zlacker

[return to "Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed"]
1. gregwe+pV1[view] [source] 2021-03-22 22:00:55
>>ruarai+(OP)
This is a great article explaining why a lab leak should always be a suspect. The alternative theory is that a virus traveled on its own (via bats or other animals) from bat caves 900km away to Wuhan where there are 2 labs researching bats. One of the labs is lesser known but is right next to the seafood market and the hospital where the outbreak was first known. [1]

This article points out that a lab outbreak could have happened in the United States and many places in the world. We need to avoid demonizing China over this if we want to ever find out the truth and learn how to prevent another pandemic outbreak.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20200214144447/https://www.resea...

◧◩
2. strogo+R42[view] [source] 2021-03-22 22:48:18
>>gregwe+pV1
An eerily prescient quote from a paper[0] published in 2015, two of the authors of which are with Wuhan Institute of Virology:

> Understanding the bat origin of human coronaviruses is helpful for the prediction and prevention of another pandemic emergence in the future.

China has clearly contributed valuable research into bat coronaviruses. They had all the motivation to look into these after the first deadly SARS. I think it’s silly to presume CCP engineered a virus as part of some warfare strategy, or even to vilify/sanction them for a lab leak if it indeed was the cause (mistakes happen). However, CCP’s resistance to a proper thorough study of the origins of COVID is IMO not exactly appropriate.

Active research was taking place in the vicinity of suspected ground zero. Lab escapes happen—there are well-documented cases of the original SARS virus leaking from a lab in Beijing in 2004 (killing at least one person). Why was this time such a scenario discarded as so ridiculously impossible at first, and is still considered “extremely unlikely”? Is it politics?

[0] https://virologyj.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12985-...

◧◩◪
3. Aeolun+gk2[view] [source] 2021-03-23 00:29:47
>>strogo+R42
> However, CCP’s resistance to a proper thorough study of the origins of COVID is IMO not exactly appropriate.

It is, in fact, highly suspect. I’m not at all positive that it indeed leaked from a lab in Wuhan, but the fact they won’t let an independent investigation anywhere near it makes me lean more strongly towards that as a possibility.

The description of the last investigation into the origins of the virus felt more like a ‘guided tour’.

◧◩◪◨
4. agumon+Fq2[view] [source] 2021-03-23 01:19:47
>>Aeolun+gk2
It can be pride over shame of incompetence maybe ? the wuhan labs are said to be lacking in standard safety biohazard practices.. so investigating may reveal that.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. marcus+2x2[view] [source] 2021-03-23 02:12:09
>>agumon+Fq2
You gotta remember the culture, and that everything in China is political. You can't just say "oops" and learn the lessons.

Any investigations will have the goal not of finding the truth, but of minimising damage to the political powers that control it.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. refene+kI2[view] [source] 2021-03-23 03:52:28
>>marcus+2x2
That's not a cultural thing, it's a universal human/organizational thing.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. tweetl+yp3[view] [source] 2021-03-23 11:08:23
>>refene+kI2
That is true, but the difference is the lack of accountability, which is cultural/societal/political - there are virtually no external forces to counter a potentially dishonest official narrative.

A one party state means that there is no pressure from political opponents (political battles inside the party will never trump the party itself). And there is no pressure from journalists - China has the worst score for press freedom [1] (bar Eritreaa, Turkmenistan and North Korea) with a downward trend over the last decade. If there's no one to hold your feet to the fire, there's little incentive to self-incriminate.

[1] https://rsf.org/en/china

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. refene+NG3[view] [source] 2021-03-23 13:23:39
>>tweetl+yp3
In theory that might be true, and it's the way they teach it in American civics class.

In practice, Xi went on an 'anti-corruption campaign' that purged all his political enemies from power as his first initiative. The exact opposite of what your theory predicts, and actually a stronger cyclical purge than our typical repubs->dems->repubs one.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. tweetl+pK3[view] [source] 2021-03-23 13:45:22
>>refene+NG3
The campaign was a unique event in decades of party history and the Wikipedia page for the campaign lists 4 different theories for political motives. I'm not sure you can view it as a sign of a culture of healthy accountability.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-corruption_campaign_under...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣▦
10. refene+xS3[view] [source] 2021-03-23 14:23:36
>>tweetl+pK3
The point remains that they have politics. It's not some lockstep monolith.

As far as which culture has more healthy accountability.. plenty of corruption to go around on all sides, the comparison would be pretty nuanced.

I'd say that China has a lot more low-level corruption, as a bigger % of their economy, what with large swaths of the country being pretty third-world, but also more accountability for senior people who fuck up badly. They executed a baby food exec who poisoned kids, while nobody saw a day in jail for poisoning the city of Flint. Rick Snyder probably has a nice lobbyist job.

Or, look at Covid -- the mayor of Wuhan and governor of Hubei were sacked over their poor initial handling. Is NY gonna elect a Republican over it? TX elect a Democrat? No way in either case. Maybe we have less accountability in some ways specifically due to the 2-party system's polarization. Arguably Trump lost over it, but the guy literally got covid, right before the election, after downplaying it for 6 months and still got the 2nd most votes in history.

[go to top]