Chinese virologist claims she has proof Covid-19 was made in Wuhan lab

The genome of the virus is available to every lab in the world and has been closely studied by the world's top virologists for about 9 months now.

If the virus was artificial and so easy to spot as such (she claims one does not even need to know anything about biology...) I would expect all the main labs in the West would have reported that instead of leaving it to some junior HK doctor in exile who is doing the tour of the tabloids (which should also tell us something). It feels she is just part of a FUD campaign, which should not be be given undue airtime.

So many people have asked me about this paper that I put together a quick response, below.

There are so many reasons why this 'report' is wrong. Beginning with the abstract: 'The natural origin theory, although widely accepted, lacks substantial support. The alternative theory that the virus may have come from a research laboratory is, however, strictly censored on peer-reviewed scientific journals'. In fact there is a great deal of experimental support, from multiple groups, on the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2. On the other hand, there is ZERO evidence for a laboratory origin.

The introduction also is full of inaccuracies. For example, 'the origin of SARS-CoV-2 is still the subject of much debate' is not true. The conclusions of the Nature Medicine article cited have not been challenged by other than charlatans such as the authors of this paper.

Here is their evidence:

1. A bat virus ZC45 is the backbone. It is 89% identical to SARS-CoV-2. In a genome of 30,000 bases that means it differs from SARS-CoV-2 by 3300 bases. No way is that the backbone of SARS-CoV-2.

2. The receptor binding motif of SARS-CoV-2 could not have been made from that of SARS-CoV. It is not what one would predict would give the highest affinity binding to ACE2. No one would have made this sequence in the laboratory because it would not have been the one to make.

3. The furin cleavage site has been found in other bat CoV, contrary to what the author says.

4. The presence of restriction cleavage sites in no way indicates manipulation; they just picked two that flank the RBD.

On top of it all I have never heard of this person or their institution.

It is a complete reach and adds nothing beyond what has already been suggested. There is nothing new here! Similar arguments were made and debunked months ago.

-- Vincent Racaniello, PhD | Higgins Professor Department of Microbiology & Immunology Columbia University College of P&S, New York

Please consult the community of virologists.

See This Week in Virology (TWiV) ( https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/ )

They covered this several times. The consensus is that "made in a lab" is nonsense.

Listen and learn. This is Hacker News, not Facebook.