamas]

Thank you so much! I was waiting for a rebuttal.

[@johnellmaker]

In the comments you'll find a bunch of people who can't explain virology basics, for example virus replication, how cleaving works, bsl, mutations, and genetics; all things you need to be able to speak on this topic. Somehow they have the hubris to think there are experts outside of virology, microbiology, immunology that are more informed without any demonstration of expertise. If you are one of them, there is a free virology course on this channel, you can spend some time yourself to get some basics before parroting some politician or failed scientist like Chan

[@mforever8019]

Epidemiology 101: Examine area you first find the outbreak for likely spillover spots & then examine sequence and see if you find a link. We note some of the closest ancestors were worked on at the lab. Almost right away we knew two things.... the labs were a very likely source of the outbreak and the field had issues being objective and were not going to be much help due to they labeled the most likely spot a crazy conspiracy. Nothing new... politics has been corrupting science since science existed.

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

@@mforever8019 Ha ha ha "....Examine area you first find the outbreak for likely spillover spots & then examine sequence and see if you find a link....." what, like a market selling live and butchered animals? ....some of which are known to be susceptible to SARS like corona viruses? .....and an animal market that is shown to be the epicentre of 2 separate lineages of the virus in humans? "....We note some of the closest ancestors were worked on at the lab...." 1) they are not ancestors, they are separate lines of evolution which may have had the same ancestors decades or centuries in the past. 2) The closest relative to SARS-Cov-2 documented to have been in WIV before 2019 was only 96% similar - some 1200 bases different......obviously you haven't the biological knowledge to realise, but that's like the difference between you and a chimpanzee.

[@mforever8019]

@@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173 Labeling the lab a crazy conspiracy was one of the most ridiculous moments in science history. Follow the psychologically compromised if you want, but I'll go where the evidence leads. It's not unsual that politics corrupts a field when so much is at stake.

[@GaryVolts]

@@johnellmaker in the comments you’ll find a bunch of highly conflicted people that want desperately to it not be the case that their field was culpable in the deaths of millions of innocents and that their heroes lied to them.

[@petercollingwood522]

And you're an expert at what exactly?

[@PK779able]

Why refer to Pekar et al in support of multiple spillovers when new genomes published in Lv et al (2024) show intermediate genomes and spread before the A-B split? These lineages were only two mutations apart anyway so it was always questionable that they reflected separate spillover events. A new PubPeer comment also shows Pekar compared likelihoods of *different outcomes* for N=1 and N=2, with N=2 given a bigger target. When corrected single spillover is more likely. They also appear unaware of Weissman (2024) showing ascertainment bias in early case data or Bloom (2024) showing the environmental samples show other animal CoVS linked to susceptible animals but not SARS-COV-2? Ultimately WHO is still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs so they should support that.

[@Sceince01]

Not true . The papers used rejected samples . Where is Lv et al published ? Are they not using genomes rejected by Worobey as group for incompetence samples and 5 other reasons ? Also Pekar mistake was caught before publication and fixed and it did not change the end result or papers significance so stop lying . Your 😊desperation os way too obvious

[@brendanmay9585]

@@Sceince01 I noticed you failed two engage the the fact that the WHO is still calling for more data

[@Sceince01]

@@brendanmay9585 is that another one of your obviously deceitful comment where you fail to complete the where they say its extremely unlikely but more data is needed >? Also why do you care what any body says whats your reason for ignoring overwhelming evidence specially when you can can not qualify your dumb opinion based on sheer ignorance ?

[@brendanmay9585]

@@Sceince01 just noting that you disagree with the WHO. I am not the one using ad hominem attacks instead of discussing the point. 🚫

[@shannond.4129]

@@brendanmay9585 who isn’t calling for more data? Confused as to why this poses any doubts in anyone’s minds.

[@brendanmay9585]

Interesting that the arguments against lab leak contradict each other. 1) we only found it BECAUSE there were good labs, it was probably elsewhere before it got to the market. 2) finding two different variants at the market means it must have crossed ovee in the market. Hmm so which one is it?

[@Sceince007]

Dumbo two different market for each lab leak , not the same . Your designation is hilarious. Now that you got yourself in a bind care to explain why each variant chose to ignore more crowded areas in Wuhan and went straight fur market each time ?

[@AlbertMark-nb9zo]

What makes it contradictory? Your desire to make it so? If a hunter caught an early crossover in the middle of a cave, in a countryside as backwards as China, the chance of observing it and catching it is slight. Look at the AIDS example. It originated in Africa, decades ago. First observed cases of identifiable AIDS was in LA.

[@brendanmay9585]

@@AlbertMark-nb9zo but that is exactly my point. The argument thatnitbmust be from nature seems to stem from the argument that huanan market was the crossover location.

[@AlbertMark-nb9zo]

@@brendanmay9585 - my point is that your original post against lab leak contained contradictory arguments wasn't a proper assessment. There were various independent factors. The wet market is a natural focusing point of where a natural spillover is going to more likely happen because it concentrates interactions of natural species in unsanitary conditions with people. If the argument is that it arose in a lab, to the wet market, that seems to unlikely, given the characteristics of the virus. And the history of the research being done. The wet market is great for concentrating what's maybe there, but the fact that you would've needed over a thousand mutations to get from the closest known virus at the time shows that it was highly unlikely as an incubator in the time period. One of the TWIV's has scientists looking at various other natural Coronovirus'. These have aspects much closer to COVID19. It's things like that, that point more to a natural source. It took around 10 years to source a cave that contained all the elements to produce SARs. And they still didn't find a definitive ancestor.

[@AlbertMark-nb9zo]

@@brendanmay9585 my point is that your original post against lab leak contained contradictory arguments wasn't a proper assessment. There were various independent factors. The wet market is a natural focusing point of where a natural spillover is going to more likely happen because it concentrates interactions of natural species in unsanitary conditions with people.

[@elizabethparker2017]

Interesting how conspiracy theorists never question the people they're getting their 'information' from. Wildlife trade is a billion dollar set of industries, with a strong interest in not being at fault for the recent and future pandemics. Anyone else wondering who is funding Chan for her article?

