zlacker

[parent] [thread] 281 comments
1. ttz+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-02-13 19:17:03
First gen Chinese, grew up in NA. Have contact with relatives "on the ground".

My own experience: Don't ever trust the Chinese government on issues that could potentially involve the reputation of the party. Note that I'm not saying don't trust what CCP says, ever (sometimes they actually do good things) - just not on issues that involve anything to do with how the world might perceive them.

Which is exactly what this issue is about.

That's not to say we have compelling evidence that this was a lab virus, either. I think, for me, it's a, "we don't know, but I wouldn't be shocked at all if it was a lab virus".

replies(27): >>Udik+e4 >>throwa+A6 >>getpol+u7 >>powera+Pf >>IIAOPS+sh >>nickys+rH >>fiftyf+xH >>yurlun+5O >>travis+rW >>known+7Y >>onetho+XY >>blackr+8Z >>izzyda+g11 >>msie+I21 >>caulif+v31 >>mkolod+Z31 >>handed+P41 >>mnming+o51 >>knolax+W51 >>throw7+p71 >>paulie+k81 >>jb775+n81 >>mytail+6h1 >>qubit0+wh1 >>sverha+Cj1 >>odiroo+Pm1 >>snarf2+BB1
2. Udik+e4[view] [source] 2021-02-13 19:51:44
>>ttz+(OP)
> Don't ever trust the Chinese government on issues that could potentially involve the reputation of the party

Seems this holds true for every government and party.

replies(5): >>mc32+D5 >>mhh__+t7 >>SllX+Ld >>bottle+lC >>throwi+KK
◧◩
3. mc32+D5[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:01:41
>>Udik+e4
The difference is there is no opposition to question the official stance. So I’d say it’s naive to imply the same holds true everywhere. Even Russia and Turkey have vocal dissidents.
replies(1): >>sa-mao+F9
4. throwa+A6[view] [source] 2021-02-13 20:08:02
>>ttz+(OP)
It's crazy that at this point we still keep with this delusion. Of course this is a lab virus. This info is getting old:

https://project-evidence.github.io/

https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-origins-genome-analy...

Who was really behind this, and the whole history of it, is something surely we won't know for know.

"When war is declared, truth is the first casualty"

replies(2): >>AshWol+xN >>tim333+2y1
◧◩
5. mhh__+t7[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:14:17
>>Udik+e4
Air Pistols and machine guns are both guns, which one are you taking your chance against?
6. getpol+u7[view] [source] 2021-02-13 20:14:39
>>ttz+(OP)
Do we / did we even have the tech co be able to build this in a lab? I don't think we do.

It MIGHT have been possible but Occam's Razor says it's more plausible it evolved naturally and just jumped species.

FAR FAR FAR more plausible.

replies(8): >>Regnis+K7 >>bcrosb+R7 >>andrei+79 >>Amezar+q9 >>renewi+3a >>btilly+Aa >>mancer+Gb >>reduce+Wq
◧◩
7. Regnis+K7[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:16:25
>>getpol+u7
In the the more common lab theory is that it was a natural virus being studies in the lab. It escaped by accident.

China has had multiple SARS escape accidents.

◧◩
8. bcrosb+R7[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:16:48
>>getpol+u7
"Building" it in a lab might be too scifi. But it's possible they were experimenting with things.

E.g. "killer bees" are a product of human scientists trying to engineer a better bee - the release was accidental. It's not like we have the ability to genetically engineer a bee from the ground up. But as a species humans have been purposefully manipulating the traits of living things for thousands of years.

◧◩
9. andrei+79[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:25:16
>>getpol+u7
“Building” the virus is a sleight of hand that people use to discredit the lab theory.

More likely than building the virus is studying it and accelerating it’s development.

Now I’m not saying that’s what happened here however without the cooperation of the CCP we’ll have no idea what the truth of the matter is

◧◩
10. Amezar+q9[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:26:58
>>getpol+u7
There was a great article in New York Magazine covering the background here and the possibilities.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-esca...

It turns out we've been doing "serial passage" research for some time, which is where we leverage natural selection to do our genetic engineering for us, rather than manually editing genes. This is how we engineer viruses to jump species - on purpose.

> They did it using serial passaging: repeatedly dosing a mixed solution of mouse cells and hamster cells with mouse-hepatitis virus, while each time decreasing the number of mouse cells and upping the concentration of hamster cells. At first, predictably, the mouse-hepatitis virus couldn’t do much with the hamster cells, which were left almost free of infection, floating in their world of fetal-calf serum. But by the end of the experiment, after dozens of passages through cell cultures, the virus had mutated: It had mastered the trick of parasitizing an unfamiliar rodent.

In fact, "we" (meaning humanity) have even been experimenting with serial passage into humans.

> A few years later, in a further round of “interspecies transfer” experimentation, Baric’s scientists introduced their mouse coronavirus into flasks that held a suspension of African-green-monkey cells, human cells, and pig-testicle cells. Then, in 2002, they announced something even more impressive: They’d found a way to create a full-length infectious clone of the entire mouse-hepatitis genome. Their “infectious construct” replicated itself just like the real thing, they wrote.

The whole article is really worth a read.

replies(1): >>ummonk+RM
◧◩◪
11. sa-mao+F9[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:28:03
>>mc32+D5
Last time I checked Turkey is still democracy. A better example would be Egypt or KSA or UAE.
replies(1): >>mc32+9a
◧◩
12. renewi+3a[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:30:22
>>getpol+u7
You can, with your own body, the right drug regimen, and starting with just garden variety TB and no skills whatsoever, "build" XDR TB.

The general evidence is this is yet another reason why wet markets are terrible for humanity, not that it was made in a lab and got away. But you can build lots of things.

replies(1): >>nsajko+WH
◧◩◪◨
13. mc32+9a[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:30:42
>>sa-mao+F9
They’re a democracy in the same way Russia is a democracy.
replies(2): >>edgyqu+cc >>sa-mao+Gl
◧◩
14. btilly+Aa[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:32:48
>>getpol+u7
Do we / did we even have the tech co be able to build this in a lab? I don't think we do.

A random virus, no. This one, we do.

We can't build a virus from scratch. But we can combine pieces of different viruses to build a new one. The same thing also happens naturally when an animal is sick with 2 viruses at once. If both get into the same cell, you get various mixes created and sometimes a mixture will turn out to be a better virus than either parent.

This virus looks like a combination of apparently unrelated viruses. See https://theconversation.com/coronavirus-origins-genome-analy... for confirmation. That happens to be something that can happen either naturally or artificially.

Where conspiracy theorists get going is that a few years ago there were papers from the lab near Wuhan suggesting that a combination much like COVID-19's actual combination should be particularly effective in humans. So this looks like an extension of a known line of research from a lab involved in military work. Combine that with the local coverup and you can see how people go down the rabbit hole.

replies(3): >>highst+Jb >>Amezar+7d >>enchir+Hr
◧◩
15. mancer+Gb[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:39:48
>>getpol+u7
Why does it have to be "built"? It could have been isolated from bats and studied, and an error / human mistake occurred and it got out.

There's a rational reason to study this one, since SARS (1.0) was a big deal in the early 2000's, and anyway why wouldn't you study something you don't fully understand as a matter of course. It's not a stretch if it was found that it leaked from the lab by accident and a cover-up ensued.

replies(1): >>ern+0d
◧◩◪
16. highst+Jb[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:39:56
>>btilly+Aa
You really should cite those paper if you're going to offer such significant information. your comment is worthless otherwise.
replies(2): >>Dylan1+hc >>btilly+yp
◧◩◪◨⬒
17. edgyqu+cc[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:43:11
>>mc32+9a
Hmm I don’t think so. They’re autocratic for sure but Turkey has been an autocratic democracy for a hundred years so there is a culture of republicanism. I get what you mean but Russia is so new to the voting thing that the comparison isn’t apt imo.
◧◩◪◨
18. Dylan1+hc[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:43:46
>>highst+Jb
> You really should cite those paper if you're going to offer such significant information.

Yes.

> your comment is worthless otherwise.

No.

◧◩◪
19. ern+0d[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:47:08
>>mancer+Gb
The problem is that an accidental release from a lab has been deliberately conflated with the idea of a bioweapon and labeled a conspiracy theory. Coupled with aggressive propaganda efforts from China, and the fact that the Trump Administration pushed the theory of a lab release (turning the concept into political kryptonite for more than 50% of the US population) its discussion has become verboten.
replies(1): >>mancer+Nz
◧◩◪
20. Amezar+7d[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:47:38
>>btilly+Aa
I think what makes the Wuhan lab particularly suspicious is that the lab was specifically doing work on the closest known ancestor to the COVID-19 virus, which as far as we know was only found naturally in bat caves more than a thousand miles away.

I would discount the possibility that this was bioweapons research - the US was funding serial passage and gain-of-function research at this lab, of which the express purpose is to make viruses more infectious in different species, including humans.

At any rate, I don't think we can expect anything to be definitively proven. It is absolutely possible that this came out of the wild. But as the NY Magazine "Lab Leak" article illustrates, we should probably be open to the idea it came out of a lab. I also think we should reconsider whether or not serial-passage and gain-of-function research is something that can be ethically conducted. Anywhere.

◧◩
21. SllX+Ld[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 20:51:05
>>Udik+e4
Most governments and political parties are not capable of or willing to exercise the same information controls that the CCP does. That doesn’t make them trustworthy, but it does make it easier to 1. Check their bullshit 2. Discuss their bullshit freely and 3. Call them out on their bullshit without being disappeared, only to turn up later and sign false confessions/apologies/whatever the Party tells you to.

Having separate and distinct parties and competitive elections also puts parties in the position of doing this to each other using the levers of power available to them.

22. powera+Pf[view] [source] 2021-02-13 21:04:33
>>ttz+(OP)
CCP has 90 million members. They have more opportunities because government jobs would favor CCP members. They also have responsibilities, when they are called when incidents, such as flood, and covid 19 incidents. Dr. Li Wenliang is a CCP member as well.

If you ask people from any developing countries, they would express the same attitude (as you do for CCP) towards their own government. The reason is that the officials and way of work is stuck behind current standard, and that's why it is called developing country.

Personally I don't care too much about if it was a lab virus or something else, it becomes all political. Could it be better? I don't think so. If it was developed in a bio-weapon lab, China would have handled it well because it would be prepared.

23. IIAOPS+sh[view] [source] 2021-02-13 21:14:02
>>ttz+(OP)
I just assume the ccp default mode is to cover up, even when there is nothing to cover up. When legitimacy derives from competence rather than from election, you better never have any high profile incompetence.
replies(2): >>duxup+ej >>Der_Ei+1D
◧◩
24. duxup+ej[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 21:28:18
>>IIAOPS+sh
That's been a problem even internally in China where local government hides things from those up the chain and then things get out of hand.
replies(5): >>fiftyf+YG >>Americ+cI >>vimy+VR >>alasda+e71 >>petre+5c1
◧◩◪◨⬒
25. sa-mao+Gl[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 21:44:58
>>mc32+9a
I wouldn’t go as far as comparing Turkey to Russia. The recent Turkish elections have shown that the ruling Party in Turkey can lose key strongholds like Istanbul, this never happens in Russia. In Egypt, most contenders to the presidency are in prison now. Current president Al Sissi (a bloody dictator won by 97%) Erdogan om the other hand won by 53%. Putin by 73% while some major opposition leaders barred from running.

Turkey is often unfairly criticised by western media, which obviously prefers military dictators in power.

◧◩◪◨
26. btilly+yp[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 22:17:25
>>highst+Jb
A good starting point is https://www.independentsciencenews.org/health/the-case-is-bu....

See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4797993/ for one of their previous lines of research that look similar to the actual COVID-19 virus.

◧◩
27. reduce+Wq[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 22:27:18
>>getpol+u7
Are you serious?

Occam's Razor says the only (non-vet) BSL4 lab in China, studying bat coronaviruses, several miles from known first virus reports, that has had multiple previous virus leaks, with huge information shutdown by China for a year, is the more plausible culprit.

replies(1): >>runawa+c81
◧◩◪
28. enchir+Hr[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 22:34:25
>>btilly+Aa
At that point it's just a theory, not a conspiracy theory
replies(2): >>btilly+5y >>nsajko+vH
◧◩◪◨
29. btilly+5y[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 23:24:36
>>enchir+Hr
It is. But then you descend down the rabbit hole to a government coverup of a release from a secret bioweapons research lab that was intended to target US military members at the 2019 Military World Games in late October in Wuhan. And now it becomes pretty clearly a conspiracy theory.
replies(1): >>adolph+gR
◧◩◪◨
30. mancer+Nz[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-13 23:39:22
>>ern+0d
Well that's not surprising, we're trending towards a world of increase tightening of the exchange of data, fact checking, labels of "conspiracy", and there will of course be fallout that people will see in retrospect. Today the mainstream view is to knock the non-mainstream views out of acceptable discourse. I would say with QAnon and vaccine shennanigans, a lot of people support that. At some point something important will be covered up (such as during a war) and they won't be so gung ho. So swings the pendulum.
◧◩
31. bottle+lC[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:00:57
>>Udik+e4
It disingenuous and lazy to make broad statements of equivalence like this. There are very obvious differences in how the world’s governments operate.
replies(2): >>Udik+6D >>coldte+LS
◧◩
32. Der_Ei+1D[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:06:41
>>IIAOPS+sh
You're being down-voted but this is exactly what my friends who live in China have told me. People were also downvoting big time back in March when I and others were saying that the numbers China was quoting were made the heck up. Suddenly the western media realizes that's true[1] yet we don't see a mass back-lash against China as a result...

