Hacker News Reader

Comment by amichail | Hacker News Reader

11 pointsamichail5 comments

The headline seems to greatly overstate the new evidence. I still believe a lab escape is the most straightforward and most likely explanation.

Not sure why you’re being downvoted for pointing out the obvious explanation of covid escaping from the coronavirus research lab near to the wet market.

I am always wondering why the animal market hypothesis is always criticized by saying the proofs are not convincing enough, whereas the lab hypothesis is favored by the same ones while there is zero proof. I am quite an atheist there, both are possible for me, but if i were to bet my money, the animal market is the option with some scientific research and not speculations.

There isn't really 100% proof either way so you are left looking at evidence and estimating probabilities. There is quite a lot of evidence suggesting a lab origin, for example sarbecoviruses have not been found in nature with a furin cleavage site and Ralph Baric proposed inserting one, which was put into a grant proposal by Daszak and low a year or so latter one pops up by the lab he worked with. I mean that never before seen thing could have evolved randomly at the market down the road by coincidence but it seems a low probability.

> Researchers have identified half a dozen animal species that could have passed SARS-CoV-2

"Could have" doing some seriously heavy lifting.

> The study establishes the presence of animals and the virus at the market, although it does not confirm whether the animals themselves were infected with the virus.

This is convincing to people? That there were animals at a wet market??

Here's the worst part:

> The study, published in Cell today, is the latest in a series [0] of analyses of the market samples. The researchers argue that their reanalysis adds more weight to the market being the site of the first spillover events, in which animals with the virus infected people, sparking the pandemic.

But when you follow that link, you get this headline:

> Wuhan market samples fail to shed further light on COVID origins

...

I'm trying to find something of merit in this, and coming up empty handed.

0 - https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-01483-2#ref-CR1

Reply on news.ycombinator.com