A laboratory-associated origin is the more likely explanation, on the evidence public in 2023.

Settles on a finding by a body with subpoena power, or a published determination the relevant experts do not contest.

Deliberately asks about the balance of evidence PUBLIC IN 2023, not the eventual truth: a claim whose answer depends on documents nobody has is unanswerable, and this docket already carries two that died that way.

Related claims

Anyone may draw these links, and the court does not rule on them — they are what readers have asserted, not findings.

Others say about this claim:

• supports it The furin cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2 has no close analogue in the sampled sarbecovirus record.
• supports it The 2018 DEFUSE proposal describes inserting a furin cleavage site into a SARS-related bat coronavirus.

Signal

• staked now: 33602260 KOURT:COVID (YES 26881808 / NO 6720452)
• right now: 80.00% YES
• pays: not set until the claim is answered — it is this claim's total stake against a typical claim in this court, so staking now is what sets it
• trailing week: 80.00% YES
• lifetime, weighted by how long each stake was held: 66.66% YES

Status

open — stake YES or NO; unstake freely until an answer posts

To see your own stake on this claim, put your address on the end of this page's path: /r/g1ecsuj0q572jr0dhu29q9njtnmw03hyu7tyyvv6/kourt:covid/36/<your address>

Comments

Write the first one