Lab-Made? SARS-CoV-2 Genealogy Through the Lens of Gain-of-Function Research
Trust me, you’ll get lost. . .
ANd...
The Information Army of Northern Virginia beg to differ with Dr. Fauci:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16115318/
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30251-8/fulltext
When the protein sequence of the SARS-CoV-2 receptor binding site was analyzed, an interesting result was found. While SARS-CoV-2 is overall more similar to bat coronaviruses, the receptor binding site was more similar to SARS-CoV.
https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(20)30262-2?_returnURL=https%3A%2F%2Flinkinghub.elsevier.com%2Fretrieve%2Fpii%2FS0092867420302622%3Fshowall%3Dtrue
Both SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV use the same host cell receptor. It also found that, for both viruses, the viral proteins used for host cell entry bind to the receptor with the same tightness (affinity).
Try this: Lab Made COV2 Geneology Through the Lens of Gain of Function
Thank you for posting- extremely interesting and informative!
I read the “Lab-Made?” article at Medium last week after Bret Weinstein mentioned it on his podcast.
Like you, I got lost but I plugged through to the end.
Dr. Weinstein is the progressive evolutionary biologist who got run off Evergreen College for failing to kowtow to political correctness. He’s a very unusual progress because he seems to be scrupulously intellectually honest. Dr. Weinstein noted that the scientific analysis in the paper is solid. Since my biology education ended in high school, I have to trust his expertise to a large extent.
One thing is certain: Both UNC Chappel Hill and Wuhan Institute of Virology have engaged in “gain-in-function” research involving the creation of coronavirus chimeras and have published papers that document some of their research. Many knowledgeable biologists object to such research, arguing that its risks far outweigh any potential benefit.