Covid-19 miscellany

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

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!

I feel like conspiracy type things are usually missing a kind of meta-thinking. It's hard to describe, but it's more like, "hey I noticed this real big coincidence. Now, let me go find a p-value for it. Wow, it's significant!" The meta-thinking should look more at how you always find a bunch of coincidences in a far greater context, like let's say life. It's hard to apply sometimes, but let me try: what kind of coincidence would have made someone jump up and down and say, "see look, this proves it!"--and what are the chances due to randomness you find such a coincidence? What is the probability of the thing you wanted to know in this much greater context? So, this 19nt sequence is some kind of oncology sequence from 3300 nt, but there's a ton more sequences from other things patented by Moderna and also Pfizer, J&J, and even govt entities and others that also would have made a conspiracy person jump up and down. Any of those things could have matched by chance and this one is weird because it's from an oncology gene, not something you'd expect to be used for some kind of synthetic whatever in virus editing, especially just 19nt. 19nt is more like the length of a primer or probe design. And wouldn't you expect an insert to be a multiple of 3nt or it'd change the open reading frame? Anyway, 19nt is also the match but it's also somewhat arbitrary because some of the nucleotides surround the area of interest and if you look at 30nt, it fails equivalency, or if you look at some other thing you might find that 21nt matches some other thing some other company patented but more of the nucleotides are on one side or you might find 16nt (less) match some other thing. In this latter case, I think anything 12nt or greater matching the 12nt section and any nt on the sides would have been cause for someone to jump up and down.

ETA: I am still looking at the nucleotide sequences as I need to clear something up there...will post later as well.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

^So if you look at the Daily Mail image, the original sars cov2 sequence is not equivalent to the 19nt sequence which was confusing to me. I don't know if it is a typo by Daily Mail or what.

cctcggcggcga
cctcggcgggca

I suspect it is a typo by Daily Mail because if you look at the paper, they have a 100% identity match in BLAST result. I doubt the authors made the error as they would look over their results multiple times by multiple people.

The authors also say it's a reverse match, which makes me wonder again about the conspiracy-minded person. Such person would also say, "hey look, this is a match to the reverse sequence!" or the reverse complement, or complement. That increases the chance of a coincidence.

 

[TSwizzle]

Went to Costco this evening, fascist bastard on the door insisted I wear a mask. What a joke.

 

[blastula]

Went to Costco this evening, fascist bastard on the door insisted I wear a mask. What a joke.

 

[repoman]

There are two separate things here with lab leak and the articles that TSwizzle often links.

Sure, it makes sense to shoot down articles that are sensationalistic.

But, this has ZERO bearing on the real question of whether this leaked from a lab.

Which was really answered, long ago.

The answer is "no".

Now, could you please stop JAQing off about this non-controversy?

Are you viscerally, emotionally invested in a lab leak not being possible?

Don2, now he has an open mind about this.

 

[bilby]

There are two separate things here with lab leak and the articles that TSwizzle often links.

Sure, it makes sense to shoot down articles that are sensationalistic.

But, this has ZERO bearing on the real question of whether this leaked from a lab.

Which was really answered, long ago.

The answer is "no".

Now, could you please stop JAQing off about this non-controversy?

Are you viscerally, emotionally invested in a lab leak not being possible?

Nope. I just care about facts.

I am not viscerally, emotionally invested in a flat Earth not being possible; Nor in the Moon landings being a hoax not being possible; Nor in vaccines not causing autism.

I just know that these untruths are being bandied about by idiots a lot, and am determined not to let them go uncorrected, lest someone be gulled into thinking they have a shred of support.

The evidence is clear; Despite widespread attempts to obscure it under a fog of JAQing off. You need to stop contributing to that fog, lest people think you a total cunt with a vile agenda.

 

[Metaphor]

I am not viscerally, emotionally invested in a flat Earth not being possible; Nor in the Moon landings being a hoax not being possible; Nor in vaccines not causing autism.

I just know that these untruths are being bandied about by idiots a lot, and am determined not to let them go uncorrected, lest someone be gulled into thinking they have a shred of support.

The above is gaslighting. The idea that a lab-leak origin of the SARS-CoV-2 is as unlikely as a flat earth is gaslighting.

You need to stop contributing to that fog, lest people think you a total cunt with a vile agenda.

You should take your own advice.

 

[Metaphor]

Black people continue to have higher non-vaccination rates than white, Asian, or Hispanic people in America.