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-55481397

replies(2): >>dirtyi+sG >>ttz+gV
◧◩◪
33. Udik+6D[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:07:35
>>bottle+lC
Oh yes? Shall we trust the US government in a good investigation on their motives to finance the bloody disaster that is the civil war in Syria? How about we send a Chinese delegation to check the documents inside the Pentagon or the CIA?
replies(4): >>bluepi+2E >>pbourk+MH >>stickf+GI >>kmonse+EL
◧◩◪◨
34. bluepi+2E[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:16:25
>>Udik+6D
Yes, you are absolutely right. Look at all the political interference in Puerto Rico, not to mention the prison camps in Ohio.
replies(1): >>crater+lR
◧◩◪
35. dirtyi+sG[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:41:06
>>Der_Ei+1D
"Chinese friends/wife/coworker said" is particularly kind of ridiculous appeal to authority considering the average citizen is not typically a subject matter expert on relevant topics being discussed outside of generalized familiarity with the censorship apparatus. The only useful things the average Chinese person will tell you is Chinese numbers / stats with Chinese characteristics are not accurate, but analysts familiar with Chinese stats will at least use oblique indicators to tell you if numbers are useful, i.e. Chinese GDP smoothing.

Or in this case, how covid19 export case numbers from places like Taiwan, HK, SK, Singapore, Australia, Newzealand all indicate Chinese numbers are not grossly exaggerated - China only exported a fraction of covid19 cases compared to Europe or North America because covid19 never exploded in China due to harsh restrictions. The article you're citing is also sourcing figures from _Chinese_ CDC on antibody prevalence rate which is expected to be higher than pure testing data seen in similar studies in other countries. So again, it's official Chinese numbers being useful and comporting to similar measures elsewhere. The difference is western media like BBC attempting to spin as the numbers being uniquely nefarious and useful idiots eating it up, just like in this NYT article.

replies(1): >>__m+w91
◧◩◪
36. fiftyf+YG[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:46:40
>>duxup+ej
This is the kind of behavior you see in organizations where the penalty for making mistakes is overly severe, the only recourse for people is to lie and cover-up the truth at all costs. This is how projects at some companies continue despite being way behind schedule and overbudget until eventually the weight of the truth brings everything crashing down.
replies(2): >>Americ+aJ >>mattne+uW
37. nickys+rH[view] [source] 2021-02-14 00:51:20
>>ttz+(OP)
To me, both the official explanation and the conspiracy theory are both embarrassing for China and the CCP. SARS was supposed to have originated the same way -- in these disgusting third-world wet markets. The CCP shut them down after SARS for the sake of optics, but was too inept to "up" their health standards, and they conceded to pressure and reopened the disgusting third-world wet markets again.

If this was some sort of lab mistake, as the conspiracy angle suggests, IMO that's much less embarrassing. In the "real" explanation, thousands of mainlanders are regularly eating food contaminated with bat shit, with zero health standards. In the "conspiracy", they're a first-world country doing groundbreaking science, and an accident occurred.

I think they're probably telling the truth.

replies(5): >>yters+ZH >>eloff+7N >>Terr_+SQ >>maxeri+NR >>ghomra+MX
◧◩◪◨
38. nsajko+vH[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:51:53
>>enchir+Hr
"What Is a Theory?" - https://www.amnh.org/exhibitions/darwin/evolution-today/what...
39. fiftyf+xH[view] [source] 2021-02-14 00:53:16
>>ttz+(OP)
The funny thing in this case is there was no reason for the CCP to cover this up. If they had just responded to the outbreak instead of trying to cover it up initially and been a little more open with the international community they would have been lauded for their handling of the situation.
replies(5): >>WaxPro+2K >>ashton+RN >>crater+4Q >>boombo+OT >>qubit0+ak1
◧◩◪◨
40. pbourk+MH[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:55:58
>>Udik+6D
If you vote for the right people, and advocate enough, you can get a congressional inquiry into the issue, a change in the law, or a precedent-setting court ruling. Point me to analogous outcomes under the Chinese system.
◧◩◪
41. nsajko+WH[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:57:03
>>renewi+3a
This is what the acronyms stand for, in case it's not apparent: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extensively_drug-resistant_tub...
◧◩
42. yters+ZH[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:57:36
>>nickys+rH
In the lab scenario their lax standards wiped out 2 million people and they covered it up. In the wet market scenario, it mostly reflects on the local inhabitants doing the usual black market stuff most local inhabitants of most countries do, and the CCP can only do so much to control their people. Plus, lab source has many other possible implications that are concerning, e.g. engineering bioweapons, IP theft, more nefarious conspiracy if it turns out to be a purposeful leak, etc. Wet market is overall much more benign. Also, from an evidential standpoint, lab outbreak seems much more plausible. Very easy to connect the dots with researchers, funders, etc. On the other hand, they cannot even determine the proximate transmission animal for the wet market theory, and the supposed bat source assembly is based on a faked dataset from the wuhan lab.
replies(2): >>ummonk+KM >>yters+VN
◧◩◪
43. Americ+cI[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 00:58:50
>>duxup+ej
It’s how all centrally planned systems work. Avoiding accountability for failure is always the most optimal strategy, which inevitably ends up involving concealing failure. It was one of the defining characteristics of the soviet system. You can even see it play out in large companies (which essentially operate as miniature planned economies), where political actors promote bad ideas, and then somehow end up rewarded after they fail. The only difference being that companies in a free market (usually) have to suffer the consequences of their failures, and politicians in a democratic system can (usually) be replaced if they fall out of favor.
◧◩◪◨
44. stickf+GI[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:04:15
>>Udik+6D
Every 4-8 years the US government gets a new executive head, often from the opposition. That puts significant constraints on what kind of corruption can flourish.
◧◩◪◨
45. Americ+aJ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:09:05
>>fiftyf+YG
Everybody will always have a motive to prevent others from discovering their failures. A democratically elected politician has just as much reason to want their failures covered up as a CCP member does. The reason governments like the CCP have such a hard time dealing with that issue is that their entire system is set up so that you have one party, with no opposition, all working in concert to conceal the truth from the people. The “voters” have no mechanism to scrutinize their government, and no alternative to “vote” for if they don’t like what they’re doing. A natural consequence of this is that the opacity the CCP relies on to protect itself from scrutiny, also prevents central committee members from being able to effectively scrutinize the system themselves. A good story is always made available for public consumption, but what’s known internally is equally controlled by individual political actors trying to protect their own interests.
replies(1): >>kmonse+2L
◧◩
46. WaxPro+2K[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:18:40
>>fiftyf+xH
Is that true? It's hard for me to imagine anything China does being 'lauded' in western media, they're very much a media/political boogeyman (not necessarily saying that's unwarranted).
replies(1): >>kmonse+CK
◧◩◪
47. kmonse+CK[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:23:31
>>WaxPro+2K
I kind of find it the opposite? They run concentration camps and acknowledge mass rape but the western media mostly shrugged. I find it hard to find anything the media take seriously these days. We are all so easily distracted, myself included.
replies(1): >>MattGa+LL
◧◩
48. throwi+KK[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:24:14
>>Udik+e4
It was just a little over a decade ago that the United States killed 300,000 + Iraqis, but it's in vouge to portray China and Russia as the worlds ultimate boogeyman.
◧◩◪◨⬒
49. kmonse+2L[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:26:53
>>Americ+aJ
This is also why dictatorship always have corruption. They cannot have transparency which means there will be corruption.

Of course democracies are just as vulnerable to all the bad stuff as they are run by humans, but transparency is at least possible. Sadly we see national security being used as reason to avoid transparency, and of course corruption follows.

replies(1): >>WarOnP+321
◧◩◪◨
50. kmonse+EL[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:33:09
>>Udik+6D
Regardless of your view point, there is still has freedom of speech, mostly free information and elections that matters so if the people dislike the policy they can change it.

Not saying it’s all golden, but these are very meaningful differences.

replies(2): >>coldte+TS >>YaSamP+hk1
◧◩◪◨
51. MattGa+LL[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:35:14
>>kmonse+CK
The problem is that news stops being, well, new after it has been reported and if nothing changes, attention goes elsewhere.

The people were informed, they reacted as much as they are going to, and until new information comes out, the issue is where it is.

◧◩◪
52. ummonk+KM[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:48:25
>>yters+ZH
What faked dataset are you referring to? The bat source was sequenced several years ago after guano harvesters fell sick. And the most likely lab scenario actually involves either gain of function research on that sample or that sample being exposed to animals and / or humans where it recombined to allow human to human transmission.
replies(2): >>yters+JN >>yters+5O2
◧◩◪
53. ummonk+RM[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:50:42
>>Amezar+q9
Right, and combine this with a history of lab leaks both in China and the west (which the article outlines) and a lab leak scenario is perfectly plausible. It is however hard to tell whether it was a lab origin because serial passage is also the route the virus would have taken if it naturally evolved outside a lab to infect humans.
◧◩
54. eloff+7N[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:53:53
>>nickys+rH
> in these disgusting third-world wet markets

That's old information. The first cases of the virus had no connection with the wet market, and no connection could later be found other than it was the first major subsequent point of spreading for the virus. So it's much more likely that people spread it at the market, rather than that it came from there.

However, they are indeed disgusting third-world wet markets and the practice of consuming bush meat as well as having live wild animals of all different kinds together in a wet market is an experiment we shouldn't be conducting. The risk to reward ratio is way too high. Remember that HIV likely came from butchering and consuming contaminated chimpanzees in Africa. The world needs to put those kinds of practices behind us, it has cost us far more than it can ever be worth.

replies(2): >>JoshTk+RS >>whymau+M91
◧◩
55. AshWol+xN[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 01:58:45
>>throwa+A6
a lot of this is just really bad, like just off the top of my head 96 percent related genetics is not very much, thats the same similarity between humans and monkeys
replies(1): >>Gauntl+9P
◧◩◪◨
56. yters+JN[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:01:39
>>ummonk+KM
I'll have to refind the tweet, but a researcher found the read dataset could not be assembled into the bat coronavirus assembly.
◧◩
57. ashton+RN[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:03:16
>>fiftyf+xH
Authoritarian regimes develop a knee jerk response to anything that might reflect negatively on them, even if it ends up actually harming their long term interests.
replies(2): >>crater+8Q >>YaSamP+cz1
◧◩◪
58. yters+VN[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:03:47
>>yters+ZH
My conspiracy theory as to why someone might with good intention trigger the pandemic and then fast track the mRNA vaccine is to pave the way for gene therapy to reverse genetic entropy and reverse aging and consequently eliminate the genetic basis of death, granting us a sort of immortality. Eliminating death for untold numbers of people would justify the death of a few million from a utilitarian perspective. In fact, there is really no limit to the number you can kill in your research if the payoff is immortality for all, which would then give researchers time to bring about the singularity and digitally resurrect those sacrificed along the way. Sounds crazy, but does seem to be how a lot of tech elite think: utilitarianism, anti death, singularity, everything is ultimately a technical problem. It is also the logical conclusion if materialism is true, but tragically misguided if materialism is false. Just like all the other materialism based utopian ideologies of the past couple centuries that have killed hundreds of millions of people.
59. yurlun+5O[view] [source] 2021-02-14 02:05:58
>>ttz+(OP)
No need for you to preach to the choir about not trusting the Chinese government. As can be seen in the thread, people would much prefer to trust conspiracy theorists and fringe scientists before they put any trust in the Chinese government.

To me, the only constructive discussion that can be had at this point needs to be around actual evidence, and not the absence of it. The first documented cases, first traces of positive samples etc etc. It's clearly still in the early stages of discoveries so all theories are just theories. That said I don't expect this to remain a mystery forever. It will just take time, because eventually the natural origins will be pinned down and reasonable chain of events of first spread will be identified.

replies(6): >>turdna+PO >>fspeec+SR >>jjcc+AS >>karmas+AT >>mxcros+021 >>Hnrobe+Dt1
◧◩
60. turdna+PO[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:14:28
>>yurlun+5O
Why do you think that is inevitable if the Chinese government continues to obfuscate?
replies(1): >>crater+0Q
◧◩◪
61. Gauntl+9P[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:17:34
>>AshWol+xN
96% of human vs monkey DNA similarly is not a lot, because most of that DNA is shared throughout all of the animal kingdom. Since human DNA is close to a billion codons long, the remaining 4% is still tens of millions of codons.

COVID-19 is ~30,000 base pairs long (10,000) codons. The 4% difference is 400 codons. That's not a lot. There are many singular proteins longer than that.

Is that proof? No, the same way gravity is just a theory.

replies(1): >>AshWol+BW2
◧◩◪
62. crater+0Q[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:30:14
>>turdna+PO
Epidemiology. History. The Spanish Flu was called that because at the time everyone (for xenophobic reasons... sound familiar?) blamed Spain. Today we can say with reasonable confidence that the source of the 1918 influenza epidemic was.... wait for it.....

Kansas

replies(5): >>sebmel+LR >>opo+G71 >>Splatt+Ei1 >>tim333+Mt1 >>andrep+gd2
◧◩
63. crater+4Q[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:31:36
>>fiftyf+xH
> If they had just responded to the outbreak instead of trying to cover it up initially and been a little more open with the international community they would have been lauded for their handling of the situation

Are we talking about China or the Trump administration?

replies(2): >>XorNot+dS >>Wowfun+dT
◧◩◪
64. crater+8Q[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:32:27
>>ashton+RN
As evidenced by the fate of a certain former occupant of the Oval Office.
◧◩
65. Terr_+SQ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:43:56
>>nickys+rH
Note that "wet markets" are common around the world.

The (theorized) problem was that wild-caught land-animals happened to be part of the selection.

◧◩◪◨⬒
66. adolph+gR[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:50:14
>>btilly+5y
No, the theory is that the US service members brought it with them and infected Wuhan.

Earlier in March, Zhao Lijian, an outspoken Chinese diplomat, raised a suspicion on his personal Twitter account that it might have been the US army representatives to the Military World Games who brought the novel coronavirus to Wuhan in October 2019, after a top US health official admitted detecting coronavirus infections on some deceased flu patients. Zhao urged the US to disclose further information, exercise transparency on coronavirus cases and provide an explanation to the public.

