[zozbot234]

> but there are many strong indications that it did.

Nope, there really aren't. We're now finding more and more naturally-evolved viruses in cave-dwelling bats that share plenty of features with SARS-CoV2, including the 'weird' features everyone was talking about at the beginning of the pandemic. All it really takes is to go and look for them. Occam's razor says this virus too is just one of many.

[spfzero]

10's of thousands of animals have been tested for a predecessor to human Covid-19 though, for two years now, and nothing has been found, despite looking very hard and in ways that 'should have' found something had it been there. In all other known zoonotic crossovers, where we had the modern capability to test, the virus or a very close relative was quickly found.

Since we have exhaustively eliminated zoonotic origin, whatever is left must be the cause, even if it did not have the preponderance of circumstantial evidence that lab escape does.

[hunterb123]

> All it really takes is to go and look for them

They did, the closest sample is still Ra4991/RaTG13 which was found in a Wuhan mine and transported to the Wuhan virology lab before the outbreak.

Not aware of another confirmed sample found that is closer to SARS-CoV-2:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RaTG13

[benpiper]

Indeed. They've been looking for the intermediate host for 2 years and have not found anything close to SARS-CoV-2.

Contrast that with the fact that they found the intermediate host for the first SARS within just a few months of that outbreak.

[caperfee]

> Not aware of another confirmed sample found that is closer to SARS-CoV-2

Paraphrasing from this article: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02596-2

> BANAL-52 is 96.8% identical to SARS-CoV-2; one section in BANAL-103 and BANAL-52 could have shared an ancestor with sections of SARS-CoV-2 less than a decade ago.

> RaTG13 is 96.1% identical to SARS-CoV-2 and the two viruses probably shared a common ancestor 40–70 years ago.

[hunterb123]

> The results, which are not peer reviewed, have been posted on the preprint server Research Square

It's a CCP propaganda piece. I find that "study" pretty fishy, the results would have been easy to verify if true.

Same as the CDC study they tried to use against Israel's study for natural immunity.

[mrtesthah]

Once you let ideology infiltrate your reasoning, you’re no longer doing science. Just because you don’t like the implications of a particular piece of research doesn’t mean you get to dismiss it.

[hunterb123]

That's not what I said. I said it should be easy to peer review but it hasn't been.

That's a very common ask especially among HN, is it not?

https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

From my perspective it looks dubious and the only goal is to shift attention away from the RatG13 sample.

[jiocrag]

Exactly. Parent poster is spewing a line without evidence. Please cite discoveries of respiratory viruses with “weird features” on par with SARS-cov2.

[johncena33]

I think the parent poster was talikng about BANAL virus discovered in Laos, which apparently is closest to SARS-CoV2, but it doesn't have Furin Cleavage Site.

> The Laos study offers insight into the origins of the pandemic, but there are still missing links, say researchers. For example, the Laos viruses don’t contain the so-called furin cleavage site on the spike protein that further aids the entry of SARS-CoV-2 and other coronaviruses into human cells.

From [1]. So yes, the claim made by the parent poster is patently false.

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02596-2

[bmn__]

> Wuhan mine

correction: Yunnan mine

It is exceedingly important that you get all facts right. Much depends on this.

[hunterb123]

Sorry yes, typo. Thank you!

Very important because it was transported across the country to the lab.

If it was natural the outbreak would be in and between Yunnan and Wuhan, not Wuhan as the epicenter.

[himinlomax]

An independent inquiry into the lab could settle that quickly.