Forum Replies Created

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)
  • Author
    Posts
    • Sun, Jun 07, 2020 - 02:50am

      #4
      HenriPiccolo

      HenriPiccolo

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Jun 07 2020

      Posts: 5

      count placeholder0

      RaTG13 existence being questioned

     

    • Sun, Jun 07, 2020 - 02:49am

      #3
      HenriPiccolo

      HenriPiccolo

      Status Member (Offline)

      Joined: Jun 07 2020

      Posts: 5

      count placeholder0

      RaTG13 existence being questioned

    Much of this paper is relying upon the unfounded assumption that RaTG13 was sequenced in 2013 but not published until 2020. Nowhere in the Nature paper by Zhou et al does it state that RaTG13 was sequenced in 2013. It simply states that the sequence was obtained from a bat sample TAKEN in 2013. Thus, there is no reason to conclude that RaTG13 was ‘forgotten’ about for 7 years and then ‘conveniently’ re-appeared.

    It might well be that RaTG13 is the same as  BtCoV/4991,  a partial sequence of which was published in 2016. And, yes, until SARS-COV2 came along, the authors did not pay much attention to it. The head of the WIV has already explained why. AT THE TIME when BtCoV/4991 was found, it did not meet their criteria for further investigation. At the time, they were looking for viruses 90% plus related to previous SARS type viruses. This one did not fit the bill. Its significance did not appear until SARS–COV2 was sequenced. Then it was realised to be an important virus.

    So, once again, we are seeing conspiracy theorists finding a  ‘smoking gun’ when there is no smoking gun.

Viewing 2 posts - 1 through 2 (of 2 total)