[@erikboehm8210]

It's funny you say that when Daszak is funding people to say otherwise

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

Confirmation bias + ignorance ......they go with whatever fits their own preconceived ideas & are not smart enough to see the conspiracy nonsense for what it is. Alina Chan co-authored a book (with Matt Ridley I think?) which is basically a long-winded version of the NYT article. Clearly, book sales are slowing down now the AVs have realised it has too many words & not enough pictures. Quite surprisingly, the book is in the "non fiction" section if you're interested.

[@jessehauver]

Yeah, her funding at Broad comes from Big Wildlife Trade. She's obviously a conspiracy theorist.

[@brendanmay9585]

Anyone wonder who is funding dazcek?

[@janetmasleid4085]

@@brendanmay9585 EcoHealth was a rainmaker for careers!

[@Logotic]

"The truth floats, unfortunately it takes a long time to get to the surface." That's brilliant, thank you!

[@Logotic]

And bullshit also floats. Human history has always been one long bloody contest between which of these will prevail.

[@jochemlambers]

This "panel" is self-congratulatory coping from another level lol😅😂 RACCOON DOGS AGAIN???? Wow.

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

Hmmmmm .......lets see - raccoon dogs are known to have been susceptible to a bat SARS corona virus & to be a suitable intermediary vector for human infection some 20 years ago. What are the chances that it could happen again with another bat corona virus? ..........Really really high actually..... who'd have thought that the basic biology of the virus, the bat, the raccoon dog and the human hasn't massively changed in 20 years. No clue what "...self-congratulatory coping from another level..." means in proper English .......I'm guessing that's derogatory. What you observed was "confidence" - because they are all highly educated & qualified in their chosen fields and know exactly what they're talking about. Do you have an expertise other than trolling?

[@wendyg8536]

Fact is..there are Chinese run biolabs being found in California. . ...what does this team have to say about this ??

[@wendyg8536]

United front run

[@ericlarsen9830]

I heard the Chinese have tampered with our coca cola supplies

[@laj382]

Why don't you have Dr. Steven Quay on your podcast. I would like to hear you debate with him about the potential lab leak and the gain-of-function research performed at the Wuhan Lab. Dr. Quay's arguments and explanation of the fundamental science concerning the origins of the virus is more convincing than anything that you have presented.

[@gravitationalvelocity1905]

Heard nothing to convince me that this was not lab created. Your inability to analyze your industry critically is disheartening.

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

when Columbus came to America did he deploy lab-created germs on the indigineous people?

[@RebeccaHorton-gx6uy]

Lol if they can't convince you--no one can

[@hector_m1973]

Its called GAIN of function for a reason. Otherwise it would be called loss of function. You can thank me later.

[@Sceince007]

lol as if your non scientific explanation is enough. It’s funny when those who know nothing actually think they do know something . Laughable ? Are you aware that within a virus a gain of function can result in loss of function in other ways ? or loss of functions ? Also exactly what function was gained ?

[@shannond.4129]

No.

[@darth_pronator]

This is a perfect example of what happens when you look at evidence with the intent of proving the argument you want to believe. It’s a 200 million to 1 chance that it didn’t come from the lab. But if you go through enough mental gymnastics, you can find features in the facts to focus on, while ignoring everything else, in a way that sounds like a plausible argument.

[@sciencefliestothemoon2305]

200 million in one ? Where is that number coming from? Uranus?

[@Sceince007]

Where did you get that stat from ? Your lower end right ? What evidence you have for the extreme bs you just posted ? I have not seen even 1 bit of evidence for lab leak yet .

[@Sceince007]

@@sciencefliestothemoon2305 his lower end . I have noticed the most important characteristic among lab leakers is dishonesty .

[@Sceince007]

Since there are no ifs and buts about Alina Chan being dishonest , how disgusted are you with her and why do you think she had to resort to lying ?

[@Sceince007]

@@sciencefliestothemoon2305 there are two clowns who actually liked his lie . I think lack of integrity is a huge among lab leakers

[@scottyp8780]

Can someone knowledgeable speak to the lack of progenitor variants? Maybe give another example of an airborne virus without evolutionary history. The lab origin sounds like the most likely scenario to me by overwhelming circumstantial evidence. Had to do a double take on the date of this vid. Kinda shocked really. Listening now.

[@PK779able]

Good point. New genomes were published this year by Lv et al which suggest a single point of emergence with lineage A coming first. The panelists here seem to have overlooked it.

[@scottyp8780]

Yeah. Lab Origin is hard to wrap my head around as if it is true it would have dark implications. Those implications being that "covering it up" would be obstructing the scientific force of 8 billion people from whatever data was gleaned during the work in the lab. Then there is the question of genomic patens. Maybe a question would be is if it was a lab leak, what would that look like?

[@scottyp8780]

@@PK779able I find myself in a hard position. I don't want it to be from a lab, but that is what I think is the most likely scenario.

[@gayluinstra1396]

Regarding the origin of Covid19, ... I lean toward the Lab origin theory.

[@John75Mulhern]

Based on what evidence?

[@ThisTooShallPass2030]

@@John75Mulhern China destroyed it. They protect their government's reputation over anything, even the lives of their own citizens and the truth

[@nictamer]

@user-br6px6ok9x simple plausibility in the absence of transparency from the Chinese dictatorship. To wit, there are 100 cities with > 1 million pop in the PRC. Only one of them had a lab studying those viruses, and it was known before the crisis that it had typical Chinese safety practices, I.e none. What was the prior probability that a pandemic started in that very city without being linked to the lab? 1 in 100. It follows that an alternate explanation should have better odds, I.e >99%. And not just being merely more likely than not. This would change if Xi's lackeys allowed a bona fide investigation, but that's not happening until the next revolution/coup.

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

@@ThisTooShallPass2030 yeah the US government would never do that 🙄 what was the per capita fatality rate of COVID in China vs the USA?

[@ThisTooShallPass2030]

@@howilearned2stopworrying508 Safest place was Africa, lowest deaths per capita in the world. but worse was Europe, so hard hit, it was like the dark ages with the plagues

[@BluePlanet88]

You should keep producing quality scientific discussions and reinforce the spillover hypothesis to keep everyone informed. Important information needs constant reminders. We can deal with the distraction caused by the fringe.

[@brendanmay9585]

Quality would be specifically discussing with a proponent of the lab leak theory. 6 vs. 0 is not particularly useful.

