Is SARS From Mars? 76
lupulack writes "A news item at CTV.ca asks whether coronaviruses such as that implicated in SARS are in fact completely terrestrial in origin. It's not as clear cut as you might think !"
This restaurant was advertising breakfast any time. So I ordered french toast in the renaissance. - Steven Wright, comedian
Tinfoil hat time (Score:5, Insightful)
"This showed up all of a sudden, we've never seen anything like it, so it must be ALIENS! "
True, he is not suggesting that SARS is the first step of global domination by an actual extra-terrestrial intelligence, but he is saying that SARS came from a comet.
OK, let's break out Occam's razor. (strop, strop, strop. Hmmm, good and sharp.)
The explaination that requires the fewest ad-hoc assumptions is the most likely to be correct (as it has the fewest places to break).
Scenario 1: SARS is ET in origin. Required ad-hoc assumptions: there are viruses in space. Those viruses can infect humans. Those viruses can survive transport on a comet or other body from their point of origin and earth. None of those assumptions have much evidence to back them up.
Scenario 2: SARS is a naturally occuring virus that we have not seen before. Required ad-hoc assumptions: none.
OK, kids - which of these scenarios survives Occam's Razor?
scenario 3 (Score:1)
And apparently there's anecdotal now that the infection rate is higher than official numbers suggest, and it's being kept covered up, even i
Re:scenario 3 (Score:5, Insightful)
I wouldn't use complexity as any sort of argument for a human's hand in this. If anything, I would argue that complexity would point away from an artificial source and towards a natural one.
For all our advances in understanding of molecular biology, we still know far less than we don't know, especially about protein structure and fuction. If we knew enough about that, then most diseases for which we have identified the genes involved would be cured by now. Sequencing genes is relatively easy, identifying what the gene does is harder, but figuring out exactly how the protein product of the gene actually works (and how a mutation affects that functioning) is by far the hardest.
Human intervention in creating a virus would most likely take the form of "let's take this gene from another virus or organism and put it in this other virus". Things like that aren't too hard to identify by DNA sequence analysis (relatively simple pattern matching, after all). I'm sure after they sequenced the DNA of the virus, they started comparing it to other known sequences. (Interesting side note - I actually had a class with one of the people who sequenced the virus DNA - he was taking a few qualifying courses before starting his grad studies in molecular biology, and I was finishing my undergrad in biochemistry. It was funny to see the name and recognize the face almost 12 years later.)
Re:scenario 3 (Score:1)
If you would like I mean, and if you are interested.
Re:scenario 3 (Score:1)
I found three links in a row on the Rense website referring to the possibility of SARS being a man-made bioweapon. A lot of the information from the three links is the same, but each does contain additional information.
one [news24.com]
two [rense.com]
three [rense.com]
I don't have time to research all of the claims made in those links, but some things did stick out to me:
They keep quoting Nikolai Filatov as saying he thinks the virus is man-made because "there is no vaccine for
Re:scenario 3 (Score:1)
race specific (Score:1)
Re:race specific (Score:1)
random thoughts (Score:1)
Re:scenario 82 1/2 (Score:1)
Just a wild guess.
Jaysyn
Re:Tinfoil hat time (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Tinfoil hat time (Score:3, Interesting)
But
Occam's razor is not "the explaination that requires the fewest ad-hoc assumptions is the most likely to be correct (as it has the fewest places to break)."
Its actually "Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily."
One of the philisophical conclusions you can take Occam's razor to is "when you have two competing theories which make exactly the same predictions, the one that is simpler is the better."
But that aint actually the razor itself.
Re:Tinfoil hat time (Score:1)
This is a really pat answer but:- :->
Occam was never the victim of a conspiracy
Sorry (Score:5, Insightful)
1. Viruses are delicate. Being in outer space, crashing to earth, and infecting someone. A difficult task by itself.
2. Viruses evolve jointly with hosts. All evidence suggests that viruses have a very close (evolving) relationship with their hosts.
3. There are perfectly good theories with lots of evidence that explain new virus infections. For example, SARS may have come from a little evolution by a virus in a cat-like species of civet [hinduonnet.com]. It didn't help that the viruses new host happened to be a delicacy.
4. There may be lots of evidence that life exists outside of our planet, but (like #2) viruses require evolution from a similar host. That suggest the virus would have to get into space from earth first. That makes it extremely unlikely (IMO) that a virus could go to space get back and reinfect the same (or similar) species of host without being damaged.