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1183658.shtml

replies(1): >>btilly+F01
◧◩◪◨⬒
67. crater+lR[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:51:30
>>bluepi+2E
You mean private prisons? Or did you mean "prison camps in Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona"?
◧◩◪◨
68. sebmel+LR[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:58:14
>>crater+0Q
People did not blame Spain for xenophobic reasons, just because the Spanish press was the first to report on it.

And, as pertains to the virus's origin, COVID-19 did come from China, and we know that. We have epidemiology to guide us here, and the situation is altogether different from 1918 w/r/t speed of communication and the state of science.

replies(2): >>crater+gS >>Aunche+Fb1
◧◩
69. maxeri+NR[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:58:48
>>nickys+rH
China was 2nd world country.

Of course you are making some other argument, but I doubt it's the poor people in Wuhan that are eating pangolins.

◧◩
70. fspeec+SR[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 02:59:54
>>yurlun+5O
Comments by experts who went on the WHO mission https://mobile.twitter.com/TheaKFischer/status/1360590441817...
replies(1): >>jgalt2+IW
◧◩◪
71. vimy+VR[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:00:37
>>duxup+ej
That’s exactly what happened with covid-19. By the time Beijing knew about it things were already out of control.
replies(1): >>fma+zY
◧◩◪
72. XorNot+dS[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:05:12
>>crater+4Q
Seriously. The amount of concern over what China, at the time regarded as a belligerent untrustworthy power, fails to explain why western governments took so long to take any mitigating measures and then some continued to actively oppose mitigating measures while still insisting this is somehow something China is going to actually fix on their end.

The tone and tenor of the investigation has always been to find a way to absolve local politicians of responsibility for their incompetence in managing this issue by blaming China.

All for the punchline of "so you're then going to do what to China in response?" Of which the answer is nothing. The genocide of the Uyigur people certainly hasn't motivated any strong international action.

replies(2): >>lenkit+SW >>unisha+ZZ
◧◩◪◨⬒
73. crater+gS[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:05:44
>>sebmel+LR
"there is strong circumstantial evidence that the virus didn't originate in Wuhan after all"

https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-05-...

replies(1): >>hayst4+gW
◧◩
74. jjcc+AS[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:09:10
>>yurlun+5O
>No need for you to preach to the choir about not trusting the Chinese government. As can be seen in the thread,

Great expression! I have the same strange feeling but couldn't put in correct words. Other than the topic of this thread, there's a meta topic which reflects some interesting human natures showing up more often among politicians and lawyers: Spread bias opinions without being caught misleading, disguise subjective speculations under objective delicately organized articulation.

Being constructive in discussion is extremely difficult. Sometime I watch the debate with fun on meta topics other than topics.

◧◩◪
75. coldte+LS[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:10:42
>>bottle+lC
>It disingenuous and lazy to make broad statements of equivalence like this.

It's also disingenuous and lazy to ignore a century or more of empirical evidence.

>There are very obvious differences in how the world’s governments operate.

Are there?

https://www.amazon.com/All-Governments-Lie-Times-Journalist/...

replies(1): >>bottle+He1
◧◩◪
76. JoshTk+RS[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:11:14
>>eloff+7N
Can you share your sources on your key points?
replies(1): >>eloff+701
◧◩◪◨⬒
77. coldte+TS[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:12:35
>>kmonse+EL
>Regardless of your view point, there is still has freedom of speech

Freedom of speech is irrelevant if speech doesn't have consequences to those in power. Even less so if there are plenty to tow the establishment's lines anyway...

>and elections that matters so if the people dislike the policy they can change it

LOL, yeah, they can vote between one or the other corporatist neoliberal party, complicit in everything except a few token issues they use to lure their faithful. Such choice...

◧◩◪
78. Wowfun+dT[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:19:22
>>crater+4Q
I'm no fan of the Trump administration or their handling of COVID, but they didn't throw doctors in jail or censor their research. Entirely different level of screwup.
replies(5): >>fma+WY >>onetho+bZ >>dboreh+K11 >>crater+W41 >>cma+jd1
◧◩
79. karmas+AT[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:23:48
>>yurlun+5O
> No need for you to preach to the choir about not trusting the Chinese government

I am honestly laughing like this needs to be communicated to the HN folks, like it bares any insights, like it is not already the default political correctness for majority here.

The top comment is as useless as to say the OP would believe whatever he/she would love to believe whatever the evidence presented.

New Yorker puts it well:

"The site’s now characteristic tone of performative erudition—hyperrational, dispassionate, contrarian, authoritative—often masks a deeper recklessness"

◧◩
80. boombo+OT[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:26:40
>>fiftyf+xH
The ongoing trade war with the US provided at least some reason to cover it up, they weren't yet sure how bad it was and it would give the US additional leverage in negotiations. The government certainly started being more open about the virus after a deal was signed on January 15th.

Obviously I wish they hadn't done this, but they didn't arbitrarily try to hide it.

◧◩◪
81. ttz+gV[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:43:45
>>Der_Ei+1D
Down votes or up votes don't matter to me - I'm just glad (and surprised) that what I thought was basically an innocuous "IMO" comment generated so much discourse.

Isn't this the point of public forums? To encourage discussion?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
82. hayst4+gW[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:55:21
>>crater+gS
You are quoting an article that's very first sentence is:

"There's no doubt that the novel coronavirus ... originated in China."

As a response to the statement: "COVID-19 did come from China" in the previous post, the article you linked directly confirmed that statement.

83. travis+rW[view] [source] 2021-02-14 03:58:26
>>ttz+(OP)
Is it just me or is there a deep irony here? I find it interesting that one of the oft maligned attributes of religious communities, especially those in authority in said communities, is this same behavior. Do good things and be open, but also very much protect the brand. As a naive westerner I've hear/learned/assumed that Chinese communism/society was areligious.

When described as you (OP) put it, it seems that abstractly, the Chinese Communist party is just the state religion.

I'm not trying to play a game of whataboutism. I'm curious why these structures seem to rise, regardless of what we intend or call the them. What is it about the human experience that so often results in this.

I apologize if this is overtly stereotypical, naive, assuming, or disrespectful. It wasn't meant to offend or annoy. Just cautiously curious.

replies(6): >>Negiti+YW >>hi5eye+UY >>e9+h11 >>physic+d21 >>petre+ze1 >>YaSamP+8x1
◧◩◪◨
84. mattne+uW[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 03:59:07
>>fiftyf+YG
The old story of the Chinese general Chen Shen comes to mind: Apparently he was running late due to rainstorms and the penalty for appearing this late to the Qin emperor was execution. Since that’s the same penalty for open rebellion, he decided he might as well try that too. And that was the beginning of the end of the Qin dynasty. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chen_Sheng_Wu_Guang_uprising

If the penalty for lying and being caught is the same league as screwing up, people are going to cover up problems.

replies(3): >>Judgme+7X >>gnulin+g71 >>ljm+qB1
◧◩◪
85. jgalt2+IW[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:02:11
>>fspeec+SR
Right now, I trust WHO slightly more than I trust CCP. Biden is right to re-engage them, but they have a lot of work to do to get its reputation back.

They can probably start by capping payments from any one country as to minimize the effects of soft power.

An under-funded WHO is better than a biased WHO.

replies(2): >>mcguir+AZ >>lostlo+6f1
◧◩◪◨
86. lenkit+SW[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:03:35
>>XorNot+dS
World governments were formally advised by the WHO to not impose any travel restrictions. The WHO also laughably said there is no "human transmission" of the virus.

The WHO chief just blindly parroted whatever the CCP said for nearly 2 months while the pandemic spread and got out of control. That man deserves to be stripped out of his position. But he will face no justice for the many, many lives he has taken.

The entire timeline of tweets and statements by the WHO is open on the internet - don't see the need to quote them verbatim here.

The only nation in the world raising flags was Taiwan - and their warnings were ignored until it was too late.

replies(2): >>hcknws+IX >>em500+zb1
◧◩
87. Negiti+YW[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:04:44
>>travis+rW
You could say the same thing about many companies.

Would you say “Microsoft is just a corporate religion”?

I think a religion is about more than just an entity that tries to avoid negative PR.

◧◩◪◨⬒
88. Judgme+7X[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:07:08
>>mattne+uW
> And that was the beginning of the end of the Qin dynasty.

Not what I was expecting, but still a really interesting story.

◧◩◪◨⬒
89. hcknws+IX[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:14:12
>>lenkit+SW
There is a reason, the U.S. has traditionally had a U.S. WHO representative in China since the first SARS outbreak, well until TRUMP. Trump's removal of the U.S. presence "on-the-ground" made it easy for the Chinese gov't to delay the real-time reporting while they struggled to figure out on their own whether they had something really serious to worry about or not. Covid-19 is not ENTIRELY Trump's fault, but he sure did just about everything he could to make it worse.
replies(2): >>lenkit+JY >>AzzieE+D01
◧◩
90. ghomra+MX[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:14:43
>>nickys+rH
The lies aren't for the international community, it's for the people of China.

If the wet market is at fault, it can be blamed on the local party leadership, which was easy enough to do because they continued to screw up during the early stages of the pandemic. One memorable one is when they hosted a massive dinner for 20000 people in close proximity when it was starting to really heat up.

If it's the lab, that squarely falls on the national government, which in all things can and must do no wrong.

A poster above said it perfectly, when your authority comes from competency, you need to show your competent. The CCP has this precarious position in China where the people support it strongly because they've been doing a good job giving people better lives, at least from their perspective. If that turns badly in any way, it could break them.

91. known+7Y[view] [source] 2021-02-14 04:18:50
>>ttz+(OP)
Every ruling party/regime across the world does that ;) https://archive.is/5oNEY
◧◩◪◨
92. fma+zY[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:24:12
>>vimy+VR
Yeah...the irony is Beijing blames Wuhan for not being transparent. And here's Beijing doing the same.
replies(1): >>baq+wb1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
93. lenkit+JY[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:26:55
>>hcknws+IX
I wasn't aware of that. Can you let me know who was the earlier representative and their term period ?

I fully agree that Trump could have handled the virus better. Unfortunately, ALL media attention was focused on his impeachment at the time and he was derided as a racist and tyrant for banning China travel.

He should had the courage to ban all international travel immediately when the virus got to the EU and begun to initiate national readiness. Some nations did this and suffered far less as a result. Sadly, he - like so many national leaders - took the virus seriously far too late.

◧◩
94. hi5eye+UY[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:29:39
>>travis+rW
> Do good things and be open, but also very much protect the brand

is that not the default mode for families? elementary/middle/highschool/universities? work? any communities you spend a lot of time in?

◧◩◪◨
95. fma+WY[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:29:55
>>Wowfun+dT
We don't have the exact same things, but similar:

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/24/birx-says-someone-was-giving...

Dr. Deborah Birx, the Trump White House coronavirus response coordinator, said in a CBS interview released on Sunday that former President Donald Trump had been reviewing “parallel” data sets on the coronavirus pandemic from someone inside the administration.

"Rebekah Jones, the data scientist who helped create Florida's COVID-19 dashboard, has turned herself in to police, in response to an arrest warrant issued by the state. " https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/0...

96. onetho+XY[view] [source] 2021-02-14 04:30:07
>>ttz+(OP)
Wait a second. The report was from the WHO not china. WHO have consistently confirmed it is not a lab virus. Or are we saying that the international group that entered china were some how in league with the CCP?
replies(1): >>waterh+oZ
97. blackr+8Z[view] [source] 2021-02-14 04:33:17
>>ttz+(OP)
There is a word for this. It’s called: obviously.

How is this different from any other country? Do you think that the United States government, or any other western government, would accept any damaging rumors that would cause embarrassment to them?

Just look at their hypocrisy when it comes to Assange or Snowden. But at least these two are still alive. For now. Too bad for the Australian guy that exposed Australia’s recent war crimes, he got pleasantly suicided. That’s the penalty for upsetting the western world order. Thanks for playing.

◧◩◪◨
98. onetho+bZ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:33:38
>>Wowfun+dT
They didn't throw doctors in jail. They questioned a number of doctors, and then censored them.

Not unlike Fauci and the CDC being censored and forced to send information through the DHS...

So you are right entirely different level of screwup - China Censored a single Dr, US censored the CDC.

◧◩
99. waterh+oZ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:36:56
>>onetho+XY
"Senior WHO official dodges questions about Taiwan’s WHO membership; praises China": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UlCYFh8U2xM

Japan's deputy prime minister calls the WHO the "Chinese Health Organization": https://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2020/04/29/commentary/w...

> are we saying that the international group that entered china were some how in league with the CCP?

There may be reason to expect that they or their superiors are ... biased.

replies(1): >>onetho+S01
◧◩◪◨
100. mcguir+AZ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:40:50
>>jgalt2+IW
Note that the WHO has very similar problems to the International Red Cross: if they don't play by the rules of the governments in question, they get kicked out and can't do anything. Something is better than nothing, right?

On the other hand, the WHO after the pandemic had clearly emerged continued to appear biased, seriously damaging its reputation.

replies(1): >>raverb+Qa1
◧◩◪◨
101. unisha+ZZ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:44:28
>>XorNot+dS
> The tone and tenor of the investigation has always been to find a way to absolve local politicians of responsibility for their incompetence in managing this issue by blaming China.

I think you have this backwards. The obsession has always been first and foremost with US domestic politics because so many americans on the internet have an unhealthy obsession with domestic politics. Present discussion is a yet another example.

