
The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 - KarlKemp
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9/source
======
klevertree
To summarize, this paper's argument is that SARS-COV-2 can't be lab grown
because: 1\. It uses a different method of binding to ACE 2 than has
previously been found to be most efficient 2\. It has several mutations that
are of unknown consequence 3\. It doesn't have any retrovirus (tool for
manipulating virus) backbone

The paper then concludes that SARS-COV-2 must be a result of natural
selection. While I think this is possible, they ignore the possibility that
the virus is a result of artificial selection. If a laboratory were studying
how SARS-COV-2 could pass to humans, they might serially pass the virus
between mammals (like pangolins) in order to artificially select for
mutations.

That is, in fact, exactly what previous scientists did in a 2012 experiment
with bird flu. They wanted to make it transmissible between mammals, so they
serially passed genetically modified bird flu between ferrets until it was. I
wrote this up on my blog:[https://get21stnight.com/2020/04/14/why-do-some-
viruses-cros...](https://get21stnight.com/2020/04/14/why-do-some-viruses-
cross-over-from-animals/) . The result of this is that bird flu acquired
previously unknown mutations in order to pass between mammals.

I'm not saying this is what happened, and there are some key differences (i.e.
in the bird flu experiment, scientists had to start off with a genetically
modified virus). Still, I disagree that we can definitively conclude this was
a result of natural selection.

~~~
burlesona
Can you help me understand why scientists would intentionally take a virus
that can’t transmit in humans and go to lengths to make it transmissible in
humans? Just at a gut level that seems reckless and irresponsible to me, but
people talk about it like it’s normal and no big deal... so, help me
understand?

Also, if it was somehow proven that the virus did come from a Chinese lab,
what does that mean? Will the world hold China liable for this mess? That
seems unlikely to me, rather I assume it would come down to “big stick
diplomacy” and China carries a pretty big stick. But is there any precedent
for a disease being leaked from a lab and the lab being held responsible for
the consequences?

~~~
jakeogh
Powerful people can be very religious.

[https://wearethene.ws/notable/95575](https://wearethene.ws/notable/95575)

~~~
dang
Can you please stop posting flamebait to HN?

~~~
jakeogh
Historically, what I illuded to is almost a law of nature. I could have
elaborated, but is it really necessary? People dont need stuff spelled out,
and pointing that out didnt start a flame. That's the founder of CNN... his
opinions effect people; it shouldn't be off limits to discuss. Parent
ultimately was asking about the def of irresponsible is, and might not have
considered that other people have other definitions.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17781131](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17781131)

------
Gh0stRAT
>While the analyses above suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may bind human ACE2 with
high affinity, computational analyses predict that the interaction is not
ideal and that the RBD sequence is different from those shown in SARS-CoV to
be optimal for receptor binding

Sounds like it could evolve to be more transmissible in humans. The more
people it infects, the more likely that is to happen.

With that in mind, "flattening the curve" is even more essential.

~~~
djsumdog
Most viruses will start very harmful but tend to mutate into less lethal
stains causing them to spread further.

The Oxford study talks about the S and L strains. The L strain is the more
deadly one, but it's likely not made it very far.

~~~
zbjornson
Source on the first claim?

The S/L strain study has been heavily challenged, see commentary at
[https://nextstrain.org/help/coronavirus/FAQ#is-one-strain-
of...](https://nextstrain.org/help/coronavirus/FAQ#is-one-strain-of-the-
covid-19-virus-more-severe)

~~~
KarlKemp
I do remember this phenomenon being mentioned quite a few times in my genetics
classes. Don’t remember the name, unfortunately. But the logic is fairly
obvious:a virus wants you to die just as little as humans want the earth to
die.

As I remember it, it probably wouldn’t make much of a difference here. The
classic case mentioned were extremely fast & lethal viruses such as Ebola &
Marburg: When a virus kills you within two or three days of infection, any
small change can easily double that time and thereby gain significantly better
chances of transmission. But for Covid (and, before that, HIV) the infectious
period is pretty long already and any improvements would matter less in
relative terms.

~~~
zbjornson
Pathogens can definitely evolve to improve fitness and settle into an
ecological balance with their hosts. I more meant to contest that most start
out very harmful. I don't think we have data to support that, or to be able to
separate virus vs. host adaptations that would cause the appearance of
lessened severity, given that most viruses circulating today have ancient
origins.

