The furin cleavage site in SARS-CoV-2 has no close analogue in the sampled sarbecovirus record.
Settles on an identified natural progenitor carrying the motif, or on documentary evidence of insertion. Neither exists, which is why this one is expected to close unanswered.
Related claims
Anyone may draw these links, and the court does not rule on them — they are what readers have asserted, not findings.
This claim says:
- supports A laboratory-associated origin is the more likely explanation, on the evidence public in 2023.
Signal
- staked now: 0 KOURT:COVID (YES 0 / NO 0)
- 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
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/25/<your address>