[@BluePlanet88]

@@brendanmay9585not if you are going to bring in substandard conspirators. TWIV got it right by bringing only real scientists. 43:02

[@nuynobi]

​@@brendanmay9585 Sure. And in the interests of providing quality education to our kids, proponents of Intelligent Design should be invited into the classroom to provide a counterpoint whenever evolution is taught school. That'd be much more useful than simply learning about evolution from someone who knows what they're talking about.

[@brendanmay9585]

@@nuynobi again. You are just making a poor argument. With intelligent design vs evolution the debate has been settled. In this case there is no conclusive evidence either way, thus a debate is absolutely valid.

[@Sceince007]

@@brendanmay9585 even after she has already pr Ben herself to be a liar ? What will a discussion with a proven liar do ? For you it will be gibberish as you have already admitted you do not understand evidence .

[@simontemplar404]

I appreciate your efforts to counter misinformation, thank you.

[@PK779able]

The FBI and Dept of Energy Z-Division scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Los Alamos favor lab origin while WHO is still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs. A bit premature to say a given theory is incorrect.

[@Sceince007]

@@PK779ablelol without evidence though . Also you forgot to mention the other intelligence agencies which do not . At least you must have put together something in your head to counter the overwhelming evidence for zoonotic origin . Can I ask you specific questions ? How do you explain two lab leaks lineage A and lineage B ? I have more than dozen questions .

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

@@PK779able yeah like how they hadcredible inteligence about Iraqi WMDs. they definitely wouldnt lie to make their bosses happy

[@wendyg8536]

It's guessed some here also appreciate the efforts to force vaccine escape.

[@brendanmay9585]

You mean the misinformation from the WHO that literally says we don not have enough evidence to rule anything out?

[@RedFox-c5l]

It was man made fact

[@John75Mulhern]

Evidence for it?

[@RedFox-c5l]

@@John75Mulhern Bioweapon poulation controll agenda 21 and 30 WEF transgerderism aborion FACT in one word NEW WORLD ODER o you will have a fight on your hands i because it will not stand FACT i know

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

@@RedFox-c5l as it says on every US Dollar NOVO ORDO SECLORUM

[@Sceince007]

Based on what facts ? Lol . Just behave you hate facts ?

[@Sceince007]

@@John75Mulhernhis lower end . He made it .

[@anthonysei]

Poor containment practices and known breaches show a probability. >0

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

Captain Tripps was made in a lab in 1975. Randall Flagg told me

[@Sceince007]

How important do you think it is for the virus to be in the lab for the leak ? Why do you think Americans intelligence report that lab started working on virus after December 2020 tell you ? You don’t know how to connect dots and put things in perspective do you ? Why were two lineages ? How did it leak twice ? Why did it go straight to market each time ? Why did it happen in a place where a zoonotic spread would occur ? If it was lab leaked why are relatives of lab people not among the first cases , not even among first 750 cases ? I can keep going. At this point to consider virus was lab leaked one has to be as dumb as GOP or as dishonest .

[@Sceince007]

@@anthonysei of purse it shows a probability slightly higher . But when talking about probabilities why in a typical lab weaker way considering it only one way ? Life is not one event . Then also consider down stream and upstream events. Could a pandemic start at your office ? No ? Why not ? Because you did not have the virus on which you could work . There is decent enough evidence the jab did not have it . That’s upstream we can talk what evidence. Downstream . Did the Boris leak twice ? Each time avoid every body else and go straight to the place a zoonotic spread was supposed to occur ?

[@saliksayyar9793]

Vince , perhaps you can educate the ideological polemicists in Congress?

[@GaryVolts]

@@saliksayyar9793 he wouldn’t get far, they’re already onto his game

[@tikaanipippin]

These RNA viruses have a shotgun approach to evolution, producing many particles per infected cell that may have incomplete or defective genomes after the cell that gave rise to them lyses, but as long as a few other cells get infected by these released virions, before many rounds of infection, the host is releasing billions of virions, some of which can infect other hosts. There is a good chance that variants may be produced with every host infected. By chance some variants have some selective advantage (i.e. there is a natural Gain of Function), and may produce new waves of infection, having variations from the original antigens on the viral surface, escaping the immunity prior variants have conferred on previous infections in the new hosts. Chasing the origin for SARS-CoV2 is futile, since there is no breadcrumb trail to follow, the intermediate virus genomes have long mutated away. What is not often repeated is that throughout the world, there are individual people who have cross reacting antisera to SARS-CoV2, who showed no symptoms right from the beginning of the pandemic at the end of 2019. The virus origin may have been circulating in the human population, certainly in Italy before September 2019, where stored blood showed antibodies to SARS-CoV2 have been detected. Perhaps some unknown traveller was coinfected with a similar coronavirus in the Wuhan area, resulting in a natural chimeric genome that became the origin of COVID-19. We shall never know.

[@janicelipsky8200]

This was a great rebuttal but I think what’s needed is a succinct piece laying out the case for a natural market origin that can be submitted to the NYT. Five key points in descending order of importance, perhaps drawing from Worobey’s article. Not a rebuttal as the main points (although can be used to support) but the strongest points in favor.

[@PK779able]

Why are the panelists still referring to Pekar et al in support of multiple spillovers when new genomes published in Lv et al (2024) show intermediate genomes and spread before the A-B split? These lineages were only two mutations apart anyway so it was always questionable that they reflected separate spillover events. A new PubPeer comment also shows Pekar compared likelihoods of *different outcomes* for N=1 and N=2, with N=2 given a bigger target. When corrected single spillover is more likely. They also appear unaware of Weissman (2024) showing ascertainment bias in early case data or Bloom (2024) showing the environmental samples show other animal CoVS linked to susceptible animals but not SARS-COV-2? Ultimately WHO is still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs so they should support that.

[@janicelipsky8200]

I don’t disagree with you. I did not know about the more recent data regarding the lineages. I am persuaded by the panelists based on my perception of their integrity and expertise but I’m open to the lab leak theory. There’s no conclusive smoking gun yet on either side, which to me would need to be a credible whistle blower on the lab leak side or a definitive intermediate host or definitive animal-to-human jump on the natural origin side.

[@MrxstGrssmnstMttckstPhlNelThot]

Episodes on this topic always bring out the crazies, wow.

