zlacker

[return to "The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins"]
1. bartar+T5[view] [source] 2021-06-04 00:04:55
>>codech+(OP)
This is the most shocking article I have ever read in my life. I'd ask everyone to please read it because it is incredible.

One thing I did not realize is that US researchers who conducted gain of function research tried to downplay and discredit the possibility of the virus originating from the wuhan lab. There was an anti-lab theory Lancet statement signed by scientists, and "Daszak had not only signed but organized the influential Lancet statement, with the intention of concealing his role and creating the impression of scientific unanimity."

Plus there's all the stuff about the miners shoveling bat poop for weeks and then dying of coronaviruses, and the Wuhan institute collecting and doing gain of function research on these similar-to-SARS samples. And then several of the lab's gain of function researchers became ill in late 2019. And there's the weird renaming of samples to hide the unmatched closeness of the mine samples and covid. This is just the absolute surface of the article. There's too much to list here

Edit: here's another amazement for the list: "Shi Zhengli herself had publicly acknowledged that, until the pandemic, all of her team’s coronavirus research — some involving live SARS-like viruses — had been conducted in less secure BSL-3 and even BSL-2 laboratories." And the article says "BSL-2 [is] roughly as secure as an American dentist’s office."

◧◩
2. mc32+p9[view] [source] 2021-06-04 00:38:42
>>bartar+T5
The other astonishing things is the sudden about face by the media. I'm glad they allowed themselves the liberty of looking at alternative origins. But... they were SO adamant and complicit in any discussion about alternative theories being shut down under the guise of conspiracy, Trumpism, anti-China, etc. (These are the same people who have no qualms about attributing anything to Russia even if evidence is thin, so it's clear there is hypocrisy involved).

Edit: It looks like Twitter is suspending the account of the Fauci email leaker(s). So the MoT is still on it.

◧◩◪
3. fricke+Fp[view] [source] 2021-06-04 03:18:31
>>mc32+p9
China supported this in a psyop. Remember when they tried repeatedly to push the origin of the virus to Italy? I'm ethnically Chinese, so I'm in contact with a lot of mainlanders. The brainwashing is very effective. Even if most mainlanders know that their state media is bogus, and that Xi is a dictator, they'll take it deeply personally when you say anything that threatens the whole China # 1 narrative. All they had to do was hire a few shitposters, feed a few media narratives and the US fights with itself over stuff like anti-china, racists etc, while the CCP takes over Hong Kong.
◧◩◪◨
4. Correc+HM[view] [source] 2021-06-04 07:58:51
>>fricke+Fp
Or all the effort to not call it China Virus/Wuhan flu because that's racist and we don't name viruses after places anymore.

Virus variants named after places on the other hand are apparently perfectly fine. So we don't have the Chinese virus but we do have British, Brazilian and Indian variants.

◧◩◪◨⬒
5. bildun+DU[view] [source] 2021-06-04 09:53:35
>>Correc+HM
Nobody in the world except the US right called it that, and it is indeed uncommon to name viruses after its place of origin.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. averev+B01[view] [source] 2021-06-04 11:18:46
>>bildun+DU
Except for the Spanish flu, the Brazilian flu, almost every single mammarenavirus strain...
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
7. bildun+L21[view] [source] 2021-06-04 11:43:57
>>averev+B01
The Spanish Flu most probably originated in the US, not Spain. Spain just had a pretty free press and published much about it. Never heard about the Brazilian Flu and couldn't find out when and where this was supposed to be, so can't comment here.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
8. KMag+S31[view] [source] 2021-06-04 11:53:59
>>bildun+L21
The question wasn't historically if the place-of-origin names were accurate. The question was if they were historically common.

I think naming diseases after places is a bad practice we should probably do away with, but it certainly has precedent. Offhand, there's also the Marburg virus. My understanding is also that it was unusual to name the Ebola virus after the nearby river instead of the nearby town.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
9. brippa+xa1[view] [source] 2021-06-04 12:53:19
>>KMag+S31
Isn't it similar to naming medical conditions after the people that discover them? After all, it's naming pathogens after the place where there were was adequate diagnostic expertise to identify them and in which there was sufficient scientific and press freedom to report on them. And geography is obviously important in the context of epidemics/pandemics. No country or locality should receive special treatment in this regard, but much of the MSM appears to have been bought or cowed into submission by the geopolitical influence of the CCP.
[go to top]