Israeli Startup Claims SARS-Cov-2 Escaped from Wuhan Lab During Gain-of-Function Research

An Israeli startup named Rootclaim has determined that there is an 81% chance that the SARS-cov-2 was accidentally released from the Wuhan bioresearch laboratory during gain-of-function research.

Rootclaim is, i'm assuming, an ai driven service that does this:

Rootclaim outperforms human reasoning by correcting for the biases and flaws of human intuition. The platform integrates all available evidence, assesses it for credibility and uses probabilistic models to reach conclusions about the likelihood of competing hypotheses. Its conclusions represent the best available understanding of the complexity and uncertainty in our world

According to rootclaim

www.rootclaim.com...

The virus was developed during gain-of-function research and was released by accident. (81% probability)

Hypotheses Considered

1 81% Lab escape: The virus was developed during gain-of-function research and was released by accident.
2 16% Zoonotic: The virus evolved in nature and was transmitted to humans zoonotically.
3 2.8% Bioweapon: The virus was genetically engineered as a bioweapon and was deliberately released.

When a novel coronavirus was first identified in late 2019, the assumption was that, like most epidemics, it was of a zoonotic source. A few studies, including one published in the prestigious Nature magazine, concluded that the virus is not a laboratory construct.

Today, claiming a non-zoonotic origin is widely considered a conspiracy theory, and indeed many such claims are easily refutable without requiring probabilistic inference.

However, the possibility of a lab escape does require serious examination, especially when considering the proximity of the source to a major coronavirus lab and several unusual findings in the genome of SARS-CoV-2. Due to the complexities of weighing an unlikely lab origin against findings that are unlikely for a zoonotic source, a probabilistic analysis is needed.

I'm sure this will likely be dismissed by the majority of media and many people. But it seems like it's worth looking more into. The link goes more into the evidence behind the eventual decision.

ETA: a bit of info on gain of function research.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Subbarao explained that routine virological methods involve experiments that aim to produce a gain of a desired function, such as higher yields for vaccine strains, but often also lead to loss of function, such as loss of the ability for a virus to replicate well, as a consequence. In other words, any selection process involving an alteration of genotypes and their resulting phenotypes is considered a type of Gain-of-Function (GoF) research, even if the U.S. policy is intended to apply to only a small subset of such work.

Subbarao emphasized that such experiments in virology are fundamental to understanding the biology, ecology, and pathogenesis of viruses and added that much basic knowledge is still lacking for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. Subbarao introduced the key questions that virologists ask at all stages of research on the emergence or re-emergence of a virus and specifically adapted these general questions to the three viruses of interest in the symposium (see Box 3-1). To answer these questions, virologists use gain- and loss-of-function experiments to understand the genetic makeup of viruses and the specifics of virus-host interaction. For instance, researchers now have advanced molecular technologies, such as reverse genetics, which allow them to produce de novo recombinant viruses from cloned cDNA, and deep sequencing that are critical for studying how viruses escape the host immune system and antiviral controls. Researchers also use targeted host or viral genome modification using small interfering RNA or the bacterial CRISPR-associated protein-9 nuclease as an editing tool.

originally posted by: dug88
An Israeli startup named Rootclaim has determined that there is an 81% chance that the SARS-cov-2 was accidentally released from the Wuhan bioresearch laboratory during gain-of-function research.

...

Didn't need no damn AI to tell me that!

That is, if it's actually all as terrible as they claim it to be.
:

a reply to: dug88

To be honest dug88, humans got there first....and quite some time ago.

Nonetheless, this is significant and very important in demonstrating that when Bill Gates (of hell) says there will be more pandemics, we know where to start pointing the finger.

Never forget Sars-CoV-2 Is The Tip Of The Iceberg.

a reply to: dug88

If it accidently leaked from China, they owe the rest of the world for the losses that will set us all back a decade.

The idea that a bat 800 miles away from Wuhan caused a outbreak of a novel corona virus at a wet market and not the Bio lab is just insane

So much points towds a accadental release from the Bio lab there is just no way a natraly occurring virus made that trip without leaving a trail of infected citys just as bad if not worse than Wuhan

It came from that lab there is no other logical explanation

I personally don't think what escaped was modified but I would not rule out the possibility tho I doubt we will ever know for shure

a reply to: dug88

Thanks for posting this dug, but pardon my skepticism...

