zlacker

>>lazycr+(OP)
I think the WHO did a fine job of writing it up. The US motive for proving China is at fault is largely political diversion from the US' mishandling, which would be mishandling no matter what origin.

That China blocked the Who's efforts and the WHO disclosed this is more relevant to future health policy than where this particular outbreak started. (Do we really want the public health system to tune to this specific scenario?)

>>foolme+Zh
> The US motive for proving China is at fault is largely political diversion from the US' mishandling, which would be mishandling no matter what origin.

Whether this is motivation is true or not has nothing to do with whether the WHO report reflects reality.

>>zepto+7j
The WHO disclosed they were blocked. You can infer a bayesian for a lab release of this specific virus. Now what does that change about the next pandemic?

>>foolme+Zj
The lab leak is not the only hypothesis the CCP may be seeking to avoid.

What they knew and how early they knew it is at least as significant.

>>zepto+Tk
So the fact that China didn't cooperate should affect future health policy?

edit- make China/cooperate more explicit.

>>foolme+Ul
Of course - if China knew more, earlier, wouldn’t you say knowing this should affect policy in future?

>>zepto+NP
Yes that's what I said:

> That China blocked the Who's efforts and the WHO disclosed this is more relevant to future health policy than where this particular outbreak started.

(Obviously the WHO, like any part of the UN can do nothing but document anything a superpower refuses to do.)

Now how does that build a case that the WHO is a problem instead of allowing superpowers to have super power is a problem?

It seems to me like people down voting my original comment are members of superpower states with hypocritical stances.