Latest Data on COVID-19 Vaccinations by Race/Ethnicity | KFF

KFF is collecting and analyzing data on COVID-19 vaccinations by race/ethnicity to gain increased insight who is receiving the vaccine and whether some groups are facing disparities in vaccination.

www.kff.org

Why are black people such plague rats? What can we do to make black people less likely to choose to be plague rats? I think since plague rats violate everyone else's human rights, we should kidnap them and forcibly inject them with a vaccine.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Which was really answered, long ago.

The answer is "no".

Now, could you please stop JAQing off about this non-controversy?

That has been discussed earlier in the thread, and the evidence does not support your position. While not conclusive, the lab leak hypothesis ( whether by a genetically engineered virus or one collected in the wild and then leaked) seems to be probable. Government agencies are cautious before making claims, but I would expect that, eventually, some would begin acknowledging this.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Black people continue to have higher non-vaccination rates than white, Asian, or Hispanic people in America.

Latest Data on COVID-19 Vaccinations by Race/Ethnicity | KFF

KFF is collecting and analyzing data on COVID-19 vaccinations by race/ethnicity to gain increased insight who is receiving the vaccine and whether some groups are facing disparities in vaccination.

www.kff.org

Why are black people such plague rats? What can we do to make black people less likely to choose to be plague rats? I think since plague rats violate everyone else's human rights, we should kidnap them and forcibly inject them with a vaccine.

Because they were lab rats in the mid 20th century. There is a deeply ingrained distrust in these sorts of things for them. It is difficult to overcome. One thing I have experienced, where I live, blacks wear masks much more than whites.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I am not viscerally, emotionally invested in a flat Earth not being possible; Nor in the Moon landings being a hoax not being possible; Nor in vaccines not causing autism.

I just know that these untruths are being bandied about by idiots a lot, and am determined not to let them go uncorrected, lest someone be gulled into thinking they have a shred of support.

The above is gaslighting. The idea that a lab-leak origin of the SARS-CoV-2 is as unlikely as a flat earth is gaslighting.

That's bull because we have the exact same people condemning China for the 'release of this virus on the world'... and then minimizing the alleged impact of said virus and criticizing mitigation efforts to slow spread because it isn't 'that big of a problem' and people trying to mitigate the effects of the virus are just acting to consolidate power over other people.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

I am not viscerally, emotionally invested in a flat Earth not being possible; Nor in the Moon landings being a hoax not being possible; Nor in vaccines not causing autism.

I just know that these untruths are being bandied about by idiots a lot, and am determined not to let them go uncorrected, lest someone be gulled into thinking they have a shred of support.

The above is gaslighting. The idea that a lab-leak origin of the SARS-CoV-2 is as unlikely as a flat earth is gaslighting.

That's bull because we have the exact same people condemning China for the 'release of this virus on the world'... and then minimizing the alleged impact of said virus and criticizing mitigation efforts to slow spread because it isn't 'that big of a problem' and people trying to mitigate the effects of the virus are just acting to consolidate power over other people.

First, the "because" is a mistake, because even if that would not make the hypothesis that sars-cov-2 leaked from a lab bullshit. In fact, it does not have anything to do with it - except to the extent that you're trying to make an argument from authority, or lack thereof. Arguments from authority are alright when you actually got the right authority and no counterargument, but it's pretty weak in this context. And you have yet to present the authority to contrast with the alleged non-authority on the other side. And if it's just an argument from non-authority - of those assigning significant or even high probability to the leak hypotheses -, well the claim you are making is just false. On that note...

Second, the set of people who assign a greater probability to a lab leak than to a natural origin, or the set of people who just do not assign negligible probability to a lab leak, are both different from the set of people who condemn China for 'releasing the virus on the world' (was that a quotation?), which in turn is different from the set of people who minimize the impact of the virus, etc.

 

[Jarhyn]

I am not viscerally, emotionally invested in a flat Earth not being possible; Nor in the Moon landings being a hoax not being possible; Nor in vaccines not causing autism.

I just know that these untruths are being bandied about by idiots a lot, and am determined not to let them go uncorrected, lest someone be gulled into thinking they have a shred of support.

The above is gaslighting. The idea that a lab-leak origin of the SARS-CoV-2 is as unlikely as a flat earth is gaslighting.

That's bull because we have the exact same people condemning China for the 'release of this virus on the world'... and then minimizing the alleged impact of said virus and criticizing mitigation efforts to slow spread because it isn't 'that big of a problem' and people trying to mitigate the effects of the virus are just acting to consolidate power over other people.

First, the "because" is a mistake, because even if that would not make the hypothesis that sars-cov-2 leaked from a lab bullshit. In fact, it does not have anything to do with it - except to the extent that you're trying to make an argument from authority. Arguments from authority are alright when you actually got the right authority and no counterargument, but it's pretty weak in this context.