5. Finally, (AFAIK) A VIABLE VIRUS HAS NEVER BEEN FOUND/CULTURED ON A METEOR!!!!
This theory is a little like suggesting that crop circles come from aliens even after the people who admitted building the first ones have come forward. It is possible, but very, very unlikely. (Personally, I hope that the rest of cosmological theories are attached to better evidence than this)
-Sean
Re:Sorry (Score:3, Insightful)
-Sean
Re:Sorry (Score:1)
Bacteria - which contain nucleic acids, obviously - can survive on the moon [nasa.gov]. Viruses are even simpler and hardier.
Re:Sorry (Score:2)
That was an interesting read. Many viruses, as far as I know, actually, are not hardier than bacteria. Gram negative bacteria are covered in a thick layer of protective peptidoglycan. Many viruses, particularly rhinoviruses don't survive long when exposed to the open. Some gram negs also have a desicated spore form that is very dry and very, very hardy.
-Sean
Nothing to see, move along (Score:5, Insightful)
The scientists quoted in the article don't provide a shred of evidence. They argue that it is possible that the pathogen responsible for SARS fell out of the stratosphere. They don't have any evidence to suggest it actually happened. Furthermore, they can't show any examples of living things falling from that altitude and surviving, nor can they even really provide a mechanism by which such a thing might be possible.
We already have an explanation of where SARS and other viruses come from: mutations of other human diseases or mutations of similar animal diseases. We already have an explanation for why many of these come from China: China has a large number of people in close proximity to farm animals, and most of these people do not have good sanitation. From the plague to influenza and even HIV, we can identify the animal links by which humans first became infected. These explanations have been tested and correctly predict future results: for example, immunologists look at pigs and ducks in Hong Kong when they decide which three strains of influenza the annual flu shots should protect against.
In contrast, a few British microbiologists are proposing that viruses fall from the stratosphere. It's certainly possible that they're right, but we're a long way from throwing out our current theories.
Re:Nothing to see, move along (Score:2)
Re:Nothing to see, move along (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Nothing to see, move along (Score:2)
China has a large number of people in close proximity to farm animals, and most of these people do not have good sanitation.
I suspect it's more relevant that rural Chinese live in relatively close proximity to a wide range of animals. In North America and Europe, farmers are regularly exposed to cows, sheep, goats, pigs ... a dozen animal types, perhaps. HIV/AIDS migrated from monkeys to humans, in Africa. Since China is the world's largest country with a variety of climates: southern, northern, deser
Re:Nothing to see, move along (Score:2)
Re:Nothing to see, move along (Score:1)
were the SARS virus from space, it would be expected that it would have little relationship genetically to other viri on earth. In other words, there would be no genes in sars that are genetically similar to those found in other species. However, at the beginning of the SARS virus there is a replicase gene that is identical to one found in other viruses. If you would like to confirm this for yourself, here are some inst
Link to a more believable article (Score:5, Informative)
I expect the author of the theory that 'The Lancet' printed in their letter page will now follow up with an equally believable theory that the cats flew here from Mars.
Re: Link to a more believable article (Score:2)
Re: Link to a more believable article (Score:2)
Re: Link to a more believable article (Score:3, Informative)
Re: Link to a more believable article (Score:2)
"WHO have said that cats (and cockroaches) do not spread the disease".
And then concluded:
"it is probable that SARS originated from people eating cats"
So it seemed to me that he thought that civet cats are cats. And I figured it would be good to correct him.
Re: Link to a more believable article (Score:2)
Somebody smack these people (Score:1, Insightful)
First, don't eat carnivores. Is that so frikkin' hard to understand? Besides being cute and fluffy, they're already at the top of the food chain. Do you understand what a bioaccumulator is? No, I didn't think so. Hint: it's a really bad idea. Also, beating puppies to death and eating them just shows what a pathetic waste of air you are.
Also, don't eat endangered species. Seriously, I'm sorry you've got a small di
Re:Somebody smack these people (Score:4, Informative)
[newsday.com]
Info on Civet Cat, Found to Have SARS
* TRAITS: Of the family Viverridae, the civet cat is a primarily nocturnal animal closely related to the mongoose. There are several species. Some are carnivores that live on the ground, while the animals with SARS in China are masked palm civets, which live in trees and eat fruit.