There's an unsolved mystery we would like to see solved. Specifically right at the heart of one of the most traumatic and pivotal events of our lifetime. Why do you care so much about finding ulterior motives for people interested in that mystery?

replies(1): >>refene+e01
◧◩◪◨
102. eloff+701[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:46:00
>>JoshTk+RS
It should be easily found if you search for it.
◧◩◪◨⬒
103. refene+e01[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:47:12
>>unisha+ZZ
Because ulterior motives are the best motives!

There's a huge incentive to blame China for our fuckups. Really, it should be assumed unless proven otherwise.

After all, aside from the whole "no evidence" thing, what does it matter if it's a lab accident or a bat bite or whatever? We had months of warning and fucked it up badly. They were blindsided and recovered nicely. Clearly this must be their fault.

replies(1): >>unisha+P01
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
104. AzzieE+D01[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:55:34
>>hcknws+IX
"Covid-19 is not ENTIRELY Trump's fault" - in what way is it his fault at all? Also, the timeline of events you are sighting is intentionally misleading.
replies(1): >>refene+N01
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
105. btilly+F01[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:55:34
>>adolph+gR
To the people holding the theory that I just gave, that's a Chinese disinformation campaign that is part of the coverup. They are accusing others of what they did.

But, there is more than one conspiracy theory here. And probably will be forever. As a hopefully rational third party, I would like it investigated.

But I'm currently giving good odds to "accidental release from program intended to research possible future pandemics". And if that winds up seeming at all likely, I believe that the whole world should commit to having better controls on this type of research to avoid future accidental releases. Because accidental mass murder isn't OK.

replies(1): >>adolph+uw2
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
106. refene+N01[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:57:06
>>AzzieE+D01
He encouraged people not to wear masks as a lifestyle choice and cultural signalling thing. Some % of transmission rate is directly attributable to him -- he could have said wearing a mask owns the libs and massively helped instead of hurting.
replies(3): >>nervlo+T51 >>asguy+H61 >>menset+bU1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
107. unisha+P01[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:57:29
>>refene+e01
> After all, aside from the whole "no evidence" thing, what does it matter if it's a lab accident or a bat bite or whatever?

Indeed because both of those leading theories point the blame at China. So if people want to blame china nothing is stopping them. Except perhaps those claiming it came from Europe or the US first. Perhaps that's the point of the stonewalling, to provide cover for being able to claim alternative theories? Since you're so into ulterior motives.

Who is the "we" you are referring to? The western world? The US?

replies(1): >>refene+E11
◧◩◪
108. onetho+S01[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 04:58:02
>>waterh+oZ
I agree on the Taiwan front, that's BS and annoying. But given WHO needed as much of China's cooperation at that time I can understand not wanting to aggravate them.

Really... Japan... because there is no history of tension between China and Japan that would make me doubt Japan's agenda here.

WHO is an international organisation, literally people from around the world work there... are ALL of these people actually secretly Chinese agents? Tell me how that works.

replies(1): >>waterh+W31
109. izzyda+g11[view] [source] 2021-02-14 05:02:11
>>ttz+(OP)
I don't know why whenever people bring up that the virus might have come from a lab it always gets dismissed because the virus doesn't look artificial.

Why is it never brought up that it could just be an accident? It doesn't need to be a weapon. Just poor safety during research.

replies(4): >>jedmey+L11 >>blackr+c21 >>Jon_Lo+D71 >>quandr+cc1
◧◩
110. e9+h11[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:02:13
>>travis+rW
Grew up in USSR. The basic premise of communism is that it's the best possible way to organize society. If you are not happy then it's not the problem with the communism(how could it be? it's the best!) but it's the problem with you. From that premise all sorts of bad things happen like you are not allowed to complain about communism or question it etc. Not unlike any authoritarian government or cult.
replies(1): >>pinipe+Jn1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
111. refene+E11[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:07:51
>>unisha+P01
Yeah, whatever % of Chinese who blame the West are the mirror image of westerners blaming China, and they're all absolute morons. It doesn't matter where the virus showed up first, it's here and we all have to deal with it.

> Who is the "we" you are referring to? The western world? The US?

I was thinking US -- I guess it goes to varying extents to the rest of the "western world", depending on how you define that.

replies(1): >>unisha+x21
◧◩◪◨
112. dboreh+K11[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:09:27
>>Wowfun+dT
Like this? https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.yahoo.com/amphtml/seattle-...
◧◩
113. jedmey+L11[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:10:06
>>izzyda+g11
And it might have been a wild virus extracted from animals that escaped from the lab due to the poor safety protocols in place. Not the first time this would have happened. Soviets released the anthrax spores due to the filter not being in place, for example.
◧◩
114. mxcros+021[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:15:30
>>yurlun+5O
We’re just not following a good process of discerning truth here. We started with a blatant, baseless conspiracy theory “this is a weapon China created”. Then we white wash the theory to “China created it, but maybe it was an accident”. Then suddenly the burden of truth is on China to disprove this claim. It’s just not a sensible process, rooted in the fallacy of the middle ground; as you said we need to start from the evidence and not from what you want to be true.
replies(2): >>eggie+Ck1 >>tim333+bt1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
115. WarOnP+321[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:16:04
>>kmonse+2L
> Sadly we see national security being used as reason to avoid transparency, and of course corruption follows.

Man it took forever for someone to make this point. There's a lot of bad Chinese Gov behavior that US Gov players absolutely aspire to.

replies(1): >>Americ+u41
◧◩
116. blackr+c21[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:17:25
>>izzyda+g11
Perhaps the virus was a lab leak. But maybe you’re looking at the wrong country for it.

I mean, name any other country that has a lot of biological weapons labs all over the world.

replies(1): >>mcswel+C41
◧◩
117. physic+d21[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:17:29
>>travis+rW
The experience of changing from someone who believes all aspects of the “orthodoxy”, to someone who accepts that there are flaws in it, can be strikingly similar.

A Chinese friend once described to me the week he discovered YouTube after going to study in America, when for the first time he saw videos of Chinese leaders (2000-era) behaving very rudely toward reporters. He found that shocking, and over the next few weeks and more research, accepted that much of what he’d been taught about his history was fabrication. The experience was pretty traumatizing for him. He’s back living in China now, but with a very different perspective.

I was what you might call a fundamentalist Christian for most of my life, until I was exposed to enough of the counter-arguments that some of them finally stuck. The deprogramming process took a year and a half and was the most difficult thing I’ve ever done.

In both cases, the in-group is well-protected from “improper information” (as the CCP calls it). In China they have the great firewall and the domestic censorship apparatus; in religion believers are inoculated against trusting information from “worldly” sources (though the motives of those involved in the actual suppression may differ). Neither system could survive in its current form if this information weren’t suppressed — that’s obvious by looking at what happens when individuals are exposed to alternate points of view and take them seriously.

replies(2): >>mister+N51 >>qubit0+Hj1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
118. unisha+x21[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:23:00
>>refene+E11
> Yeah, whatever % of Chinese who blame the West are the mirror image of westerners blaming China, and they're all absolute morons.

But you're a westerner blaming the west, so that's cool?

Anyway doesn't one of the sides have the majority of facts on their side? I can't imagine the virus would have been eliminated by anything the west did, as it surely spread to the developing world at the same time anyway. I really don't think there's much the US could have done to lock down either. Trump floated the idea of restricting travel to the NYC region and Cuomo threatened to sue. You want Trump seizing emergency powers and suspending the constitution?

119. msie+I21[view] [source] 2021-02-14 05:25:35
>>ttz+(OP)
I was thinking if a virus was first spotted in New York City and it had a virus lab, would that be immediately blamed? It’s like all there is in Wuhan is a wet market and a virus research lab and they are located next to each other. I think that’s how the world perceives Wuhan.
replies(4): >>astran+O51 >>runawa+q61 >>kmlevi+j81 >>pts_+JC1
120. caulif+v31[view] [source] 2021-02-14 05:37:30
>>ttz+(OP)
What other issues would you not trust the Chinese government on? For example, is food safety one of them?
◧◩◪◨
121. waterh+W31[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:44:29
>>onetho+S01
Let's assume that at least some key superiors at WHO are biased, but the majority of the lower-level investigators are honest and not especially biased. What can the WHO superiors do to try to prevent the investigation from producing an embarrassing report? Stratagems that come to mind: choose which investigators to send, choose who to lead the teams of investigators, get involved in writing up the final reports (either directly or by leaning on those who do). The investigators' work was presumably divided up; perhaps someone could have arranged for a CCP-friendly investigator to be in charge of a particularly sensitive area. Or the report summaries could omit or spin certain issues. I don't know how the investigation was organized, or the reports for that matter, but there's probably at least some room for the superiors to inject their bias into the overall outcome.
replies(1): >>onetho+bE2
122. mkolod+Z31[view] [source] 2021-02-14 05:45:10
>>ttz+(OP)
There's a real possibility that a gain-of-function experiment created SARS-CoV-2:

"Lipsitch’s activists (calling themselves the Cambridge Working Group) sent around a strong statement on the perils of research with “Potential Pandemic Pathogens,” signed by more than a hundred scientists. The work might “trigger outbreaks that would be difficult or impossible to control,” the signers said. Fauci reconsidered, and the White House in 2014 announced that there would be a “pause” in the funding of new influenza, SARS, and MERS gain-of-function research." [0]

In December 2017, the US began funding gain-of-function research on these deadly diseases again. This research creates deadly diseases that may not have existed otherwise.

This pandemic has been enough for me to strongly believe that there should be a global ban on gain-of-function experiments on deadly viruses and bacteria. I'd like to help prevent a future pandemic, and that's one clear way we can help.

[0] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-esca...

replies(5): >>rlt+g51 >>raverb+5a1 >>bhawks+ne1 >>tal8d+us1 >>tremon+ev1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
123. Americ+u41[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:53:10
>>WarOnP+321
Any organisation, or group, or person who’s granted any power will tend towards trying to accumulate more power. So while your comment is a bit hyperbolic, it’s true of the US government in the same way it’s true of every other government. For any grossly authoritarian policy you see the US government implement, you’ll typically find equivalent policies in Canada and the EU and the UK and Australia...

It’s not a new thing. The (paraphrased) quote “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance” is at least a couple hundred of years old. In practice however it’s not a very simple proposition at all. People typically agree with endlessly granting government additional powers when it’s for a policy they agree with.

The difference between the US (or France, or Germany, or the UK...) and China however, is that we actually have some mechanisms for holding our government to account (however flawed they might be). Whereas Chinese citizens have none at all.

◧◩◪
124. mcswel+C41[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 05:56:37
>>blackr+c21
This is wrong, even deceitful, for a couple reasons: 1) No country (officially, or afaik in reality) has a bio weapons lab, and certainly not "all over the world". Nobody (well, nobody official) ever said the Wuhan virus lab was a bioweapon lab; it's a virology lab.

2) The Wuhan virus lab has been experimenting with corona viruses for a long time, including gain of function, and it had a history of problems.

3) There's no indication--as in zero--that any other country had covid-19 cases before China. And in this case, lack of evidence IS evidence for lack, because case records are open (except in China, it seems).

Now if you want to debate this point further, I suggest that you establish with us that you are not a CCP hack. So repeat after me: Premier Xi looks like Winnie the Pooh.

replies(3): >>Jon_Lo+T71 >>eecc+rc1 >>qubit0+4j1
125. handed+P41[view] [source] 2021-02-14 05:59:57
>>ttz+(OP)
I've said it here before, and I'll say it again:

Every Asia-focused analyst will tell you that the only aspect of China's state-reported numbers you can assume with a high degree of confidence is that they're heavily massaged for PR purposes.

◧◩◪◨
126. crater+W41[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:02:17
>>Wowfun+dT
ahem Rebekah Jones would like to have a word with you.
◧◩
127. rlt+g51[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:08:03
>>mkolod+Z31
> This research creates deadly diseases that may not have existed otherwise.

This seems like a supremely bad idea.

replies(3): >>alasda+671 >>ttul+R91 >>bondar+lo1
128. mnming+o51[view] [source] 2021-02-14 06:09:44
>>ttz+(OP)
I found it interesting that on HN, without concrete evidence, when OP says: don't ever trust {A} on issue {B}. Depending on what A, B is, OP will usually get treated differently.

A -> CCP. OP -> a concerned citizen.

A -> Race/Color/Religion/Gender. OP -> Racist/Sexist.

A -> Trump. OP -> a concern citizen.

A -> Scientist. OP -> conspiracist.

But one thing that I am sure is that it'll never ever be constructive. Not mean to be disrespectful, but I do hope this type of comment won't ever get to the top of HN.

replies(1): >>rlt+S51
◧◩◪
129. mister+N51[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:15:13
>>physic+d21
And in free speech countries they have "QAnon conspiracy theory", "falsifiable", etc.
◧◩
130. astran+O51[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:15:14
>>msie+I21
Why is this supposed to be important? It literally doesn't matter if a virus comes out of a lab, if you can find an equally dangerous virus in the nearest bat cave. Being able to blame someone would not solve your actual problems.
replies(1): >>rlt+p61
◧◩
131. rlt+S51[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:16:02
>>mnming+o51
I mean, if you say “don’t ever trust” an entire race/sex, then yeah, by definition you are racist/sexist.
replies(4): >>knolax+261 >>P0l83q+e61 >>vinay4+pj1 >>tomp+Tt1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
132. nervlo+T51[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:16:03
>>refene+N01
Dr Fauci told people masks where ineffective early on in the pandemic, allegedly for the "altruistic" motive of ensuring "front line" workers don't have issues getting hold of masks. Do you attribute a percent of transmission to him?

The final verdict on the efficacy of masks against this virus is still TBD once we have more information and the passage of time removes the political agenda's that cloud this conversation. Your "own the libs" certainly doesn't help either.

replies(1): >>SuoDua+9m5
133. knolax+W51[view] [source] 2021-02-14 06:16:13
>>ttz+(OP)
And I'm an albino penguin from Mars. If you'd actually have relatives in China you would be able to see very clearly that they handled the pandemic far better than the US. It's disappointing that this generic "don't trust the communists" comment is the top comment instead of any actual debate about the merit of the report or the US gov't's accusations.