------
yokaze
Only four dupes ranging from a month ago:
[https://hn.algolia.com/?q=proximal+origin](https://hn.algolia.com/?q=proximal+origin)

------
empath75
I'm fairly convinced it wasn't designed or engineered, but I do think it
escaped from the Wuhan virus lab. That they had invited american scientists to
the lab and asked for advice in securing it satisfies me that they weren't
doing biological weapons research, the fact that they were studying
coronaviruses in a facility where the outbreak happened and americans were
sounding the alarm on security months before hand is too much of a coincidence
for me to believe the story that it came from a wet market.

~~~
baja_blast
I agree, they were most likely studying SARS like viruses to prevent future
outbreaks, but due to employee negligence it got out.

~~~
abacadaba
I'm torn between not being able to entirely dismiss this theory, and the harm
it could cause putting this out there whether true or not.

Even more geopolitical distrust is the last thing we need right now, but how
do you look the other way?

Edit: look the other way referring specifically to any cover up done, fwiw.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Its gossip. Don't spread gossip.

~~~
abacadaba
Welp, cats outta the bag on that one.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
The OP indicated natural origin. The rest is speculation/gossip.

~~~
empath75
So? People speculate on hacker news all the time. It’s a plausible theory for
what happened.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Its a conspiracy theory. And bigoted one.

~~~
laowhy
If there was a viral outbreak at a grocery store within a mile of a CDC
infectious diseases lab, no one would assume its bigoted to speculate a
containment breach as a possible origin.

Its actually less bigoted than the assumption the media pushed before which
was that someone ate a bat or because of unsanitary health practices regarding
the handling of wild animals.

This at least assumes someone was doing scientific research and accidental
exposure occurred and no one noticed until it was too late.

------
magwa101
See this Aussie news program showing the the lockdown in Wuhan. Clearly the
authorities were terrified.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycrqXJYf1SU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycrqXJYf1SU)

------
hubadu
Why is this one-month-old paper reposted now that the lab leak theory is
regaining traction in media outlets?

Here is the conclusion of the paper: “[…] we do not believe that any type of
laboratory-based scenario is plausible”.

Here is the title of Scripps Research Institute press release about their
publication: “The COVID-19 coronavirus epidemic has a natural origin,
scientists say”.

Here are some links to Scripps Research press releases of multi-million
dollars deals with chinese labs:

[https://www.scripps.edu/news-and-events/press-
room/2017/2017...](https://www.scripps.edu/news-and-events/press-
room/2017/20170608chempharma.html)

[https://www.scripps.edu/news-and-events/press-
room/2019/2019...](https://www.scripps.edu/news-and-events/press-
room/2019/20191127-szbl-collaboration.html)

[https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/yisheng-
biopharma-...](https://www.biospace.com/article/releases/yisheng-biopharma-
announces-research-collaboration-with-the-scripps-research-institute-in-
developing-new-aids-vaccine-/)

I am not going to address the china-praising statements and political stances
from main researcher twitter account at a time when CCP cover-up was already
known worldwide.

At the time this paper was published, moderators on social networks deleted
any possible discussion on the topic. Copy-paste op's link in reddit search
bar and see how many comments were deleted from related discussion.

~~~
Aperocky
Are you suggesting that .. China is going to engineer a virus and release it
in its own population?

And then shut the whole country down and pray that it would spread fast and
worse elsewhere?

Let's just say that back in early February nobody even in China thought that
other countries are going to be affected. It is a disaster for the CCP at the
time that had popular opinion on the internet swing suddenly and violently
against the government.

Now, seeing how other countries reacted, that suddenly was not the case
anymore. And the CCP have no ability to control other countries action.

~~~
redis_mlc
> Let's just say that back in early February nobody even in China thought that
> other countries are going to be affected.

This is ridiculous. If you mean Nov. or early Dec., maybe. But by Jan. corona
was nation-wide. Amd Wuhan has an international airport.

Mid-Jan. documented widely-known pandemic at latest:

[https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/asia/china-wuhan-
coronavirus-...](https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/16/asia/china-wuhan-coronavirus-
ap-intl-hnk/index.html)

Disney world Shanghai was closed Jan. 24 (Disney should have told the US CDC
it was that bad in China.)

Known to be contagious? early Dec.

~~~
Aperocky
> Known to be contagious? early Dec.

Source?