[@circa1890]

I don't know.. the recent GCRI showed 1 in 5 virologists and epidemiologists believe that there's at least a 50/50 chance it was a lab leak. Curious to hear more of their evidence for natural origins.

[@Patrick_Ross]

The conspiracy theorists and assorted other nut jobs seem to come out of the woodwork on topics like this!😂

[@mpennipep]

It’s not a conspiracy theory when there’s a real evidence based conspiracy.

[@simontemplar404]

@@mpennipep I am not aware of any evidence for a conspiracy. Care to mention what that evidence is?

[@DP-PhD]

As in all good conspiracies a few strands of truth, which alone are of little relevance or consequence, can be woven with a fabric of un-truths to create an ever lasting 'cloak of righteousness'. Some people use this to cloak their own 'agendas'. Sadly, I doubt this one will ever go away, no matter what evidence comes to light in the future.

[@luismatheu4226]

So prone to infect every thing every where.... That after more than 1 millón years, start to trip and do turism...amaizing

[@josephherrera111]

Great lesson in critical thinking guys. Thank you

[@PK779able]

Why are the panelists still referring to Pekar et al in support of multiple spillovers when new genomes published in Lv et al (2024) show intermediate genomes and spread before the A-B split? These lineages were only two mutations apart anyway so it was always questionable that they reflected separate spillover events. A new PubPeer comment also shows Pekar compared likelihoods of *different outcomes* for N=1 and N=2, with N=2 given a bigger target. When corrected single spillover is more likely. They also appear unaware of Weissman (2024) showing ascertainment bias in early case data or Bloom (2024) showing the environmental samples show other animal CoVS linked to susceptible animals but not SARS-COV-2? Ultimately WHO is still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs so they should support that.

[@josephherrera111]

@@PK779able I assume this was meant for someone else.

[@GaryVolts]

@@josephherrera111 you said the video was a lesson in critical thinking but they’re hanging everything on a twice debunked paper

[@josephherrera111]

@@GaryVolts You should totally take that up with them.

[@nictamer]

+100 social credit points for you!

[@simontemplar404]

Reuters report 2 million excess deaths in China from COVID following their relaxation of isolation rules in 2023. It is your acceptance of their lies about the actual deaths which merits the social credits.

[@TheFirstManticore]

Naturally; these are the people deciding the social credit criteria for medicine.

[@Sceince007]

Thankyou for this.

[@Jaguarca23]

Blinded by the Science 🧪💀

[@mkilptrick]

Jolene is a nice addition to the team.

[@Logotic]

I suspect that Jolene might be the power behind the throne...

[@jonetyson]

Vince, PLEASE write a response to the NY Times.

[@shannond.4129]

They rejected an offer from virologists.

[@janetmasleid4085]

@@shannond.4129 These folks are still quoting Pekar/Worobey!! Its like they can't be bothered to listen to Ralph Baric!!

[@deanjohnston1614]

@@janetmasleid4085 "Though he thinks it’s far more likely COVID-19 originated in nature, he said of a possible laboratory escape, “You can’t rule that out.” Ralph Baric in Vanity Fair, 5/1/2024

[@emerraldx]

We cannot rule out alien introduction either but we generally don’t make note of all the things that might be possible and at this point there is as much evidence for both if the lay person could actually properly interpret it

[@janetmasleid4085]

@@deanjohnston1614 My major point was that Dr. Baric believes that the origin of SARS2 was not at the Huanan market. IMO nothing should be ruled out and we will never have dispositive evidence.

[@DudeFun-yi7nu]

Thank you for these acts of love

[@Logotic]

Honestly, this sounds like something an AI may have written, but I'm down with it...

[@janetmasleid4085]

TWiV is going to the mat for their friends. So, it is an act of love but what is not.. is an act of good science unfortunately.

[@ghettocowboy993]

IT CAME FROM A LAB , HOW DENSE ARE PEOPLE

[@John75Mulhern]

You should also provide evidence so we "dense" people can read it

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

like Stephen King's The Stand? Don't fear the reaper, get back to the office!

[@mforever8019]

@@John75Mulhern Plenty of evidence has been provided and it's won the majority view of the world. A lot is listed in Chan's piece. An uncomfortable hypothesis puts people in denial and causes them to dismiss evidence with bad reasoning.

[@scottyp8780]

You’re likely right but your name calling isn’t an argument and is not helpful at all.

[@emerraldx]

oh yes, when has the majority of people without any scientific background ever held a completely false opinion? *sigh* seriously, all the darned time and you’ve all latched on to 5 confused scientists with an axe to grind or book to sell and decide all the professionals who have been doing this work for years must be lying for no good reason 😒

[@JillKnapp]

Really great breakdown; thank you so, so much. The title cracked me up, as did Alan's "You can blow into your lanyard to inflate." 😂. Today's recommendations were especially great. 1,000 bonus points to David for pointing us to that geochron video-- just fantastic!

[@alocinotasor]

Talk about bias. Have you heard of Occam's Razor?

[@GaryVolts]

@@alocinotasor not when they’re culpable in the deaths of millions of people. They’re ain’t hearing it

[@Sceince01]

@@GaryVoltshaha . Could you post anything dumber ?

[@smbogan]

Occam's Razor says it jumped from animals *like every other novel virus*.

[@GaryVolts]

@@smbogan SARS1 jumped from nature once but leaked from labs 3 times just counting China

[@margotbw4660]

Exactly, the sequences aren't there. Scientific integrity is unshakable.

[@donnamunro2090]

How did Alan miss calling this episode "This little virus came from market"

[@tomsteinberg8106]

Thanks for doing this important TWiV -- Brandolini's Law of (mis)information asymmetry: the energy required to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude greater than to generate bullshit, and My First Corollary, that Brandolini sets a lower limit only.

[@PK779able]

Why are the panelists still referring to Pekar et al in support of multiple spillovers when new genomes published in Lv et al (2024) show intermediate genomes and spread before the A-B split? These lineages were only two mutations apart anyway so it was always questionable that they reflected separate spillover events. A new PubPeer comment also shows Pekar compared likelihoods of *different outcomes* for N=1 and N=2, with N=2 given a bigger target. When corrected single spillover is more likely. They also appear unaware of Weissman (2024) showing ascertainment bias in early case data or Bloom (2024) showing the environmental samples show other animal CoVS linked to susceptible animals but not SARS-COV-2? Ultimately WHO is still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs so they should support that.