> shocked at all if it was a lab virus

That's a useless statement. It's just a weak appeal to authority with no proof in any direction. I live in the US. Me saying that "I wouldn't be surprised" it came from the US wouldn't mean jack squat without evidence.

◧◩◪
134. knolax+261[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:17:34
>>rlt+S51
Reading HackerNews has lowered my trust in the demographic categories that make up the majority of this forum, including ones I belong too.
◧◩◪
135. P0l83q+e61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:20:51
>>rlt+S51
What about pointing out more factually based claims such as which groups commit more crimes, etc?
replies(1): >>jb775+271
◧◩◪
136. rlt+p61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:23:25
>>astran+O51
What? Of course it matters. If it was accidentally released from a lab, those responsible should be held accountable so it’s less likely to happen again.

If it was intentionally released, it’s even more important to know by who and why.

replies(1): >>astran+r71
◧◩
137. runawa+q61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:23:37
>>msie+I21
Look, Americans would question the fuck out of the real origin of the virus if the official story was it came from a Wendys in Manhattan. That’s pretty much what CCP is saying, ‘uh, our local Wendy’s had like a virus’.

Yeah ok.

How about this China, find out what cave the market was getting their bats from. Go in there, confirm the bats have it, and release some data.

replies(1): >>didibu+Q61
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
138. asguy+H61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:30:21
>>refene+N01
Do you feel the same way about Nancy Pelosi telling people to “come to Chinatown” during the start of the pandemic?
◧◩◪
139. didibu+Q61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:34:30
>>runawa+q61
I don't know if a Wendy's is a fair comparison. I've heard those wet markets are kind of problematic for hosting pathogens especially. Personnally I'd find it coming from a wet market or a lab to both be just as iresponsible. In the latter you were trying to research possible new virus mutations to learn more about viruses and had poor containment procedures that leaked it out. In the former you run a unsanitary market with animals and people in too close proximity, with lack of proper hygiene.
◧◩◪◨
140. jb775+271[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:37:40
>>P0l83q+e61
If you find yourself in this scenario, you're likely already stuck in a Kafkatrap situation[1].

[1] https://www.thedailybell.com/all-articles/editorials/wendy-m...

◧◩◪
141. alasda+671[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:38:58
>>rlt+g51
Personally, I kind of like the idea that we could know in advance if a tiny mutation could turn a known disease into something that wipes us all out.

Only inside level four labs, of course. But early warning (and this work on mitigation) seems important.

replies(4): >>Jennif+S71 >>Guthur+0a1 >>jfoste+na1 >>ajdego+po1
◧◩◪
142. alasda+e71[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:41:09
>>duxup+ej
A madman with a gun is only ever told things that stop him from pulling the trigger.

This is true of any hierarchical power structure, but is especially bad in overtly authoritarian ones.

replies(1): >>Hnrobe+Cr1
◧◩◪◨⬒
143. gnulin+g71[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:42:21
>>mattne+uW
That's a fascinating story thanks for sharing.
144. throw7+p71[view] [source] 2021-02-14 06:44:26
>>ttz+(OP)
You could say exactly what you said about the U.S. and I am "First gen American, grew up in NA, have contact with relatives 'on the ground'"

Do you believe the devil doesn't exist?

◧◩◪◨
145. astran+r71[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:44:41
>>rlt+p61
> What? Of course it matters. If it was accidentally released from a lab, those responsible should be held accountable so it’s less likely to happen again.

Because it doesn't matter if it's accidentally released from a lab, if you're going to catch it from a bat cave anyway. You haven't eliminated it from the world.

replies(2): >>kmlevi+F81 >>rlt+642
◧◩
146. Jon_Lo+D71[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:49:07
>>izzyda+g11
Because some people want to believe that everything happens with intent. (note the difference between intent and reason) That may seem like a ridiculous core believe, but it is told over and over again by abrahamic monotheism, and further down might be related to how consciousness models itself.

Then a small group favors their stories to happen because of malicious intent. Like saturday morning cartoon villain style of obvious evilness. And that is often mixed with a "them (evil) and us (good)" type of self-assertive tribe behavior as well as the bitching and bickering that stems from relating social status. (USA and China are not humans, they are nations, but people anthropomorphise them)

A story about poor standards and accidents is more about empathy and carefulness, and while a wise man might tell it to his children, it is not the thing people gossip about. Everyone agrees that bio-labs should have highest standards and that is it, there is little difference to "it happened randomly", and more importantly there is little blame and fame. Have you heard what <china> did? has another ring to it.

The human mind operates on stories, not on facts. Working with facts is hard and even the most pious intellectual can and will fall prey to nature. So it is no wonder that the most scandalous stories are the ones that get around a lot.

◧◩◪◨
147. opo+G71[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:49:57
>>crater+0Q
>...The Spanish Flu was called that because at the time everyone (for xenophobic reasons... sound familiar?)

No, it tended to be called the Spanish Flu because Spanish newspapers simply reported more about the epidemic:

>...Spain was not involved in the war, having remained neutral, and had not imposed wartime censorship.[17][18] Newspapers were therefore free to report the epidemic's effects, such as the grave illness of King Alfonso XIII, and these widely-spread stories created a false impression of Spain as especially hard hit.

Some theorize it might have first originated in Kansas:

>...The first confirmed cases originated in the United States. Historian Alfred W. Crosby stated in 2003 that the flu originated in Kansas,[61] and popular author John M. Barry described a January 1918 outbreak in Haskell County, Kansas, as the point of origin in his 2004 article.

But then again:

>...A 2018 study of tissue slides and medical reports led by evolutionary biology professor Michael Worobey found evidence against the disease originating from Kansas, as those cases were milder and had fewer deaths compared to the infections in New York City in the same period. The study did find evidence through phylogenetic analyses that the virus likely had a North American origin, though it was not conclusive. In addition, the haemagglutinin glycoproteins of the virus suggest that it originated long before 1918, and other studies suggest that the reassortment of the H1N1 virus likely occurred in or around 1915.

Some theorize it might have first originated in Europe:

>...The major UK troop staging and hospital camp in Étaples in France has been theorized by virologist John Oxford as being at the center of the Spanish flu.[63] His study found that in late 1916 the Étaples camp was hit by the onset of a new disease with high mortality that caused symptoms similar to the flu.[64][63] According to Oxford, a similar outbreak occurred in March 1917 at army barracks in Aldershot,[65] and military pathologists later recognized these early outbreaks as the same disease as the Spanish flu.[66][63] The overcrowded camp and hospital at Etaples was an ideal environment for the spread of a respiratory virus.

>...A report published in 2016 in the Journal of the Chinese Medical Association found evidence that the 1918 virus had been circulating in the European armies for months and possibly years before the 1918 pandemic.[67] Political scientist Andrew Price-Smith published data from the Austrian archives suggesting the influenza began in Austria in early 1917.

But then again:

>...A 2009 study in Influenza and Other Respiratory Viruses found that Spanish flu mortality simultaneously peaked within the two-month period of October and November 1918 in all fourteen European countries analyzed, which is inconsistent with the pattern that researchers would expect if the virus had originated somewhere in Europe and then spread outwards.

Some theorize it was China:

>...In 1993, Claude Hannoun, the leading expert on the Spanish flu at the Pasteur Institute, asserted the precursor virus was likely to have come from China and then mutated in the United States near Boston and from there spread to Brest, France, Europe's battlefields, the rest of Europe, and the rest of the world, with Allied soldiers and sailors as the main disseminators.[70] Hannoun considered several alternative hypotheses of origin, such as Spain, Kansas, and Brest, as being possible, but not likely.[70] In 2014, historian Mark Humphries argued that the mobilization of 96,000 Chinese laborers to work behind the British and French lines might have been the source of the pandemic. Humphries, of the Memorial University of Newfoundland in St. John's, based his conclusions on newly unearthed records. He found archival evidence that a respiratory illness that struck northern China (where the laborers came from) in November 1917 was identified a year later by Chinese health officials as identical to the Spanish flu.

On the other hand:

>...A report published in 2016 in the Journal of the Chinese Medical Association found no evidence that the 1918 virus was imported to Europe via Chinese and Southeast Asian soldiers and workers and instead found evidence of its circulation in Europe before the pandemic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_flu

So far the historical and epidemiological data cannot identify the geographic origin of the Spanish flu.

◧◩◪◨
148. Jennif+S71[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:52:26
>>alasda+671
Maybe in BSL-5 labs?

Must be in rural isolation, NOT a city.

The administrators and janitors and everyone has to sleep inside the fence.

Getting out requires spending 40 days in a quarantine hotel in a different nearby fenced area.

Armed guards patrol the fence.

(EDIT: To be clear. BSL-5 doesn't exist yet... but it should.)

replies(3): >>kaczor+H81 >>spoonj+ud1 >>galkk+Uk1
◧◩◪◨
149. Jon_Lo+T71[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:52:37
>>mcswel+C41
Europa had cases in september of 2019. We didn't know at the time, but checking samples from back then revealed the virus was already internationally active

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/03008916209747...

Also, if you look closely, notice that the reason we have no earlier samples then september is, because we have no earlier samples. Can't test one from august, if you don't have one from august.

◧◩◪
150. runawa+c81[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:57:26
>>reduce+Wq
So I’m with you on this one.

Why wouldn’t CCP stop all suspicion on this and say the virus originated in another part of China? It almost feels like a murderer trying to use reverse psychology by hiding in plain sight. Like, it can’t be from Wuhan Lab because they actually reported that it came from Wuhan (what idiot that’s trying to cover it up do that?). A calculated person would make such a calculation.

The truth might be weird here.

◧◩
151. kmlevi+j81[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 06:58:20
>>msie+I21
> I was thinking if a virus was first spotted in New York City and it had a virus lab, would that be immediately blamed?

To answer your question: If NYC had a virus lab that actively mutated bat coronaviruses so that they could become infectious in humans, and then one day a human-infecting virus with 96% similarity to a bat coronavirus started popping up in New York City with no known origin… Yes, people would start asking questions about that lab.

Check out this commentary from 2015. This type of research was being subcontracted out to the Wuhan lab, despite public concerns that safety wasn’t tight enough there.

https://www.nature.com/news/engineered-bat-virus-stirs-debat...

I get that people don’t want to discriminate against China, but this is very clearly a hypothesis worth investigating further.

152. paulie+k81[view] [source] 2021-02-14 06:58:53
>>ttz+(OP)
To whom are they worried about regarding reputation. They already have a terrible one
153. jb775+n81[view] [source] 2021-02-14 06:59:34
>>ttz+(OP)
Well if people can't prove that Covid came from China, shouldn't they simply forget it and accept that it came from somewhere else? "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." And how dare them for even asking to see the data, those conspiracy theorists.

...Or has this logic changed since the election fraud controversy? (and no, it's not really a different situation if you think about it)

◧◩◪◨⬒
154. kmlevi+F81[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:04:33
>>astran+r71
The problem is this extremely dangerous research is bound to lead to a leak eventually, because in fact there have already been hundreds of lab virus leaks around the world in the past, and the stakes get higher as the viruses they engineer get more and more lethal. China is actually doubling down and increasing the amount of risky virus research they are doing. If it isn’t regulated eventually something even worse could leak out of another lab.

So yeah, it is important to find out what the origin of this virus was because whatever the reason was we want to ensure that it isn’t the same reason for the next big pandemic.

◧◩◪◨⬒
155. kaczor+H81[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:04:42
>>Jennif+S71
I agree. We should treat this as the existential threat that it is.
◧◩◪◨
156. __m+w91[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:17:31
>>dirtyi+sG
Shhh, we need to cover the uncomfortable truth that our numbers could have been better if we took (and take) the threat serious
replies(1): >>anonym+Ta1
◧◩◪
157. whymau+M91[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:21:41
>>eloff+7N
Unless you're advocating pure vegetarianism, prolonged animal husbandry will inevitably lead to more diseases crossing to humans. The idea that this is only a problem in Africa and Asia is entirely nonsensical.
replies(1): >>eloff+lJ1
◧◩◪
158. ttul+R91[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:23:26
>>rlt+g51
Not if your point is to understand what can go wrong when viruses mutate.
replies(1): >>brippa+Ic1
◧◩◪◨
159. Guthur+0a1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:26:21
>>alasda+671
I'm definitely no expert but it seems to me that the sheer number of biological variables means that even if you know something could potentially get bad it wouldn't really give you much of a head start as any vaccine you might develop is not so likely to be viable. Testing the impact on living organisms would also have so many ethical issues as to be pretty much a non starter.

I'd genuinely like to know what we would get out of it that would warrant such risk taking?

◧◩
160. raverb+5a1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:28:19
>>mkolod+Z31
It could be. But that I find extremely unlikely

A failed experiment? Maybe a bit more likely, but still I don't think so

Sars-Cov-2 looks like pretty much what it is: a zoonotic virus that "doesn't know what's going on"

Hence why only the recent mutations made its transmission more efficient.

