Fingerprints of the Labs - New Pre-print indicates Synthetic Origin of Covid

But it's just a conspiracy theory, shhhhhhh

A pre-print study released today reports that the genomic patterns they have observed in SARS-CoV-2 are most likely to have occurred due to synthetic genome assembly rather than natural evolution. They say that the patterns are consistent with previously engineered viruses and are unlikely to have evolved from other coronaviruses. They report that there is a high likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated as an infectious clone assembled in vitro.

Alex Washburne, one of the co-authors, said they studied a common method for synthesizing coronaviruses in labs. The method was thought not to leave a fingerprint but he claims to have found the fingerprint in the genome.

He goes on to explain that to create a virus in a lab your need a 30kb DNA clone to make a 30kb RNA virus. To make the clone, smaller fragments are glued together, often using the Golden Gate assembly method. This method makes special “cutting” sites in the DNA sequence which in turn create “sticky ends”. This is the glue that attaches the various segments together.

In wild viruses, these stitched together areas happen at random parts throughout the genome. However, the authors analysed published clones from between 2000 and 2019 and found that there was a pattern, as to where these sticky ends appear, in chimeric, lab built viruses.

Alex Washburne @WashburneAlex

Researchers tend to turn randomly-spaced restriction maps into regularly-spaced ones (A-B). Regular spacing comes from desiring fewer fragments (typically 5-8) while keeping the longest fragment lengths low. 8/

A wild type distribution was created with the engineered virus restriction map superimposed to show where the difference occurred. This created a fingerprint with which they could analyse SARS-CoV-2.

They looked at the “cutting” sites in the SARS-CoV-2 genome and discovered that it fell neatly within the range for a reverse genetic system. Compared with wild coronaviruses, the results were an anomaly, being in the bottom 1%. Compared with engineered coronaviruses it fell in the midpoint.

To test their hypothesis, other criteria needed to be met.

For example, the “sticky ends” needed to be unique and non-palindromic. There was a 60% chance of this occurring in lab creations and SARS-CoV-2 passed this test. Each test they did decreased the odds of SARS-CoV-2 having a natural origin.

Alex is expecting serious pushback and so asks for open, civil and compassionate discourse on this important topic. He says the pre-print was not rushed and it has been reviewed by many world experts.

One of those experts is Professor Francois Balloux who is very much a Covid centrist. He was given advance warning of the pre-print and was able to replicate the key findings himself. He says that to the best of his knowledge, the reported patterns are genuine.

Francois states that the restriction sites in SARS-CoV-2 is highly atypical when compared to related viruses in circulation and far more in line with previous lab-engineered coronaviruses.

He concludes that this is the strongest piece of evidence against the zoonotic theory and that these are troubling findings which require scrutiny.