[@AlbertMark-nb9zo]

@@PK779able - "No evidence of systematic proximity ascertainment bias in early COVID-19 cases in Wuhan Reply to Weissman (2024) Florence Débarre, Michael Worobey "

[@AlbertMark-nb9zo]

@@PK779able - Are you talking about Gilles Demaneuf ? His analysis is that the correction only showed a moderate chance of a single spillover, NOT more likely. And that was from 4 days ago. And his original post, showed irritation that his and others contributions weren't acknowledged. Hardly peer reviewed.

[@sebastiancioek5970]

Sorry but You can't proof it;-)

[@John75Mulhern]

Can you "proof" it?

[@ThisTooShallPass2030]

@@John75Mulhern I still know someone who believes the WMDs lies from 2003. When someone falls for a lie, no "proof" can change their mind. They have to experience personal suffering before they can re-open their mind to new ideas again

[@brendanmay9585]

@@John75Mulhern wait, since when do I have to prove that someone's theory is wrong. They have to prove their own theory. That is how science works.

[@jjharvathh]

I am unconvinced by this discussion. (I bet this group thinks the vaccine is great. Am I right?)

[@jaykanta4326]

Saved millions of lives, so yeah.

[@jjharvathh]

@@jaykanta4326 created excess deaths by millions we know that...not clear to saved any lives

[@jjharvathh]

@@jaykanta4326 Not clear it saved many at all. Is clear that excess deaths were created by millions and still are being created.

[@jjharvathh]

Not clear it saved many lives at all. It is clear that excess deaths were created by millions and still are being created.

[@jjharvathh]

Vaccine did not clearly save many lives at all, but excess deaths are indisputable.

[@brendanmay9585]

How is two variants an argument? 'simply no way to get from a lab to the market twice? Seriousl!?? We have seen two vatiants within one person.

[@Sceince007]

No not that way the two variants even though just two mutations apart are from from different mutations trees and a lot less likely ti happen in one person plus generating puts them about a month apart.

[@Sceince007]

Also can you explain why each time they went to a market , a different market each time ? If one person why infected two different places ? Why a different tree of mutations ? This theory will have to explain a lot of unexplainable but you surely must have the explanations - scientific ones . Let’s see then

[@brendanmay9585]

@@Sceince007but how does two variants lean toward nature? Like is the claim that tow different variants could not come from a lab? I mean we know that labs had 1000s of different Corona viruses. I am not arguing for lab leak, I am simply saying two variants provides no real evidence either way. Happy though if someone could explain the thought process in detail.

[@Sceince007]

@@brendanmay9585 I just did yet you in your typical dishonest way completely ignored it Well they do go a long way and you do know that you have not been able to explain it even to yourself . If you can then bring it , let’s see if you can explain . 1: the two lineages A and B even though two mutations apart are from different tree with there are own lineages further down so unlikely in one person . Also these two lineages are genetically timed to be two weeks to 1 month apart. 2: why do you keep separating it from the context- you can not explain so you keep dodging - purposefully I might say Why did each lineage went straight to market - a different market by the way ignoring other places ? Lets see, I really want the answer this time no running away this time Also why do you think this is an important point for 99.9% of the virologists? Why do you think Alina Chan ( one of the incredibly rare dissenting virologists ) clearly had to resort to dishonesty ?

[@Sceince007]

Exactly why do you think Alina Chan , one of the incredibly rare virologists ( likely trying to sell her book and get rich ) s so dishonest about her her point number 2 ? Since there is zero doubt about that how disgusting to find her dishonesty?

[@millieortiz-vk5qq]

Nope! It didn't come from a lab. You could easily replicate the zoonotic transmission by putting a bat and a pangolin together in a cage hoping one of them is the carrier of the 2003 SARS outbreak.

[@rg5445]

I will not trust any authority in any matter, no matter what, ever again. Period. It’s not a good way to live life but what alternative do we have? Assuming that we are being lied to and therefore we must scrutinize every official word is a necessity and not just conspiratorial.

[@Sceince007]

What is this based on ? Clear evidence that virus is natural ? Clear evidence that COVID vaccines have saved millions of lives ? Also the evidence that vaccines have saved suffering as well ?

[@helengarrett6378]

Early in life, in grammar school in fact, a wise teacher told me that to assume made an ass out of u and me. It was a spelling lesson but it was a life lesson too. Science is not based on assumptions, as it happens. Science is based in proof, not in assumptions. Please reevaluate your assumptions. Sad that you to did not have a wise grammar school teacher too.

[@Sceince007]

@@helengarrett6378 love this . In medicine we say “ assumption is the mother of error “. If assumption is based on experience test it and ensure .

[@maria.and2265]

Yes, it came from Mother Nature's ''lab'', courtesy of thousands of years of evolution! laughing emoji!

[@lesfaby8997]

Man helped through the $70 billion wild animal trade bringing in disease carrying live wildlife into the Wuhan animal market known to host sarbecoviruses. Nature and the illegal animal trade works at BSL level zero. The amount and variety of virus in nature dwarfs anything in labs.

[@shannond.4129]

It’s almost as if the dissenting commentators haven’t watched this 🤔

[@PK779able]

Why are the panelists still referring to Pekar et al in support of multiple spillovers when new genomes published in Lv et al (2024) show intermediate genomes and spread before the A-B split? These lineages were only two mutations apart anyway so it was always questionable that they reflected separate spillover events. A new PubPeer comment also shows Pekar compared likelihoods of *different outcomes* for N=1 and N=2, with N=2 given a bigger target. When corrected single spillover is more likely. They also appear unaware of Weissman (2024) showing ascertainment bias in early case data or Bloom (2024) showing the environmental samples show other animal CoVS linked to susceptible animals but not SARS-COV-2? Ultimately WHO is still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs so they should support that.

[@erikboehm8210]

Yes there should, it would help reign in their numerous strawman fallacies

[@ThisTooShallPass2030]

It isn't a conspiracy if 1 person did it (which was by accident, no bad intention and probably still doesn't know)

[@Sceince007]

For that theory to be true you will have to counter a ton of overwhelming scientific evidence in favor of zoonotic origin

[@brendanmay9585]

For me, the scary thing is how cobfident they can be. That is not scientific. Can someone explain the logic of Epicenter veing cobflated with origin.