Now, if it escaped unbeknownst from a research lab, that I would put on the plausible category. Would be more possible if it wouldn't have had a perfect virus breeding ground right next to it.

replies(2): >>lucas_+Qe1 >>tim333+9q1
◧◩◪◨
161. jfoste+na1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:32:34
>>alasda+671
Suppose you find that hypothetical mutation. What next? What would you do to prevent the current situation?
replies(1): >>coddle+Ba1
◧◩◪◨⬒
162. coddle+Ba1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:38:13
>>jfoste+na1
Start working on a vaccine.
replies(2): >>ericho+nd1 >>jfoste+Pk1
◧◩◪◨⬒
163. raverb+Qa1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:41:58
>>mcguir+AZ
Yeah, I trust WHO technicians much more than their "upper management" who wasn't light on appeasement and delaying of important actions
◧◩◪◨⬒
164. anonym+Ta1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:42:58
>>__m+w91
By that same logic - Did you ever leave your house feb 2020 to now? If you did, you could’ve done more.
replies(1): >>sverha+ej1
◧◩◪◨⬒
165. baq+wb1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:54:30
>>fma+zY
No irony here. The axiom is party doesn’t make mistakes, the only possible consequence is others are to blame.
◧◩◪◨⬒
166. em500+zb1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:56:29
>>lenkit+SW
This paints a rather colored picture. The initial advisory from 14 Jan 2020 [1] presents their case that

    "Based on the available information there is no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission."
The reader can decide if that was a fair assesment at the time. The text was followed by

    "Additional investigation is needed to ascertain the presence of human-to-human transmission, modes of transmission, common source of exposure and the presence of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases that are undetected. It is critical to review all available information to fully understand the potential transmissibility among humans."
A week later, on 22 Jan 2020, WHO followed up with a confirmation of human transmission [2]

    "Data collected through detailed epidemiological investigation and through the deployment of the new test kit nationally suggests that human-to-human transmission is taking place in Wuhan. More analysis of the epidemiological data is needed to understand the full extent of human-to-human transmission."
(Of course it was impossibly to deny that by then, since Wuhan was locked down the same day.)

In my small European countries, no public measures were taken based on all this info until early March (more than 2 weeks after Northern Italy was overwhelmed, while our countrymen had been traveling all over Europe), because there were no confirmed cases in our country yet. The only initial measures in early March were advices to "wash your hands", "don't shake hands" and "sneeze in your elbows".

So I don't think the WHO confirming human transmission on 14 Jan instead of 22 Jan would have changed a thing. People only take painful measures when bad things happen to people they know, and politicians only when bad things happen to people in their own country. Trying to shift the blame on the WHO or China is not very common amongst politicians here (though anecdotally it's not rare among citizens), that seems to be mostly an American (specifically, Republican party) thing.

[1] https://www.who.int/csr/don/14-january-2020-novel-coronaviru...

[2] https://www.who.int/china/news/detail/22-01-2020-field-visit...

replies(1): >>lenkit+By1
◧◩◪◨⬒
167. Aunche+Fb1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 07:59:10
>>sebmel+LR
> People did not blame Spain for xenophobic reasons, just because the Spanish press was the first to report on it.

That doesn't disprove xenophobia at all. The Spanish press reported on it first because every nation involved in WWI very aggressively censored any mention of the flu. After the war, they had every incentive to play into people's natural xenophobia rather admit to covering up the disease. Here you see the Spanish Flu depicted as a flamenco lady:

https://c8.alamy.com/comp/G386J3/the-spanish-flu-epidemic-ov...

◧◩◪
168. petre+5c1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:06:41
>>duxup+ej
It's exactly like in Chernobyl's case, only the Soviets couldn't cover up the cause and got their act together when everybody found out.
replies(1): >>tim333+Vr1
◧◩
169. quandr+cc1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:07:21
>>izzyda+g11
Why did everyone brush over the Italians finding it in blood samples from September 19, 2 months before the outbreak in Wuhan?

Certain actors have a narrative they would like to push.

replies(3): >>mytail+qh1 >>berdar+xu1 >>tim333+JK1
◧◩◪◨
170. eecc+rc1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:12:28
>>mcswel+C41
Sorry to ruin your narrative, but SARS-CoV-2 was circulating well before it showed up in Wuhan. https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-italy-tim...

Perhaps people noticed it when it hit Wuhan and freaked out because of the Research Institute thinking “oh shit, is this what they’re playing with?”

replies(2): >>saiya-+Bh1 >>eggie+Ll1
◧◩◪◨
171. brippa+Ic1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:16:32
>>ttul+R91
That certainly doesn't preclude research that's useful (and essential) to developing new pathogens; all of these things are by nature dual-use technologies.
◧◩◪◨
172. cma+jd1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:26:01
>>Wowfun+dT
At the state level you had that dashboard whistleblower scientist jailed.
replies(1): >>vinay4+0j1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
173. ericho+nd1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:26:40
>>coddle+Ba1
It took two days to create a vaccine for COVID-19. How much more lead time do we need?
replies(1): >>himlio+3f1
◧◩◪◨⬒
174. spoonj+ud1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:28:11
>>Jennif+S71
You’re not going to get any good researchers to live in a quarantine bubble for their whole lives.
replies(4): >>ant6n+ue1 >>Griffi+Bj1 >>newscl+gk1 >>spyder+gl1
◧◩
175. bhawks+ne1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:40:44
>>mkolod+Z31
Although I am there with you in spirit, a global ban is effectively meaningless.

It is unenforceable from the start. All the major world powers would continue their research (perhaps slightly less openly) simply from a MAD angle (it is irresponsible to ignore the value of a pathogen that no one else has seen and you have the antibiotics for).

We are living in dark times in terms of our technological capability and the aggressiveness of state actors.

I would argue that the only chance we have is to reign in the behaviours of our states. Crazy and seemingly impossible, but stopping science/tech is far beyond reach.

replies(2): >>tim333+Ip1 >>einpok+Jp1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
176. ant6n+ue1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:41:14
>>spoonj+ud1
Do the good researchers themselves need to be near the viruses? Debt they just need some people to handle the work?
◧◩
177. petre+ze1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:41:34
>>travis+rW
There is a reason why totalitarian societies try to substitute religion with stare propaganda and the personality cult. There's a reason why the CCP banned Falun Gong - it had more followers than the CCP.
◧◩◪◨
178. bottle+He1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:43:48
>>coldte+LS
I’m not here to give a history lesson, as there are many better sources. What I will do is call out fallacies when I see them.
◧◩◪
179. lucas_+Qe1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:46:36
>>raverb+5a1
How about this possibility: (1) You've got this lab that uses a lot of animals and does experiments. (2) There is a 'wet' market nearby that deals in animals from A to Z. (3) Maybe some animal from the lab carrying a zoonotic virus (origin unknown) somehow got disposed of for cash in the market? How could WHO or anyone uncover such an occurrence a year or more later? Would it be possible that such a thing had happened and no one ever had had any idea that it had happened?
replies(1): >>raverb+Sg1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
180. himlio+3f1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:50:24
>>ericho+nd1
Ok, start clinical trial immediately after vaccine creation. At least until the point where it's safe for humans to use the new vaccine.
replies(1): >>garmai+eg1
◧◩◪◨
181. lostlo+6f1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 08:50:57
>>jgalt2+IW
Are you aware that the messed up situation with WHO funding is due to US policy?

“ Though the US paid $446.5m in 2019 compared with China’s $43m, the bulk of American funding was voluntary; the organization only receives 17% of its funding through “assessed” contributions, AKA country membership dues. The bulk of its budget is funded through voluntary donations, for which countries can earmark specific use, because President Ronald Reagan passed a “zero-growth policy” for WHO funding in the 1980s. With the assessed dues frozen at 1990s levels, the WHO has been forced to increasingly rely on donated funds.”

https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2020/oct/19/john-oliver-...

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
182. garmai+eg1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:06:43
>>himlio+3f1
You can’t do a trial when there is no outbreak.
replies(1): >>MertsA+Kn1
◧◩◪◨
183. raverb+Sg1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:14:50
>>lucas_+Qe1
Yes there are several possibilities. And no, I don't think anybody could figure something like that out.

What you can do is follow chains of mutations and infections and try to get somewhere.

184. mytail+6h1[view] [source] 2021-02-14 09:18:00
>>ttz+(OP)
That's typical baseless FUD, which is what this whole "lab virus scenario" has been from the start with the backing of US agencies.
◧◩◪
185. mytail+qh1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:23:22
>>quandr+cc1
There is also mounting evidence that the virus was in France in November.

Now, it still most likely came from China but this adds to the reasonable suggestion that the Wuhan market was simply the first large outbreak but not near the origin of the virus.

My 2c is that the virus will be found (if we do find its origin) to come from a rural area in Southern China.

replies(2): >>eggie+6l1 >>tim333+Jv1
186. qubit0+wh1[view] [source] 2021-02-14 09:23:59
>>ttz+(OP)
That applies to any government. US lies, cheats, steals as admitted by Mike Pompeo when he was head of CIA.
replies(1): >>fuckCC+Qj1
◧◩◪◨⬒
187. saiya-+Bh1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:25:43
>>eecc+rc1
Which gives us interesting angle as to why it was first recorded so close to virus research lab in Wuhan. Could be a huge coincidence, or maybe... some impressive operation to blame those filthy commies. Maybe a fit far fetched, maybe not
◧◩◪◨
188. Splatt+Ei1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:46:28
>>crater+0Q
Epidemiology and history wasn't as effective as you think in identifying the origins of The Spanish Flu. The origin being Kansas is only one of many plausible theories.
replies(1): >>crater+t82
◧◩◪◨⬒
189. vinay4+0j1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:50:13
>>cma+jd1
That's not the same administration. It's perhaps an issue that could have also happened in many other states in the US, but the comment was about the Trump administration.
replies(1): >>foolme+Rq1
◧◩◪◨
190. qubit0+4j1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:52:18
>>mcswel+C41
Fort Detrick was a bio weapons lab that has since closed but US has plenty more around the world, and likely, many that are undisclosed.
replies(2): >>tim333+Kw1 >>mcswel+1O1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
191. sverha+ej1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:54:56
>>anonym+Ta1
I turned into a freakin' hermit... How about you?
replies(2): >>ungame+4p1 >>anonym+tH4
◧◩◪
192. vinay4+pj1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:56:29
>>rlt+S51
I agree. The problem arises when people predominantly of a certain race or sex attempt to define the narrative around racism or sexism that affects another race or sex. It's a little difficult to find that trustworthy, in my opinion. People should be trusted to speak about data and other verifiable sources as well as their own experiences.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
193. Griffi+Bj1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:59:11
>>spoonj+ud1
Then don't do it.
194. sverha+Cj1[view] [source] 2021-02-14 09:59:33
>>ttz+(OP)
I'm naive, I'll own that. But I don't see how having a virus start within your borders is a decided reputation issue. Particularly if your numbers end up so well compared to, say, the US. So, the lack of transparency then makes China look real guilty, making the lab virus option seem a lot more likely.
◧◩◪
195. qubit0+Hj1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 09:59:50
>>physic+d21
The great firewall is deterrent to spreading fake news, disinformation, and lies among the masses(1.4B) who make take it for truth resulting in social divisiveness and potential violence of which is happening in the US w/only 1/4 of the population.

That said, the firewall is easily bypassed with VPN by many with the means to do so. Chinese govt does not view this as contradiction with their policy as it is deemed those able to read Englis/foreign news are educated enough to discern the truth.

replies(1): >>whythr+a13
◧◩
196. fuckCC+Qj1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:00:48
>>qubit0+wh1
Hahahahahahhahahahahahahaha "So no, this often repeated fallacy by the west that they condemn CCP not the Chinese people is not only ignorant but supremely arrogant and condescending in assuming 1.4B are somehow mindless robots at the mercy of the few."

So are they or are they not mindless robots? It's not only ignorant but supremely arrogant and condescending to assume the 1.4B can't tell the difference between real and fake news and need to be restricted in what information they can consume. Qubit000 has the same username on reddit and twitter. He posts lots of pro-CCP garbage

replies(1): >>berdar+Lv1
◧◩
197. qubit0+ak1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:05:28
>>fiftyf+xH
That's a false narrative western politicians/media want people to believe.

If there was a 'coverup' it was by local municipal authorities which should not be conflated with central govt. Even if true, the actual reporting of first case was only delayed by 1 week with the genome sequenced shared w/WHO rest of world less 2wks later.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
198. newscl+gk1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:06:40
>>spoonj+ud1
The point isn’t to live there their whole lives, but periods where they can get a lot of work done safely.
◧◩◪◨⬒
199. YaSamP+hk1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:06:49
>>kmonse+EL
Which freedom of speech? That they don't send you to prison if you say something your neoliberal high priesthood does not like? Perhaps not, but you very well might lose your job. Otherwise go search in your free speech media anything about Assange. Now try to compare objectively Assange to Navalny and tell me why not.. Your freedom of speech is in a large part imaginary. As to the rule of law, if your legal system would get the attention it deserves, people would see that it is also in a large part a Hollywood myth
◧◩◪
200. eggie+Ck1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:13:24
>>mxcros+021
While from a US political perspective, it may appear that the lab leak hypothesis began with the conspiracy theory that China created a weapon, this is not the dominant perspective among scientists who have expressed doubt publicly (and privately).

Our prior is that novel viruses come from zoonotic sources. We haven't ever experienced a pandemic derived from a laboratory leak. It seems fanciful, because it would be unprecedented. But, what would it look like if it did happen? How would it be any different than what we've seen?

Given the situation, yes, we cannot make any conclusions without evidence. And this implies a burden of proof on governments. The fact that this outbreak began in China is unfortunate, but it does not make it right for them to withhold information on the origins of the virus. They should share every scrap of information and evidence that they have, or expect exactly the kind of reaction that you are critiquing.

There is no fallacy of middle ground here. There is simply a lack of hard evidence to confirm a particular hypothesis about where this virus came from. And, there is an uncomfortable abundance of circumstantial evidence pointing in a highly unusual direction. This is not an issue that you can align with the US political spectrum. And it can be approached without needing to make any claims about how good or bad the Chinese government is. You cannot claim to know what this virus is without information that is not available.