Glaicers. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Glaicers. (Score:2)
SARS has pretty good resistance, it can exist outside of the human body for 3 or 4 days if the temperature is in the right band (which does not explain Toronto). A virus like this one would have to survive around 70 years at below freezing and then be able to cause havoc at 'normal' temperatures. A virus that powerful would either be pretty unstoppable anyway, or we would have adapted to it as in the Co
Sars came from Mars, in Jars strapped to Cars (Score:2)
Dr. Seuss supports perpetual copyright (Score:1)
Aren't we supposed to be boycotting Dr. Seuss Enterprises [kuro5hin.org]?
Ok, it has to be said: (Score:2, Funny)
Sigh... (Score:2, Informative)
I can't believe this got posted.
Is SARS from Mars? (Score:5, Funny)
Is your Brainus in Uranus?
Sceptical - or blinkered? (Score:4, Informative)
To put a couple of things straight first. Professor Wickramasinghe [cf.ac.uk] hasn't said that SARS comes from space. In the Lancet letter [thelancet.com] (free reg required), he says "With respect to the SARS outbreak, a prima facie case for a possible space incidence can already be made". Note the word "possible". Note the words "prima facie" (roughly="sufficient to warrant further investigation").
This isn't some crackpot who's just heard of SARS, can't understand epidemiology and therefore thinks it must have come from outer space without thinking things through. Along with Fred Hoyle [cf.ac.uk], he's long been a proponent of panspermia [panspermia.org] - the theory that life originated in space, rather than on Earth.
There is plentiful evidence of complex organic molecules in cometary and interstellar material. The environment on periodically warmed comets is every bit as suitable for the generation of life as the alternative theory of the primordial soup. Organic compounds, quite tightly concentrated, intermittent energy, water. The theory is that life on Earth originated Out There, so it would be no surprise that DNA/RNA from space would fit earthly organisms - they share the same origins.
In his letter, Prof. Wickramasinghe estimates that "a tonne of bacterial material falls to Earth from space daily, which translates into some 10^19 bacteria, or 20 000 bacteria per square metre of the Earth's surface". It would be surprising if none of these found a viable host. On the rare occasion that there is a good match, a pandemic could result. We don't know if SARS started this way or not.
Note that meteors aren't involved. Nothing gets burned up on re-entry. The stuff just drifts in.
I don't know what the answer is, but I know that it's not as clear cut as some would like to think. It's just possible that data from Beagle2 this Christmas might help shed a little more light.
short answer: no (Score:2)
Lars and the SARS from Mars (Score:1)
More probable theory (Score:4, Funny)
-
Star trek writers on Slashdot ? (Score:1)
:)
Re:More probable theory (Score:2)
they got the names wrong (Score:1, Troll)
what's wrong with that... (Score:4, Insightful)
But a virus that infects human cells and evades the immune system sufficiently long to kill has to have evolved in vertebrates. So, unless the universe is filled with vertebrates and they have a habit of coughing in our general direction, that doesn't seem particularly plausible.
More likely, the SARS virus belongs to the viruses that we have never bothered to identify before: among viruses and microbial life, we have identified and characterized only a tiny fraction so far.
Re:what's wrong with that... (Score:2)
No - from Marx (Score:1)
Just off the top of my head... (Score:1)
When was that last time you caught Dutch Elm Disease? A tree has more in common genetically with us than whatever hosts these virii developed on. What are the odds t
Re:Just off the top of my head... (Score:2)
Apparently humans can also get it, although the effects are pretty mild. To Humans.
Various forms of Influenza are also alleged to originate with Chickens (in China). Body temperature seems to be an important factor, but I have not seen a http://www.bushorchicken.com site so far so would suspect that the birds are not that closely related to u
Re:Just off the top of my head... (Score:1)
But they are vertebrates, and we do share some common genetic structure. Whereas these alien viruses use alien beings as hosts, and thus are attuned to alien genetic structure, which would in all likelyhood be so completely alien to human genetic structure that compared to them, chickens and huma
I don't think that there is life out there too (Score:2)
Is SARS From Mars? (Score:1)
SARS' relationship to coffee (Score:1)
Civet coffee [nzoom.com]
And THIS is why... (Score:1)
it's obvious! (Score:1)
as the article states it came from a far place called 'United Kingdom' (probably a planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse) and NOT fom an earthbound microbiologist.
And we are worried about what we send up. (Score:1)
Duplicate Theory ;-) (Score:2)
Re:Duplicate Theory ;-) (Score:2)
And this of course is also key - a bit of a nutcase, sure, but not even a *biologist* with nutty views on evolution. At least they have a chance of finding a slippery grasp on biological principles with two blind grabs...
Health care (Score:2)