[@Sceince007]

Aren’t you the clown who ran away when presented evidence ? How do you explain two leaks with in a week and how do you explain both of them shooting straight for market each time ignoring all other places ?

[@Sceince007]

Aren’t you the clown who ran away when presented evidence ? How do you explain two leaks with in a week and how do you explain both of them shooting straight for market each time ignoring all other places ?

[@Sceince007]

You mean how it was the doctors not the CDC or government organizations that discovered the first cases which were market unrelated yet clustered tightly around the market ?

[@Sceince007]

Confidence because of evidence ? Why is it not science dumbo ? So far they have come across zero evidence for Ian leak , none and they have overwhelming evidence for zoonotic origin.

[@Sceince007]

Since Alina Chan is clearly dishonest ( obviously no it’s and buts about it as evidence is crystal clear) are you disgusted by her clear dishonesty ?

[@5955yt]

The problem came from a lab, and so did the solution, Omicron.

[@gribbler1695]

Omicron is believed to have been an immune-pressure escape mutation, since there were so many nonsynonymous mutations.

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

@@gribbler1695 sounds like modern medicine is flawed, pumping people with deep pockets full of engineered antibodies so they can stick around for 1 mroe day as an incubator for more variants. And don't tell them to wear a mask when they jet off on a vacation, either. Bill Hamilton was right

[@luismatheu4226]

All great science desigs come from serendipity and a wild guess

[@Sceince007]

You heard that story as a baby and never gave it a thought ? Lol

[@TheFirstManticore]

I have to hear this. I know it's not the whole truth, but I won't be happy unless I hear it.

[@wendyg8536]

Ugh. .just..how could you !

[@DP-PhD]

I love TWiV for all the scientific discussion. It is totally understandable when frustration can be detected in voice tone when discussing some science that, really is straw grasping. And boy is it hard not to let it show. However, please folks on such a charged topic, best to try and 'hold it in' not to 'woooooo new news' and such as that is exactly the kind of thing that the full on lab-leak diehards use as evidence that scientists are arrogant and ignorant know it alls. I can almost see the next video capture on Twitter being taken out of context and off we go again!

[@luismatheu4226]

1200 or 2400 nt difference.... But what about aminoácid... May give diferent results, i think

[@Sceince007]

Do not mind just making up things ? No respect for the facts and the truth ?

[@vkevpe]

Title should be “Lab leak proffered evidence not sufficiently supported. We still don’t know the origin.” Also it could be lab origin and yet not engineered. Bats brought in for study, or an employee who investigates caves could have theoretically brought the virus to the lab. I think the only honest answer is: “We just don’t know.”

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

Did you even bother to listen to this video? Why do you think the epicentre for both early lineages was the market - some 20-25km away from the lab? Why do you think None of the early cases were at or around the WIV. You're almost right, the honest answer is "We just don't know, but all the evidence suggests a natural spillover event in/around Huanan seafood Market is the most likely explanation, whereas the alleged lab leak theory has no plausability or evidennce behind it".

[@PK779able]

WHO's position is all hypotheses remain on the table.

[@PK779able]

​@@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173Weissman (2024) shows that the early case data is affected by ascertainment bias so is not informative unfortunately. As David Relman said it's "hopelessly impoverished". Also, new genomes published by Lv et al (2024) indicates a single point of emergence not multiple spillovers and A came first. As all the market cases were lineage B that suggests the market cases were not the primary cases. WHO has called for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs and considers all hypotheses remain on the table.

[@janetmasleid4085]

Conversation CD8 @CD57227 Honest words from @profvrr (Feb 21, 2020): "If it turned out to be true [that this was a lab construct], that would bother the hell out of me, not just because of people dying and so forth, but it's kind of an indictment of the field, right?" 3:56 AM · Apr 11, 2022 TWiV 588: Coronavirus update - Save the pangolin! see ~43 minute mark

[@Sceince01]

Yup it would bother the hell out of us all , good thing it turned out not to because lab leak

[@WillNewcomb]

Once again I’m enormously grateful for your presentation of the actual data and science as opposed to speculation. I’ll be copying a link to this episode on social media. Blessings I've felt obliged to add Alina Chan to my Expert 1d10t$ list, now totalling 65.

[@PK779able]

A number of recent papers highlight how uncertain the origins are though. Michael Weissman has shown proximity ascertainment bias in early case data. Note all market cases were lineage B but lineage A likely arose first in light of new data published by Lv et al (2024). WH0 are still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs. It's not a clear cut issue by any means.

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

@@PK779able almost as if it was an act of God to punish man for his hubris and remind us we can never know anything definitively

[@brendanmay9585]

Which data? All I heard was opinions. Granted opinion of highly studies individuals. But if SARS-CoV-2 taught it anything it should have been that educated opinions are better than nothing when you need to make decisions quickly, but they are often wrong.

[@WillNewcomb]

@@brendanmay9585 TWIV spent a lot of time recounting peer reviewed published papers, unlike Alina Chan's first preprint on the subjected which was much quoted in the media but never accepted or published in any scientific journal. And Chan wrote this editorial for the NY Times and NOT a scientific journal!!!

[@Logotic]

​​@@brendanmay9585"Opinion of highly studies individuals" is why I keep listening to TWIV...

[@nottooherbal]

🦇🦇🦇🦇🪿🪿🪿🪿🦨🦝🦨🦝 interesting , thank you all.

[@LisaMartinez-ri6ve]

Rich’s pick of the week has been a favorite of mine for a long time.---Doctor My Eyes | Jackson Browne | Song Around The World | Playing For Change. Definitely worth viewing and listening to😎

[@jasons4425]

What’s the animal or animals called ?

[@nuynobi]

At 11:40? Sounds like "sooty manga babes" to me.

[@gribbler1695]

@@nuynobi Sooty mangabey, an Old World monkey used in biomedical AIDS research.

[@thedrunkenchefs4577]

Why did the Wuhan Institute of Virology remove their research papers from their web site?

[@shannond.4129]

Um. China.

[@Sceince007]

They were done with those and the data . However since they had tried to publish it it never went away. Also the magazines allowed the data to be published. No smoking gun there .

[@thedrunkenchefs4577]

@@Sceince007 They were done with those and the data ?