Claims that it is zoonotic are unfortunately just as baseless as any conspiracy theories about weapon development that you've been hearing. The argument for zoonotic origin are based on a single piece of evidence that came out of the labs in the very city where the virus was first found: the sequence of a related SARS-like virus, and one with some very unusual sequence features and publication parameters. Doubt is reasonable. We should fully accept the possibility that humans were able to generate such a construct, and be ready for the next time it happens. The basic fact is that we know how to make such a virus, and that information is now out in the open whether or not this particular virus came from a lab.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
201. jfoste+Pk1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:17:06
>>coddle+Ba1
Has this ever been done in response to gain of function research?
◧◩◪◨⬒
202. galkk+Uk1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:20:04
>>Jennif+S71
Maybe a fully underground, enclosed facility where scientists work and live. Oh, wait...
replies(2): >>josefx+zo1 >>pts_+bx1
◧◩◪◨
203. eggie+6l1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:23:37
>>mytail+qh1
Preface: This is rumor, although one that would require extreme cleverness and coordination to fake.

A US intelligence contractor that collects location data from apps on phones made a presentation that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was shut down from October 7 to 24, 2019. This was reported in the popular US press [1]. You probably missed that in the nightmare flood of last year. I did when it was first reported...

Thus far, the earliest-detected SARS-CoV-2 in the EU has been in November. I would bet that no evidence is ever found for it globally before late October, 2019. We may look for a long time.

[1] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/report-sa...

replies(1): >>mytail+Ol1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
204. spyder+gl1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:25:42
>>spoonj+ud1
Yes, just like no researcher will travel to Mars. /s
◧◩◪◨⬒
205. eggie+Ll1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:30:59
>>eecc+rc1
The antibody tests do have a degree of cross-reactivity with other coronaviruses, but if this is reliable it's a fascinating finding.
◧◩◪◨⬒
206. mytail+Ol1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:31:08
>>eggie+6l1
I think it would be very useful to stop sharing FUD articles ("rumors"...) at this point...
replies(1): >>tim333+qv1
207. odiroo+Pm1[view] [source] 2021-02-14 10:41:10
>>ttz+(OP)
It's like in any communist state before (we had the same in Poland).

You can blame an individual, even sentence them to death, but you cannot ever criticise the system/party. Nor shine a light at any evidence that the system is wrong. This is a deadly sin.

For the party to admit, there's flaws in the system, would collapse their whole authority.

replies(1): >>pinipe+Eo1
◧◩◪
208. pinipe+Jn1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:53:11
>>e9+h11
This is true of capitalist economic systems and democratic political systems. The USSR was not unusual in eliminating heterodox views, not that it was ever communist in more than name.
replies(1): >>tim333+lu1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
209. MertsA+Kn1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:53:20
>>garmai+eg1
You can if you want to show really great efficacy results to the regulators, just omit that pesky control group. Buy my tiger repelling rock, prevents 100% of tiger attacks.
◧◩◪
210. bondar+lo1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:58:40
>>rlt+g51
Similarly smallpox has been completely eradicated, but USA and Russia like to keep around a few live samples, "for research". Whatever will wipe us all out in the end, we probably had it coming.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smallpox_virus_retention_debat...

replies(1): >>bbatha+Yi2
◧◩◪◨
211. ajdego+po1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 10:59:10
>>alasda+671
There was some considerable progress recently using AI to predict possible mutations. I wish I could find the link. That seems like a better way to go.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
212. josefx+zo1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:01:10
>>galkk+Uk1
The lock down in the first Resident Evil movie seemed quite effective, until the response team reset the security system to get out.
◧◩
213. pinipe+Eo1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:02:05
>>odiroo+Pm1
This is true of any political system. You are not allowed to criticize what the system claims to be. For state capitalist nations like China or the former USSR which claim to be communist you are unable to criticize communism. In an oligarchy like America which claims to be a democracy you are unable to criticize democracy. They differ in the means by which they marginalize dissidents but in either case you are rendered unable to threaten the presiding political order.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
214. ungame+4p1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:05:48
>>sverha+ej1
Thats my secret, I was a hermit before covid (not OP).
◧◩◪
215. tim333+Ip1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:13:48
>>bhawks+ne1
Most of the gain of function research is either well meaning to understand disease or part of normal science published in journals. Banning it would reduce the amount done greatly.
replies(2): >>mkolod+2H2 >>Stanis+w86
◧◩◪
216. einpok+Jp1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:13:52
>>bhawks+ne1
There are very strong controls on experiments on humans, for example, and they seem to work, for the most part. Governments may circumvent them in secret, but when it's found out people were experimented on, there's a scandal.

So, while it may not be 100% foolproof, it would be quite meaningful.

◧◩◪
217. tim333+9q1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:19:33
>>raverb+5a1
>Sars-Cov-2 looks like pretty much what it is: a zoonotic virus that "doesn't know what's going on"

It was actually remarkably stable in the early days suggesting it was used to reproducing in human cells. Or so Professor Petrovsky says https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8356751/How-COVID-1...

As how that could have happened lab wise here's Daszak saying they routinely infect human cells with coronavirus in the lab https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=1701&v=IdYDL_RK--w&feature=y...

Or maybe it was in humans a bit before it took off. I see Daszak's kind of changed his tune a bit these days to not mention anything like that lab stuff.

replies(1): >>raverb+Ju1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
218. foolme+Rq1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:26:37
>>vinay4+0j1
That's really about timing. If it was earlier in his administration then leadership within the CDC, FDA, etc wouldn't have avoided blunter disagreement with chloroquine enema man. As it is they risked a major public safety crisis to keep their jobs, perhaps on the theory that whoever he would hire to replace them would be an active safety threat.
◧◩◪◨
219. Hnrobe+Cr1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:33:25
>>alasda+e71
If we accept your premise about madmen, then this

> This is true of any hierarchical power structure

is only true if everyone in the hierarchy is a madman.

◧◩◪◨
220. tim333+Vr1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:36:51
>>petre+5c1
I'm often reminded of Chernobyl by the Wuhan stuff.
◧◩
221. tal8d+us1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:40:48
>>mkolod+Z31
It is an absolutely braindead thing for a nuclear power to do - bio/chem weapon R&D. The reason why the US abandoned that course so long ago had nothing to do with morality - somebody in the DoD simply realized that they were furthering the state of the art in dirt cheap WMDs. If you already have nukes, you want to keep the cost of doomsday devices as high as possible - limiting the number of potential rivals.
replies(2): >>Aeolos+MB1 >>PeterS+082
◧◩◪
222. tim333+bt1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:47:49
>>mxcros+021
I don't think many people believe "this is a weapon China created." It doesn't really make sense - it would be a rubbish weapon just killing the over 80s and why release it in your own country?

On the other hand asking if a bat type coronavirus could have come from the nearest place with lots of bat type coronavirus doesn't seem that unreasonable to me.

◧◩
223. Hnrobe+Dt1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:54:20
>>yurlun+5O
> the only constructive discussion that can be had at this point needs to be around actual evidence, and not the absence of it.

I don’t understand this point.

◧◩◪◨
224. tim333+Mt1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:55:12
>>crater+0Q
It would be ironic if the thing was basically started by the US again with funding for "in vivo characterization of SARSr-CoV spillover risk". (https://grantome.com/grant/NIH/R01-AI110964-06)
◧◩◪
225. tomp+Tt1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 11:56:49
>>rlt+S51
It's perfectly acceptable in mainstream media to say "don't ever trust men on issue of sexual assault". Most people deny that's sexist, some even say that disagreeing with this position is sexist!
◧◩◪◨
226. tim333+lu1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:00:10
>>pinipe+Jn1
Capitalist systems produce pretty much constant criticism of capitalist systems.

The line tends to be more that this sucks but we tried voting in the other lot and that sucked too.

replies(1): >>pinipe+0y1
◧◩◪
227. berdar+xu1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:02:17
>>quandr+cc1
Yeah, but the story about covid19 being in europe in October 2019 always seems implausible to me:

Recall how much the situation changed in 2020 between the beginning of January and the end of March...

Even if we just had an handful of cases at the beginning of October, by the end of December we would have got massive clusters of cases, tens of thousands of people hospitalized with the same symptoms

And then suddenly, when we started to look for it in January/February, we found only a few clusters and the disease grew (again?) From almost nothing

Covid19 is not something that you can keep hidden:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/coronavirus-...

◧◩◪◨
228. raverb+Ju1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:04:04
>>tim333+9q1
"Human cells" are mammal cells. Macaques and Golden Hamsters can get sick with Covid-19

The common Flu can infect horses and even chickens. "stability in human cells" means pretty much nothing

replies(1): >>tim333+RD1
◧◩
229. tremon+ev1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:08:34
>>mkolod+Z31
there should be a global ban on gain-of-function experiments on deadly viruses and bacteria.

Would you make the same argument for software vulnerability research? I think the arguments against both are the same, and with the same result: white-hat researchers will halt their work, leaving more of the field available to black-hat researcers.

replies(2): >>silves+gz1 >>diabet+cy3
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
230. tim333+qv1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:10:23
>>mytail+Ol1
A agree that the evidence in that one from phone locations was very weak to the extent that it's better to ignore it.
◧◩◪◨
231. tim333+Jv1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:13:34
>>mytail+qh1
I think that's quite reasonable.

I was disappointed that having looked at evidence of early spread in France and Italy through wastewater samples and patient blood samples that the Chinese response instead of doing similar research was to say all wastewater samples have been chucked and looking at blood samples is illegal.

The cynic in me perhaps asks why they would do that.

◧◩◪
232. berdar+Lv1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:14:08
>>fuckCC+Qj1
Look at what happened with QAnon and anti-maskers.

It's not about 1.4G people: it's about 7G people... The whole of humanity is suffering because a small vocal minority has been deceived and is causing problems for others.

Before the pandemic, I thought just like you that control of the mass media... Some kind of censorship was incontrovertibly a bad thing

Now I think otherwise: if it allows us to save 2.4M lives (and counting!) I'm ok with censorship, as long as you can still use VPNs, TOR or other ways to circumvent it... And the fines for violating censorship are just little bit more than a slap on the wrists

◧◩◪◨⬒
233. tim333+Kw1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:23:52
>>qubit0+4j1
It didn't close so much as rebrand as the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases.

I don't think the US has labs abroad but other countries such as the UK and Russia have mucked around with bioweapons research in the past. Probably China too as it has a general policy to keep up with the opposition.

◧◩
234. YaSamP+8x1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:28:29
>>travis+rW
" I'm curious why these structures seem to rise" - ask yourself about your state religion, the neoliberalism. You might be less clueless about that.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
235. pts_+bx1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:29:03
>>galkk+Uk1
Only to be defeated by a rubber gasket eating mutation.

Anyway Murphy's law is always applicable and we need the capability to fight fires even more.

replies(1): >>Meltin+YM1
◧◩◪◨⬒
236. pinipe+0y1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:35:20
>>tim333+lu1
Criticizing such details are not the same as criticizing the system itself. Preferring one implementation of capitalism over another isn't a criticism of capitalism. Similarly, espousing one political party over another isn't criticism of democracy.

If you suggest eliminating private property to mitigate certain ills engendered by capitalism, or express another view that is truly antithetical to capitalism then you will find yourself marginalized to the point you cannot influence the system.

replies(1): >>tim333+9z1
◧◩
237. tim333+2y1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:35:29
>>throwa+A6
There remains uncertainty. It could be zoonotic. Spreads in some remote village that no one takes notice of, then a villager does a trip to Wuhan.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
238. lenkit+By1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:40:35
>>em500+zb1
It's not just 14th Jan. The WHO had more than sufficient data at its disposal to avoid making misleading statements. All warnings from Taiwan in December were actively ignored.

https://www.business-standard.com/article/news-ani/taiwan-wa...

https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3904054

Please note that the WHO confirmation statement on 22nd Jan came about after independent confirmation of human to human transmission and only after China's health ministry itself confirmed human to human transmission on Jan 20th. Just a mere week after strong denial, the casualties could not be hidden anymore after several whistleblowers spoke up and China was forced to backtrack.

The WHO merely acknowledged what China stated with a wishy-washy "more data is needed". I suspect if China hadn't itself come clean they would have simply followed what the CCP stated well into the future!

If the WHO had chosen to acknowledge Taiwan's concern in December, performed the most minimum of followups and raised the alarm early, this disaster could have been nipped in the bud. A lot of second and third-world nations put faith in the WHO and outside the EU and the US, the anger at the WHO is palpable.

replies(2): >>crater+k82 >>dirtyi+dO2
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
239. tim333+9z1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:45:12
>>pinipe+0y1
Well googling "capitalism broken" gives plenty of results. I admit eliminating private property doesn't get much respect but that's a different thing.
replies(1): >>pinipe+fF1
◧◩◪
240. YaSamP+cz1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:45:29
>>ashton+RN
"Authoritarian regimes.." - oh I see, it is the "authoritarian regimes"..

Now go and check (it contains a story about FOIA requests to the UK government on Assange's case)

https://consortiumnews.com/2017/11/18/signs-of-u-k-misconduc...

It is the 6th (!) year that the litigation to obtain the information goes on.

◧◩◪
241. silves+gz1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 12:46:11
>>tremon+ev1
It is much easier to contain bad software than it is to contain an virus that spreads using aerosols.

It is also much easier to stop bad software than bad biology. Software is much simpler than the human body.

◧◩◪◨⬒
242. ljm+qB1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 13:04:41
>>mattne+uW
The English idiom for this is "I'd rather be hanged for a sheep than a lamb."

That is to say, if the punishment for any kind of crime is death, no matter how serious or how trivial, you might as well go ahead and commit the much more serious one and try and cover that up instead.

Either way you're fucked, so why not go all in?

243. snarf2+BB1[view] [source] 2021-02-14 13:05:40
>>ttz+(OP)
It is possible that we'll never know. However, remember that we also recently have SARS, MERS, EBOLA, etc. This isn't some isolated event. We've made the world small, there is no where too remote. Some animal from the remotest village on earth can be sold on the street in NYC in two days. Who knows what ancient pathogens are being re-released from the permafrost? I fear this is the beginning of mother earth fighting back, not the end.
◧◩◪
244. Aeolos+MB1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 13:07:20
>>tal8d+us1
> The reason why the US abandoned that course so long ago had nothing to do with morality - somebody in the DoD simply realized that they were furthering the state of the art in dirt cheap WMDs

Is there a reliable reference that the US is no longer researching biochemical weapons?

