Uh-oh;
Fresh suspicion that Covid may have been tinkered with in a lab emerged today after scientists found genetic material owned by Moderna in the virus's spike protein. They identified a tiny snippet of code that is identical to part of a gene patented by the vaccine maker three years before the pandemic.
It was discovered in SARS-CoV-2's unique furin cleavage site, the part that makes it so good at infecting people and separates it from other coronaviruses. The structure has been one of the focal points of debate about the virus's origin, with some scientists claiming it could not have been acquired naturally. The international team of researchers suggest the virus may have mutated to have a furin cleavage site during experiments on human cells in a lab. They claim there is a one-in-three-trillion chance Moderna's sequence randomly appeared through natural evolution. But there is some debate about whether the match is as rare as the study claims, with other experts describing it as a 'quirky' coincidence rather than a 'smoking gun'.
Daily Mail
I was interested enough to click the link, and then click
to the research article they link to. I was especially interested in how they derived the "one-in-three-trillion chance."
I noticed right away that the Daily Mail had mutated a "three in one trillion" chance to the 9 times rarer number, but this was the least of problems in their calculation.
I was afraid that the calculation would involve a lot of genetics particulars I'd be unable to understand or check, but in fact it was a trivial combinatorial calculation. I've attached their Figure 2. Here's a rough transcription in case that image breaks:
P1 = Prob(19-nt seq appears in 30,000-nt genome)
= (30000-18)*1/4^19
= 1.09 * 10^-7
P2 = Prob(19-nt seq appears in 3300-nt seq)
= (3300-18)*1/4^19
- 1.19 * 10^-8
P2c = Prob(19-nt seq appears in one of 24712 seq of 3300 each)
(24712*P2
*(1-P2)^24711 = 0.00029 [the reddened part is irrelevant, but particularly silly]
P3 = Prob (id seq appears in each
= P1 * P2c = 3.21 * 10^-11
We have others adept at simple probability calculations. Check my work please! I think they committed the fallacy
"What is the probability that Lady Lucille Morningstar is in BOTH databases A and B?" without noting that Morningstar's membership in database A was the only reason she got involved in the question!
When I do the calculation my way, instead of 3-in-a-trillion I get a chance much closer to unity!