We have no way of knowing unless we find someone who is directly involved in the research.I had that door firmly closed in my face yesterday.By know there should be a marked difference in the index case and subsequent cases in terms of symptoma, mortality rate and virulence. Virus are supposed to get less virulent by generation in any given outbreak NOT the reverse.
Wouldnt an ability to consistently maintain a high mortality rate and virulence while resisting burnout over an extended period of generations be a 'desirable' :-( characteristic for a weaponized virus?
Wouldnt an ability to take a high toll among health care workers also be a 'desirable' :( characteristic in a weaponized virus?
On the other hand this isnt airborne...a bioweapon should be more easily spread non?
Might a bioweapon designer perhaps SEPARATELY develop two viral lines; one designed to maximize lethality with reduced transmissibility, another designed to maximize transmissibility with reduced lethality, to 'test release' into the wild for experimental verification of their 'improved' :-( characteristics FIELD-effectiveness BEFORE combining those lines characteristics into one [chimera?] viral 'super-weapon'?
Or am I sounding too 'Tom Clancy'/'foil beanie brigade' here?
Please forgive a laypersons ignorance if so.