A bit late to the discussion on this point, and way out of my depths. Even so, I am wondering about one aspect here.
Rhetorically, you seem to cast the question of why not elsewhere in terms of only some other specific location. Is there a reason why one might not think that rather than some single (as apposed to major) point of origin that a zoonotic transmission might not have multiple points—with “export” transmissions rates that differ based on local characteristics?
Appreciate the post and suspect this is not bad to have a solid debate around. For both the specific of what happened with regard to the pandemic and the whole manufactured consensus aspect—but suspect the latter might be better explored on its own in terms of how best to prepare oneself to recognize the event and one’s own susceptibilities to such events.
A bit late to the discussion on this point, and way out of my depths. Even so, I am wondering about one aspect here.
Rhetorically, you seem to cast the question of why not elsewhere in terms of only some other specific location. Is there a reason why one might not think that rather than some single (as apposed to major) point of origin that a zoonotic transmission might not have multiple points—with “export” transmissions rates that differ based on local characteristics?
Appreciate the post and suspect this is not bad to have a solid debate around. For both the specific of what happened with regard to the pandemic and the whole manufactured consensus aspect—but suspect the latter might be better explored on its own in terms of how best to prepare oneself to recognize the event and one’s own susceptibilities to such events.