[@Sceince007]

@@thedrunkenchefs4577 they were done with those genomes and the data , that’s why they were removed . Like man do . This was discussed in detail in one of the TWIV episodes . Regardless the point is that data actually never away commentary has tried publish it and so the publishers had the copies and also it was removed from one server but another server had it so it was downloaded again for analysis.

[@eddymoretti3742]

Alina Chan is peddling anxiety and pointless heterodoxy-thinking.

[@Sceince01]

She is a proven liar . Trying to sell her book to the dumb.

[@hanscollin9332]

Jolene, no sabía que hablabas tan bien el español Me gustó muchísimo tu vídeo. Muchas gracias!

[@sbartdbarcelona44]

The truth floats-thx Rich. I’m quoting you.

[@elliecahill5946]

I'm so glad you did this episode. I'll post it on Twitter, although in the past I actually received a warning for sharing a previous episode where this was discussed. Unfortunately people aren't interested in the truth; it's not sensational enough. It's easier to place blame.

[@EinSophistry]

A warning? Is Twitter censoring critical coverage of lab leak stuff now?

[@gayluinstra1396]

Some people may not be interested in your version of truth. I understand why lab researchers who depend on grants (and job security) would have a difficult time with the idea of a lab leak. It's just too uncomfortable to think something so horrific as a lab leak actually happening. But, juicing up already dangerous viruses to make them more likely to harm humans, and harm them quickly, is irresponsible and unacceptable in today's world. A moratorium is needed now to stop doing "gain of function" research.

[@GaryVolts]

@@elliecahill5946 go ahead, you’ll get ratio’d. Everyone knows it was the lab by now.

[@GaryVolts]

You guys are in your own echo chamber of denial. It's fascinating to watch.

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

ha ha ha - pot-kettle-black

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

@@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173 what good is freedom? God laughs at people like us True Stories (1986)

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

@@howilearned2stopworrying508 🤣🤣🤣🤣 That comment is entirely meaningless......even more so without a definition of "freedom". If you think "God" is laughing at you that's just another affirmation of your paranoid delusional schizophrenia. Spoiler alert: "God" doesn't exist - it's just an idea - a metaphorical father figure created in order to teach the ignorant & uneducated how to behave in civilised society

[@dorasmith7875]

That list of episodes where this was discussed is not here.

[@truthordare5438]

Search KZbin with TWiV and the topic any also the topic itself and you'll get dozens of great podcasts debunking the lab leak conspiracy.

[@beardog6569]

Click the show notes. Go to the bottom of the notes. The episodes are there

[@Bundysvideos]

I found them 🤷‍♂️

[@lesfaby8997]

SARS-CoV-2 origin discussions previously on TWiV: TWiV 1019: Eddie Holmes on SARS-CoV-2 origins TWiV 1017: From Nature, not a lab TWiV 995: Viral origin stories TWiV 940: Eddie Holmes in on viral origins TWiV 876: Spillover market with Michael Worobey TWiV 762: SARS-CoV-2 origins with Robert Garry TWiV 760: SARS-CoV-2 origins with Peter Daszak, Thea Kølsen Fischer, Marion Koopmans TWiV 774: Kristian Andersen, Robert Garry, and the deleted SARS-CoV-2 sequences (copied from shownotes)

[@pen1208]

Yes they are. They literally said they are in the show notes, which they are all linked for your ease of access. Click show notes and boom right there dude. 👍👍

[@Invitational2]

Obviously it came from a lab.

[@Sceince01]

Liar

[@earlgrayman982]

"No one had anything close enough to SARS cov2 for it to become a pandemic." Yes because military biolabs are usually so forthcoming with their research.

[@Sceince007]

Dumbo they were publishing . Also can I ask you specific virology questions since you feel educated enough on the case to opine

[@earlgrayman982]

@@Sceince007 Sure, ask me anything. I didn't realize that the Chinese Military published their research and could be trusted to reliably reveal everything they're doing. Maybe former State Department adviser, David Asher is wrong when he told NBC that the Chinese military was funding a "secret program" involving coronaviruses. I bet 'yer in the know because your degree in woman's studies gets you a security clearance with the state department.

[@kenyoung5682]

Tell us again how coronaviruses do not mutate.

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

Check out Episode 13 of Neon Genesis Evangelion - inspired by the movie The Andromeda Strain. How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?

[@Sceince007]

Who said they don’t mutate ?

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

@@Sceince007 in a way he's right - but for all the wrong reasons.....viruses evolve - mutation occurs at the genetic level. ......I still think he's an ignorant conspiracy troll though

[@Serg897]

The differences between the two lineages (A and B) were miniscule. The fact that there were two slightly different versions of the virus circulating in the early days isn't the slam dunk against the lab leak hypothesis they think it is.

[@shannond.4129]

For RNA viruses, “mutate” is not the proper term, that’s what they mean.

[@anthonysei]

Consider it may have not been "made in a lab" but collected from a natural reservoir and worked on a lab. Hence the "origin" argument. Just too many credible scientists and too much paperwork evidence that there was a plan that was included in a grant proposal that was denied. Ill be interested in how this information is discussed. Again, it would be facinating to see a debate among equally experienced and knowledgeable scientists.

[@anthonysei]

The grant proposal was well debunked as being related on a genetic level but it shows a willingness to go there. To go someplace deemed not acceptable. The fact that there are laws prohibiting certain research does not mean its not possible and working offshore opens the possibility to keep it out of sight (especially in collaboration with PRC controlled ppl). At this point, its a mystery of logic; means, motive, opportunity. And given what we know it seem far from implausible.

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

@@anthonysei Tuck your shirt in - your ignorance is showing. "...Just too many credible scientists and too much paperwork evidence that there was a plan...." no point in asking you for a comprehensive list, or links to documentary evidence. Exactly how much time have you spent studying or working in biology or lab environments?.......I just wondering if you've devised some revolutionary way to devise methods of creating vaccines & antiviral treatments without first understanding how viruses enter, replicate, steal cellular material, hijack cell machinery, avoid immune defenses, migrate through a host, cause disease etc etc without carrying out specific wet lab experiments to find these answers...... well have you?

