zlacker

Entertaining the question is dangerous (I don’t believe it, but for the sake of argument)...

My next question would be “why”? What would be the CCP’s motives to study and modify the virus?

Is it to test whether different changes would make the virus more/less communicable?

Is it to prevent another MERS SARS?

Is it to tailor disease for certain ethnicities? CCP doesn’t appear to have qualms about getting rid of troublesome minority populations, as long as they have some amount of deniability to rely on.

Is it to stress test global medical science and institutions?

I’ll keep an open mind in that if (and it’s a large if) there are respected scientists who present evidence of it being a lab modified virus, then the motive must be understood and fast.

Edit: I will say that China isn’t helping its case by impeding research and publishing of any studies simply trying to establish whether COVID even crossed from local (wild) bat populations; and promoting only theories that claim COVID came from elsewhere.

>>nobody+(OP)
I don’t really get why even entertaining the question is dangerous, and I can imagine some reasonable justifications for why they’d be doing that kind of research (which I believe is called “Gain of Function”). Understanding what mutations could make a virus more communicable is something that I think would benefit everyone. The dangerous questions really do come in at your last hypothetical, which obviously signals extreme nefarious intent and would require extraordinary evidence.

>>remark+11
Because I personally don’t want to lend any credence to bat-shit crazy conspiracy theories, especially in a public forum.

I’m a complete nobody, but the internet has a way of amplifying things.

>>nobody+(OP)
The CCP have done more than that, they’ve actually punished countries that have requested a fair and transparent investigation into the origin. Consider all of the cover up at the start of the pandemic, the data, the doctors, the journalism... and you see their strategy is not a good response at all. Despite their external insistence that it came from elsewhere (which is of course a possibility).

>>nobody+a2
You can't stop batshit crazy. There's no vaccine for it. So to go full head in the sand on a topic because of the crazies is detrimental to intelligent debate in general.

>>nobody+a2
I'm not convinced anyone has good evidence for this particular claim at this time, but labeling it "batshit crazy" is premature. Michael Osterholm, a respected epidemiologist, explains in his book "Deadliest Enemy" his belief ("no doubt in his mind") that the 1977 Russian flu was released from a bioweapons lab. If it happened before there isn't any reason it couldn't happen now.

EDIT: I misspoke slightly by referring to "bioweapons," so I decided to post the full quote here:

> It turned out that the Soviets were conducting vaccine studies using live, attenuated H1N1 influenza viruses in the very area where the new H1N1 was first detected. During our research, we uncovered a letter from the Soviets to the US government requesting that we share with them the 1976 Fort Dix strain of H1N1 for their vaccine studies. I have little doubt that the appearance of the 1977 H1N1 virus and its rapid global transmission in just several months was the result of a release of the virus in the course of the Soviet vaccine studies. We don’t know exactly what they were doing with the virus. What we do know is that it got out, either accidentally or on purpose, causing a local outbreak in lab workers that subsequently spread around the world. Either way, the powerful lesson here is that if an influenza virus accidentally escapes or is intentionally released, expect that it will spread around the world in short order. This is the proverbial single match being able to light a global forest fire. The possibility for a DURC research study using a potentially dangerous influenza virus should scare the hell out of everyone.

>>sunder+va
You didn’t misspeak “slightly”. At least in intent, there’s a world of difference between a vaccine study and bioweapon study.

>>nobody+(OP)
> Is it to tailor disease for certain ethnicities?

The problem with this argument is that Covid is not tailored to avoid people of Chinese ethnicity. Indeed, in the UK, they have been especially vulnerable. Asian countries have done better because they have better policies in place.