Endonuclease fingerprint indicates a synthetic origin of SARS-CoV-2

Re:Endonuclease fingerprint indicates a synthetic origin of ... by someuser54541 on Thursday October 20, 2022 @05:55PM (#33281337)

> My opinion is we are not capable of developing in a lab a virus that is so transmissible and survivable in human species only. I think the complexity of the virus machinery and its interactions inside of our bodies and immune system is beyond astronomical in complexity. It's laughable to suggest that we are so intelligent as to invent a better version of the machinery that is hypothesized as the very machinery responsible for creation of multi cellular life itself.

The very first synthetic virus created in 2002 and was modeled after polio, which is fairly transmissible and affects humans. That virus was made 20 years ago; synthetic biology has come a very long way since then.

Does that fact alter your opinion?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Endonuclease fingerprint indicates a synthetic origin of ... by beiller on Thursday October 20, 2022 @06:01PM (#33281394)

Sorry it does not. Was that virus more deadly, effective, or in any other measure better than the original polio? Or was it "polio" with a spike protein glued to it's head?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Endonuclease fingerprint indicates a synthetic origin of ... by sfink on Friday October 21, 2022 @11:18PM (#33295392)

You can trigger a pandemic by making a virus less deadly too.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Endonuclease fingerprint indicates a synthetic origin of ... by iso1337 on Thursday October 20, 2022 @05:58PM (#33281370)

There is a huge variety of viruses, just because someone wrote the equivalent of "Hello World" doesn't mean you can write a complicated CMS anytime soon.

Synthetic biology (the actual synthesis of DNA) has come a long way, we don't understand all the components yet though.

[ Parent | on HN ]