[@Sceince007]

Not a single thing you put in this bs is true you were not raised to value the truth were you ? Liar the money was to insert furin cleavage sites in sars 1 like viruses to seeif we had anything ti worry about . Also it still does not explain multiple things - for example how did virus leak twice ? You have no respect for humanity do you ? There are almost no virologists who think it was lab leaked . The very few ( countable on ginger tips ) among hundreds of thousands who are saying it was lab leaked are doing it for personal gains eg Alina Chan may be selling her book - the reason it’s obvious is her obvious and crystal clear dishonesty. Why would you want a proven dishonest person another very sincere people ?

[@anthonysei]

Now there are documents detailing the desire to make highly deadly mpox variants 10 years ago. That's not a good look for gof deniers.

[@Sceince007]

@@anthonysei lol do you even understand GOF? Akso now that you have been clearly proven wrong on your previous posts and clearly found lying as well . What do you have say about that ?

[@haydock18]

If anyone has a serious counter-argument to the rebutal made by the twiv panel, you can post them here. Maybe there are some valid counter-arguments to a few of the points they made. I'm sure the twiv team would be open to hearing them. But for now, the twiv arguments are sound and convincing.

[@man_at_the_end_of_time]

KZbin censors me when I provide references by way of PMIDs. I've long since given up on these 'experts' and authorities.

[@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173]

@@man_at_the_end_of_time YT doesn't like any links that go outside of YT. If you think you have any evidence at all you can put the title of a paper/article & its (first) author & the journal/ site where its published - we can all find it from there

[@man_at_the_end_of_time]

@@fifthoarsmanoftheacropolis4173 When I get my primary PC set up I will do just that. Currently, I am using my phone. The cell phone is nice but so utterly limited in too many ways.

[@shannond.4129]

@@man_at_the_end_of_timewhen in the history of this pandemic has this program done us wrong?

[@PK779able]

Sure, the anelists still referring to Pekar et al in support of multiple spillovers when new genomes published in Lv et al (2024) show intermediate genomes and spread before the A-B split? These lineages were only two mutations apart anyway so it was always questionable that they reflected separate spillover events. A new PubPeer comment also shows Pekar compared likelihoods of *different outcomes* for N=1 and N=2, with N=2 given a bigger target. When corrected single spillover is more likely. They also appear unaware of Weissman (2024) showing ascertainment bias in early case data or Bloom (2024) showing the environmental samples show other animal CoVS linked to susceptible animals but not SARS-COV-2? Ultimately WHO is still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs so they should support that.

[@mixload]

Thank you 🙏

[@francesschaefer]

Golly Moses! Yes I have friends who say this! Who still think this nonsense is true. So I am sharing this episode OMG the TWIV episode with Eddie Holmes was brilliant.

[@wendyg8536]

It was utterly ridiculous and full of holes .

[@PK779able]

The FBI and Dept of Energy Z-Division scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Los Alamos favor lab origin while WHO is still calling for data on both the animal trade and Wuhan labs. A bit premature to say a given theory is incorrect.

[@wendyg8536]

@@PK779able it is obfuscating for time, thats all. Clearly obvious what happenned, just whether it was intentional is the point, which is highly likely too, considering the other warfare manouvres going on. as if China has any remorse, considering they still have wet markets.. they know.

[@wendyg8536]

What do you expect where China has almost a monopoly on primary ingredients for the world pharmaceutical products..they get to dictate.. ... it's not only trade that has allowed to become stupid and corrupt...it is dumb !

[@Sceince007]

The best about this is not onnTWIV though . That one has Eddie , Kirsten and Michael worobey

[@littlejoe8359]

Shouldn’t there be a lab leak voice in this panel

[@MrxstGrssmnstMttckstPhlNelThot]

"Shouldn't there be a flat earth voice on this space science panel?"

[@palbergstrom]

@@MrxstGrssmnstMttckstPhlNelThot ?

[@sorenzollamas]

This is billed as a rebuttal, not a live debate. The lab leak voice is Dr. Chan's article.

[@MrxstGrssmnstMttckstPhlNelThot]

@@palbergstrom what they're suggesting is absurd. The panel is about real science of how COVID happened to debunk an article promoting the lab leak conspiracy theory. To have a "lab leak voice" on the panel would be as silly as demanding there should be a flat earther voice on a NASA panel.

[@palbergstrom]

@@MrxstGrssmnstMttckstPhlNelThot Talking about flat earth in this context is insulting and not very scientific. Other serious voices agree with Dr. Chan. ( interesting that my comments seems to be hidden, by YT or someone else)

[@jayg6138]

Fort Derrick ?

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

read about the 2001 Anthrax scare - talk about a lab leak! Much like J6 the call was coming from inside the house. Trust God, not government

[@GaryVolts]

UNC?

[@petercollingwood522]

Detrick.

[@nicholasm2239]

Man i cant wait for the backtrack and apology one day. !remindme 2 years

[@jjharvathh]

They will never apologize, they have dug in their heels and refuse to see evidence.

[@howilearned2stopworrying508]

when is GWB going to face international justice for a war of aggression on false pretenses?

[@Yerrik]

THANK YOU for making this!

[@StefaanNijs]

Which statement helps listeners the most in making their opinion about something scientific? Hear a discussion of 2, 3, 5, 100 scientist with a same view on things. Hear a discussion of 2 scientists with an opposite look on the matter. ?

[@simontemplar404]

If you take the trouble to learn about the subject you can make your own conclusions. Choosing politicians and celebrities to learn about a subject will give you different information to make your decision than if you go to scientific experts and their evidence.

[@nuynobi]

The panel makeup should be representative of the scientific community. If 90% of scientists think A and only 10% think B, it would be dishonest to present a panel where the split is 50/50. Doing so would give laypeople a distorted view of the issue.

[@StefaanNijs]

Distorted is hearing only one opinion. Celebrities and online doctors got apparently paid by Astra zeneca to advertise. I study this health topic from the 2 sides. But I fear the narrative if they so many times lied to us. My countries TV virologue counted me as good as dead because not vaccinated. Without any evidence. Like many of the statements we got to hear.

[@circa1890]

​@@nuynobi20% of virologists and epidemiologists believe lab leak to be a possibility.

[@Sceince007]

Evidence for a view . In scientific world opinions don’t matter. In this case I am yet to see even a single piece of evidence for lab leak but I have seen a ton for zoonotic .