Second, the set of people who assign a greater probability to a lab leak than to a natural origin, or the set of people who just do not assign negligible probability to a lab leak, are both different from the set of people who condemn China for 'releasing the virus on the world' (was that a quotation?), which in turn is different from the set of people who minimize the impact of the virus, etc.

Yet here you are intersecting with "all of the above".

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I am not viscerally, emotionally invested in a flat Earth not being possible; Nor in the Moon landings being a hoax not being possible; Nor in vaccines not causing autism.

I just know that these untruths are being bandied about by idiots a lot, and am determined not to let them go uncorrected, lest someone be gulled into thinking they have a shred of support.

The above is gaslighting. The idea that a lab-leak origin of the SARS-CoV-2 is as unlikely as a flat earth is gaslighting.

That's bull because we have the exact same people condemning China for the 'release of this virus on the world'... and then minimizing the alleged impact of said virus and criticizing mitigation efforts to slow spread because it isn't 'that big of a problem' and people trying to mitigate the effects of the virus are just acting to consolidate power over other people.

First, the "because" is a mistake, because even if that would not make the hypothesis that sars-cov-2 leaked from a lab bullshit. In fact, it does not have anything to do with it - except to the extent that you're trying to make an argument from authority. Arguments from authority are alright when you actually got the right authority and no counterargument, but it's pretty weak in this context.

Second, the set of people who assign a greater probability to a lab leak than to a natural origin, or the set of people who just do not assign negligible probability to a lab leak, are both different from the set of people who condemn China for 'releasing the virus on the world' (was that a quotation?), which in turn is different from the set of people who minimize the impact of the virus, etc.

The Venn Diagram is conclusive. Metaphor and TSwizzle and Trausti call it a Chinese released plague... while also saying it ain't a plague. They are inconsistent, to put it politely.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

I am not viscerally, emotionally invested in a flat Earth not being possible; Nor in the Moon landings being a hoax not being possible; Nor in vaccines not causing autism.

I just know that these untruths are being bandied about by idiots a lot, and am determined not to let them go uncorrected, lest someone be gulled into thinking they have a shred of support.

The above is gaslighting. The idea that a lab-leak origin of the SARS-CoV-2 is as unlikely as a flat earth is gaslighting.

That's bull because we have the exact same people condemning China for the 'release of this virus on the world'... and then minimizing the alleged impact of said virus and criticizing mitigation efforts to slow spread because it isn't 'that big of a problem' and people trying to mitigate the effects of the virus are just acting to consolidate power over other people.

First, the "because" is a mistake, because even if that would not make the hypothesis that sars-cov-2 leaked from a lab bullshit. In fact, it does not have anything to do with it - except to the extent that you're trying to make an argument from authority. Arguments from authority are alright when you actually got the right authority and no counterargument, but it's pretty weak in this context.

Second, the set of people who assign a greater probability to a lab leak than to a natural origin, or the set of people who just do not assign negligible probability to a lab leak, are both different from the set of people who condemn China for 'releasing the virus on the world' (was that a quotation?), which in turn is different from the set of people who minimize the impact of the virus, etc.

The Venn Diagram is conclusive. Metaphor and TSwizzle and Trausti call it a Chinese released plague... while also saying it ain't a plague. They are inconsistent, to put it politely.

Well, you would have to make the case against them if you like. However, I will grant that for the sake of the argument, and then point out that that does not make the lab leak hypothesis bull. It's not as though support for the lab leak hypothesis is based on no other evidence than the posts of Metaphor, TSwizzle or Trausti.

 

[TSwizzle]

The Venn Diagram is conclusive. Metaphor and TSwizzle and Trausti call it a Chinese released plague... while also saying it ain't a plague. They are inconsistent, to put it politely.

Male bovine excrement, I have said no such thing.

 

[TomC]

Venn Diagram is conclusive. Metaphor and TSwizzle and Trausti call it a Chinese released plague... while also saying it ain't a plague. They are inconsistent, to put it politely.

This is a strawman, to put it politely.
Tom

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Venn Diagram is conclusive. Metaphor and TSwizzle and Trausti call it a Chinese released plague... while also saying it ain't a plague. They are inconsistent, to put it politely.

This is a strawman, to put it politely.
Tom

There is no false statement attributed to those three in my post. You might want to look up the term strawman.

 

[barbos]

Have not been paying attention to numbers lately.
Looks like decline in infection rates in Russia.

 

[Elixir]

What an idiotic response.

True colors on display; quite the demonstration of intellectual vacuity. But not quite as abysmally stupid as calling a deadly disease that is killing thousands every day a “blessing”.