An AI, that's gonna legitimatize our whack-a-doodle conspiracy-theories ?
Really ?

From the land, where many tech startups are fronted by 'former' Moss-head agents ?
Really ?

How soon until they use this, to justify attacks, or wars ?

Just doesn't feel right...

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: dug88

If it accidently leaked from China, they owe the rest of the world for the losses that will set us all back a decade.

Hold up though. If it was being studied at UNC Chapel Hill’s R&D lab for GoF capacity (circa 2014-16?)and when it was learned of the intention and capability, it was shut down there....

So did we outsource our low-key Geneva List Bio-No-No hot potato to A BSL-4 lab in Wuhan? Plausible deniability and all?

How many licks to the center of the lollipop indeed.

Also: don’t lick lollipop, it may have Covid

a reply to: Nothin

They do have their evidence and reasoning available for scrutiny should you choose to look at it. I wouldn't bother waiting for the cnn summary, I doubt it's coming.

a reply to: dug88

We could perhaps find the evidence and reasoning that Alexa uses as well, but still wouldn't trust her for the recipe to boil-water, or make toast.

It just don't feel right...

originally posted by: dug88
An Israeli startup named Rootclaim has determined that there is an 81% chance that the SARS-cov-2 was accidentally released from the Wuhan bioresearch laboratory during gain-of-function research.

Rootclaim is, i'm assuming, an ai driven service that does this:

Rootclaim outperforms human reasoning by correcting for the biases and flaws of human intuition. The platform integrates all available evidence, assesses it for credibility and uses probabilistic models to reach conclusions about the likelihood of competing hypotheses. Its conclusions represent the best available understanding of the complexity and uncertainty in our world

According to rootclaim

www.rootclaim.com...

The virus was developed during gain-of-function research and was released by accident. (81% probability)

Hypotheses Considered

1 81% Lab escape: The virus was developed during gain-of-function research and was released by accident.
2 16% Zoonotic: The virus evolved in nature and was transmitted to humans zoonotically.
3 2.8% Bioweapon: The virus was genetically engineered as a bioweapon and was deliberately released.

When a novel coronavirus was first identified in late 2019, the assumption was that, like most epidemics, it was of a zoonotic source. A few studies, including one published in the prestigious Nature magazine, concluded that the virus is not a laboratory construct.

Today, claiming a non-zoonotic origin is widely considered a conspiracy theory, and indeed many such claims are easily refutable without requiring probabilistic inference.

However, the possibility of a lab escape does require serious examination, especially when considering the proximity of the source to a major coronavirus lab and several unusual findings in the genome of SARS-CoV-2. Due to the complexities of weighing an unlikely lab origin against findings that are unlikely for a zoonotic source, a probabilistic analysis is needed.

I'm sure this will likely be dismissed by the majority of media and many people. But it seems like it's worth looking more into. The link goes more into the evidence behind the eventual decision.

ETA: a bit of info on gain of function research.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Subbarao explained that routine virological methods involve experiments that aim to produce a gain of a desired function, such as higher yields for vaccine strains, but often also lead to loss of function, such as loss of the ability for a virus to replicate well, as a consequence. In other words, any selection process involving an alteration of genotypes and their resulting phenotypes is considered a type of Gain-of-Function (GoF) research, even if the U.S. policy is intended to apply to only a small subset of such work.

Subbarao emphasized that such experiments in virology are fundamental to understanding the biology, ecology, and pathogenesis of viruses and added that much basic knowledge is still lacking for SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV. Subbarao introduced the key questions that virologists ask at all stages of research on the emergence or re-emergence of a virus and specifically adapted these general questions to the three viruses of interest in the symposium (see Box 3-1). To answer these questions, virologists use gain- and loss-of-function experiments to understand the genetic makeup of viruses and the specifics of virus-host interaction. For instance, researchers now have advanced molecular technologies, such as reverse genetics, which allow them to produce de novo recombinant viruses from cloned cDNA, and deep sequencing that are critical for studying how viruses escape the host immune system and antiviral controls. Researchers also use targeted host or viral genome modification using small interfering RNA or the bacterial CRISPR-associated protein-9 nuclease as an editing tool.

