
The most logical explanation is that it comes from a laboratory - markdog12
https://www.minervanett.no/corona/the-most-logical-explanation-is-that-it-comes-from-a-laboratory/361860
======
nkurz
This article has been posted several times, occasionally hitting the front
page before being flagged off. It seems like a good article about legitimate
scientist who holds a controversial opinion.

Rather than just flagging it, could we have the discussion about why it is
extremely unlikely to be true? The alternative is that those who believe the
virus was created in a lab never get to see the the counter arguments, and
probably consider the flagging as confirmation that they are correct.

Alternatively, could we use this space as the discussion for why the article
is inappropriate? While it's arguable that the origin of a virus off-topic for
a tech site, I feel certain the issue is not the topic but the conclusion.
What's the argument that this conclusion is too dangerous even discuss?

~~~
svara
I'm flagging it because it's just presenting the view of some guy who asserts
something.

There's not enough information in there for a fact-based discussion. Since
this topic is unfortunately a politically loaded one, that basically
guarantees the discussion is going to turn to shit.

If somebody were to post an article presenting clear arguments based on data,
I wouldn't flag.

~~~
inciampati
Sure, here you go:
[https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.06199](https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.06199)

This uses a rigorous bioinformatic analysis to demonstrate that the SARS-CoV-2
spike protein has dramatically stronger binding affinity for human ACE2 than
any other known version of the protein.

This is the case for the version of the protein observed at the very beginning
of the outbreak. The virus evolves slowly, so this implies a very long period
of transmission in human cells, which is compatible with a zoonotic transfer
much earlier than expected (possibly many years) or gain of function
experiments in cell cultures.

As a biologist, I find this to be sufficient factual information to motivate a
discussion about the possible origins of the virus.

~~~
svara
Ok, interesting. But there's a huge issue of selection bias here. We're
interested in this virus precisely because it poses a threat to humans, so
obviously it's adapted to humans.

As a biologist, I therefore think this does not mean much at all. ;) At least
not without a more quantitative treatment of the claim that "this implies a
very long period of transmission in human cells".

Thanks for posting this though!

------
markdog12
Article which refutes the findings:
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/06/07/controver...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/06/07/controversial-
coronavirus-lab-origin-claims-dismissed-by-experts/)

~~~
hulahoof
The articles and sources from the articles you have linked seem to refute the
claim that the virus was artificially engineered from scratch; rather than
having a lab accelerated evolution towards 'desireable traits' for human
infection that TFA is suggesting

------
markdog12
I came to this link from HN, but noticed it was deleted? Not sure why?

~~~
dsr_
Probably because it makes a lot of claims while dismissing every other
explanation. Without citations, it is indistinguishable from the Weekly World
News.

~~~
markdog12
I've also linked to an article that dismisses the study in question, and links
to it.

[https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/06/07/controver...](https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidnikel/2020/06/07/controversial-
coronavirus-lab-origin-claims-dismissed-by-experts/)

But why would it be deleted? I guess because it has already been on here?
Maybe multiple times? But wouldn't people just link to previous discussion(s)?

~~~
Pick-A-Hill2019
Fair enough
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23725966](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23725966)
(18 points, 4 comments, Flagged. Posted 1 day ago)
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23727763](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23727763)
(10 points, 3 comments, Not Flagged. Posted 1 day ago)
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23738264](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23738264)
(22 points, 4 comments, Flagged, Dead. Posted 3 hours ago) & yours (21 points,
14 comments, Flagged) I don't have a stance on the topic (that I want to
discuss or is relevant here) but I nearly skipped it since it seemed a bit Off
Topic in regards to the submission guidelines and possibly a bit 'hot button-
ish' but was intrigued enough to take a look and comment after seeing a 21
point submission being Flagged. Hope that helps [Edit to add - I didn't
downvote or flag any of these but up till now had not read any of the links
nor comments]

~~~
markdog12
Thanks, I hadn't seen those. I did a search, but I guess flagged submissions
don't show up. It might be handy to have a link to see the flagged ones. If
that was the case, I wouldn't have re-submitted.

Edit: Just did the search again, for "laboratory", and this flagged submission
showed up. Not sure why the original one didn't show up for me.

~~~
Pick-A-Hill2019
I picked them up from a search using
[https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=minervanett.no](https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=minervanett.no)
as a query. Usually HN detects a duplicate submission URL (or certainly it did
- which has saved me from posting a dupe or two in the past)

