> I am a molecular biologist but not a virologist. This article is stupid. The furin cleavage site, with almost identical sequences is present in several ancestral coronaviruses to Sars cov II. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7836551/
It seems the presence of the furin cleavage site in any other Coronavirus would be enough to invalidate this paper’s comparison to pure random chance.
Why would the authors misuse statistics comparing this to random chance when there are published examples of the furin cleavage site appearing elsewhere? It doesn’t make any sense.
Yes, possible DNA sequences do not occur with equal frequencies. The whole point of selection pressure is that it selects for specific sequences. The same sequence occurring in a host species and a parasite is also not surprising. Rare events could result in horizontal transfer of genetics between host and parasite. Such things have been documented before.
It seems the presence of the furin cleavage site in any other Coronavirus would be enough to invalidate this paper’s comparison to pure random chance.
Why would the authors misuse statistics comparing this to random chance when there are published examples of the furin cleavage site appearing elsewhere? It doesn’t make any sense.