Most of us who have any damn sense or ability to reason knew this about a year ago.

a reply to: slatesteam

Your point is purely speculative.

If that was the case, I'd expect more rhetoric from China.

originally posted by: Nothin
a reply to: dug88

An AI, that's gonna legitimatize our whack-a-doodle conspiracy-theories ?
Really ?

Well AI are good at giving probabilities but we can't reach conclusions based on probabilities. However I do find it much more probable that Covid-19 was released from a lab considering that the Wuhan lab already created a SARS-Cov hybrid capable of infecting human cells. The mainstream theories about how it jumped to humans make little sense and there is very little evidence to actually show how it jumped to humans. The origin point of the virus would suggest a very high probability that the virus was accidentally leaked from the Wuhan lab, which isn't hard to imagine considering how effectively Covid-19 spreads regardless of all safety measures.

In 2005, a group including researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology published research into the origin of the SARS coronavirus, finding that China's horseshoe bats are natural reservoirs of SARS-like coronaviruses.[6] Continuing this work over a period of years, researchers from the Institute sampled thousands of horseshoe bats in locations across China, isolating over 300 bat coronavirus sequences.[7]

In 2015, the Institute published successful research on whether a bat coronavirus could be made to infect HeLa. A team from the Institute engineered a hybrid virus, combining a bat coronavirus with a SARS virus that had been adapted to grow in mice and mimic human disease. The hybrid virus was able to infect human cells.[8][9]

Wuhan Institute of Virology - Coronavirus research

pretty sure i remember reading about this before the virus spread outside of china after watching a video about it from a youtuber that used to live in china and still had contacts he talked to about it with. dont remember the details but it was pretty compelling information indicating a coverup and researchers disappearing or being reassigned before the virus became news.

a reply to: ChaoticOrder

Yes : can see those possibilities, with significant levels of probability.

My problem is in trusting the AI.
Or rather : the AI, that isn't neutral.
The AI : that is owned, financed, and programmed by someone, or some organization.

What might their agenda be ?

Will it become more and more difficult, to spot the narrative, the further that AI tech evolves ?

( Ooops : that almost sounds like : AI evolves... LoL !! )

One thing I will add is that Fauci used tax payer dollars to pay for that gain of function research.

This has all been known by those who followed the bread crumbs since the beginning.

The release in my opinion was not accidental, but rushed out prematurely when Trump's election forced them to bump up their timing.

My best bet is the plan is now to continue the hype while continuing work on the real deal eos bug. Once that one gets unleashed people will be begging to be chipped and let into sterile FEMA work camps, and those who can't will still beg to have their children taken from them and put in one, so their children can at least have a chance at life even if it is in a FEMA slave camp or work farm.

Think of covid as the foreplay that will tell them how far they can go with us. Once mandated vaccines, lock downs, and mask mandates, and ubi have become fully normalized for the seasonal flue come covid, the other shoe should be just getting ready to drop.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: slatesteam

Your point is purely speculative.

If that was the case, I'd expect more rhetoric from China.

Define more.... that’s all the CCP is good for

And so what. It can’t be refuted and it’s just food for thought.... all this is confirmable btw, with the exception this is EXACTLY what happened

a reply to: dug88

The problem with systems like this is that if you put bias data into them you merely get out a conclusion that supports this bias.

Like those sentencing algorithms that jailed young black men for longer than normal based on court documents where human judges did the exact same thing.

Until they submit their source data and algorithms for peer review I'm going to look at this as being a bias ai confirming the bias if it's bias creator.

The case for lab origins is much stronger than zoonotic from all I have reviewed.

As being an accidental or intentional release, Event 201 does provide a compelling case for an intentional release. Those involved in the pandemic planning stages are still in positions of power and influence in covid response. Suppressing treatments while promoting lock downs, masks, social distancing and vaccination policy.

It does look like a biological attack from here. Some are motivated by money as the government coffers got pillaged during the panic. Most are trying to do the right thing, just a bit lost with all the censorship and misinformation going on. A few are trying to kill of the population.