Wikipedia claims: "Both the U.S. bio-weapons ban and the Biological Weapons Convention restricted any work in the area of biological warfare to defensive in nature. In reality, this gives BWC member-states wide latitude to conduct biological weapons research because the BWC contains no provisions for monitoring or enforcement.[74][75] The treaty, essentially, is a gentlemen's agreement amongst members backed by the long-prevailing thought that biological warfare should not be used in battle.[74]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_biological_weapo...

◧◩
245. pts_+JC1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 13:18:06
>>msie+I21
Entire movies and videogames are premised on such scenarios in western labs.
◧◩◪◨⬒
246. tim333+RD1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 13:31:11
>>raverb+Ju1
I mean stability in that the sequence of the virus is much the same as it was a month before. That's not true when a virus jumps species - they evolve rapidly to the new species.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
247. pinipe+fF1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 13:43:26
>>tim333+9z1
Are those articles suggesting how to fix capitalism or are they actually suggesting eliminating private ownership of the means of production? There are numerous example of the latter being crushed by, e.g. the CIA among others, for around a century. As for how they are marginalized, I'd challenge you to name a single instance of a capitalist state becoming anything else. There have been a few, e.g. China, USSR, PRK, Cuba, etc. which became state capitalism, but that's still a form of capitalism. The anarcho-syndaclists in Spain tried, but they were crushed by the state.

Private property is inextricably linked with capitalism. If there is no private property there can be no private ownership of the means of production, hence no capitalism. Conversely, within capitalism there is private ownership of the means of production hence there can be no private property, only personal property.

◧◩◪◨
248. eloff+lJ1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 14:18:46
>>whymau+M91
> Prolonged animal husbandry will inevitably lead to more diseases crossing to humans

Yes

> The idea that this is only a problem in Africa and Asia is entirely nonsensical.

No, this statement of yours is nonsensical. What I'm saying is the practice of eating bush meat, and these kinds of wet markets bring very little value by themselves. Compared to animal husbandry in general, not even 1% of the total value. However, they represent an outsized proportion of the risk. So it's a bad idea. One could improve the risk-reward ratio by eliminating them - entirely logical.

◧◩◪
249. tim333+JK1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 14:30:02
>>quandr+cc1
11% having antibodies in September seems implausible. There would have been a major outbreak to get those numbers. It's more likely false positives on the test.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
250. Meltin+YM1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 14:46:28
>>pts_+bx1
> It is also much easier to stop bad software than bad biology. Software is much simpler than the human body.

As an RE geek, and a biologist, the Movies were so f'ing awful... I'm playing the new reboot of the Outbreak series, my favorite of all, RE: Resistance and its pretty awesome and still does way more with genre of survival horror in what was simply an add-on DLC cash-in to sell an updated RE3 then all the horrible movies combined. Online play was always more fun, but now that you're the villainous 'master mind' behind the plot kill the subjects for your own gain is absolutely brilliant, something sorely lacking the same Raccoon City Outbreak universe.

They simply did what Hollywood always does: make shit up and refused to speak about the Cyberpunk-esque undertones of Umbrella and the T virus in any adequate way. This works for comic book stuff because it's audience is so self-serving, but it's also why it's so boring and suffers from the repeated one dimensional story telling.

Instead of following the manga-style adaptions they have in Japanese cinema Hollywood made a series of mindless 2 hour brain drains of of zombie shooting banality, and then made up characters the main character (Jovovich) doesn't even exist in the lore, they deviated so far from the plot that they even managed to get Jill's character so bad I literately pissed of my date when we went I was nerd-raging so hard about how bad it was and how much a missed opportunity it was to inspire more like me to enter into biology--we were both freshman in University and I was at my peak of biopunk naivety and advocacy.

The animated series were way better, as is the case with Batman stuff and shows how gritty and dire these subjects are when properly told from the right platform and setting.

As for COVID, I witnessed how resurgance of the yellow movement in HK was being quelled by the CCP and PLA since that Summer, and I personally feel the theory that an accidental leaked gain of function virus makes sense but that nothing 'damning' will ever be uncovered as the floods that impacted Wuhan provided perfect cover to do any successful form of epidemiology, the wet markets are no longer a source of valid data and it was clear how the WHO who were refused at first from entering) is not to be trusted given their alliances to the CCP and refusal to acknowledge the efforts Taiwan had during this pandemic.

Sadly, political theater will always undo anything Science can prove (or not prove) even when it results in the death of 2+ million people. Let it not be forgotten the CCP was jailing, disspeaing and going fafter people on Social media for talking about the deadliness and serious nature of what was happening. Mainland Citizen-journalists who exposed the dire situation and the pathetic state of these make shift hospitals over run by are still not accounted for and are presumed to be either dissapeared in a black-site re-education camp, or simply murdered at this point.

That's why the CCP is such a threat, and its reliance needs to be broken from and decoupled: cheap labour and trinkets aren't worth having them be the vanguard for Human or even environmental health and denying and hiding, getting rid of any and all evidence when it suits them--which includes but is not limited to disspearing people and committing war crimes and acts of genocide while Xi speaks at DAVOS about creating a more 'diverse' system as it extinguishes ethnic groups it see's as threat to it's divisive death cult (CCP).

replies(1): >>galkk+1r3
◧◩◪◨⬒
251. mcswel+1O1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 14:54:04
>>qubit0+4j1
Fort Detrick and all other US bio weapons ceased research in offensive bioweapons in 1969. One reason is that bioweapons can't be controlled, as evidenced by the failure thus far to control this virus. So no, it's not likely that there are undisclosed US bio weapons research sites; that's just propaganda.

While I don't trust the CCP a bit, I also doubt that China is pursuing bioweapons research, for the same reason: a bioweapon is too likely to backfire. If the covid-2 virus came from a lab in Wuhan, it's not because they were pursuing it as a potential bioweapon, it's because they--and others--wanted to understand how to protect against it.

replies(1): >>qubit0+tD2
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
252. menset+bU1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 15:40:13
>>refene+N01
We were supposed to have N95’s available from day 1, but that funding was canceled a decade ago.
◧◩◪◨⬒
253. rlt+642[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 16:52:39
>>astran+r71
If it’s equally likely, I’ll gladly take half as many pandemics by eliminating one source of them.
replies(1): >>astran+LI2
◧◩◪
254. PeterS+082[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 17:20:50
>>tal8d+us1
"the US abandoned that course so long ago "

How do you know this?

replies(1): >>tal8d+HH3
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
255. crater+k82[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 17:22:24
>>lenkit+By1
What would the anti-China xenophobes be saying if WHO were to say, without sufficient evidence, that human-to-human transmission was happening and it turned out to be mistaken?

Being skeptical is acceptable but not to the extent of rejecting the evidentiary process.

Also, Taiwan News is notably anti-China and is associated with Taiwanese nationalists.

replies(1): >>lenkit+Sw2
◧◩◪◨⬒
256. crater+t82[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 17:23:21
>>Splatt+Ei1
What are the others? If you have some sources I'd be happy to look at them.
◧◩◪◨
257. andrep+gd2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 17:53:07
>>crater+0Q
As far as I understand, it's called spanish flu because neutral Spain was free to report on the epidemic, while warring nations imposed heavy censorship for morale reasons, giving the false impression that Spain was especially hit.
◧◩◪◨
258. bbatha+Yi2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 18:30:20
>>bondar+lo1
It’s substantially more complicated than that smallpox samples keep turning up in the US [1][2]. Who knows how many samples were lost in the chaos of the fall of the Soviet Union. Smallpox was in every country on earth until relatively recently simply destroying samples isn’t enough. Hanging onto them in case we need a new vaccine is absolutely prudent.

https://www.wired.com/2014/07/cdc-found-pox/ https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/blog/scab-story

replies(1): >>bondar+UF2
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
259. adolph+uw2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 19:52:37
>>btilly+F01
The second order developments of “accidental lab release” could be far larger. Do people have the right to sue for wrongful death?

Given that the CDC and commercial companies were doing research in that lab, is the US just as culpable as China?

What was the reason for the CDC working with that lab? Aside from rationalizations, was it essentially just outsourcing the dirty work like any other polluting industry?

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
260. lenkit+Sw2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 19:55:23
>>crater+k82
The WHO could have chosen not to ignore Taiwan's warnings and launched their investigation earlier independent of China's claims.

Being skeptical is necessary when considering China's terrible past track record. The SARS epidemic also started with a denial and cover-up by China.

There are many other news sources apart from Taiwan News. You can check out the FT. You can check out Reuters. (Decrying Taiwan News as comprising of anti-Chinese nationalists is rather strange considering the CCP's stance against Taiwan)

https://archive.is/nqiKV https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-taiwan...

Please note that even in Feb, the WHO chief was saying travel bans. are not needed https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-who-idUSKBN1...

"The head of the World Health Organization said on Monday there was no need for measures that “unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade” in trying to halt the spread of a coronavirus that has killed 361 people in China, and he lauded China’s efforts to contain it." (real figure as we learnt later was already >10x by that time)

“It’s no reason to really panic now,” he said. “The chances of getting this going to anywhere outside China is very low, and even in China, when you go to other provinces, it’s very low.”

"The WHO continues to advise against the application of travel or trade restrictions to countries experiencing COVID-19 outbreaks"

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
261. qubit0+tD2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 20:39:06
>>mcswel+1O1
Fort Detrick was closed 2019:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fort_Detrick#2019_closure_and_...

replies(1): >>infami+Exb
◧◩◪◨⬒
262. onetho+bE2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 20:45:01
>>waterh+W31
But that isn’t what happened. Investigators have been from US, Australia, Europe. Findings have been critical of China in terms of access to data, and access to sites.

They still have confirmed that it is not a lab grown virus, and have consistently confirmed it’s from the wild.

◧◩◪◨⬒
263. bondar+UF2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 20:58:47
>>bbatha+Yi2
If there is an actual outbreak that we need a vaccine for, we can just get new samples from the infected, right?
◧◩◪◨
264. mkolod+2H2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 21:06:48
>>tim333+Ip1
Even if these researchers have good intentions, they're human, and humans make mistakes. If someone doing gain-of-function research lets a new deadly virus or bacteria out into the wild by mistake, their mistake can can cause a pandemic like the one we're currently suffering from.

I don't think there's anything that we could learn from gain-of-function research on deadly viruses and bacteria that would be worth risking millions of deaths.

replies(1): >>mkolod+UT6
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
265. astran+LI2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 21:20:06
>>rlt+642
It wouldn't be equally likely since the lab is a single source. It's normal for caves and pig farms and such to spread diseases like this - usually it's new kinds of flu but sometimes it's worse.

To me it seems like the lab escape story has only developed because of journalist brain. It's convenient if you'll only accept a narrative that involves blaming a human and not a natural system.

Anyway, the story doesn't seem to be developing in that direction:

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/14/health/who-mission-china-intl...

I like how the WHO investigator calls the original patient "dull and normal".

◧◩◪◨
266. yters+5O2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 22:05:25
>>ummonk+KM
Here's the tweet: https://twitter.com/bioinformer/status/1252813532850081792

"Mislabeled SRA entry is one thing but - it’s clear that it’s impossible (in my hands at least with a -very good- pipeline) to assemble the reference that is in GenBank from the data in SRA"

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
267. dirtyi+dO2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 22:06:35
>>lenkit+By1
Taiwan's "warnings" were redundant information already provided by PRC - they had no unique observations. Their first case of covid was imported on Jan 21st. They didn't know shit about epidemiological characteristics of virus outside of what was communicated between medical professionals until then. Even Taiwanese media thought H2H chance was low mid January, and Taiwanese CDC didn't believe evidence for H2H was possible to establish until after mid Jan. Any notion that Taiwan had anything useful to warn about in December is part of a _literal_ propaganda drive coordinated by Taiwan and Pompeo's State Department in late March / early April.

https://archive.is/2AdyB

https://apnews.com/article/a0b22f45f0cbc8e83e7d496dd2e09556

China cracked down harshly and sufficiently that countries that immediately listened to WHOs advice to test/trace/isolate managed to contain the virus well because very few cases ever made it abroad as seen in import cases statistics from many countries. Expatriation flights meant leakage was inevitable, but screening procedures were mostly theatre, temperature checks instead of 14day quarantines. The problem is very few countries listened to WHO's advice, and still don't.

◧◩◪◨
268. AshWol+BW2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-14 23:17:09
>>Gauntl+9P
A theory is something that has been rigorously tested, this is speculation, and shaky speculation at best. Id be willing to bet sars and covid 19 have a similar level of genetic similarity

or other things like assuming someone is dead based on the fact that they dont have a picture online and dont wanna talk to press

ive seen youtube conspiracy videos more convincing

◧◩◪◨
269. whythr+a13[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 00:04:02
>>qubit0+Hj1
How can someone come on hackerNews (of all places) and claim the great firewall is a useful way to prevent disinformation? It just ensures that the only kind of information is the kind friendly to the ruling that party.
replies(1): >>qubit0+3L6
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
270. galkk+1r3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 04:32:42
>>Meltin+YM1
I may be wrong, but I think that by saying rubber gasket the parent commenter had "Andromeda strain" in mind.

I meant RE though

◧◩◪
271. diabet+cy3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 05:58:09
>>tremon+ev1
Maybe so but i would assume the barrier to entry for creating a synthetic pathogen is likely to be much higher than somebody tinkering with a Kali Linux VM. I dont know much about gain of function experiments and limited working infosec knowledge so take that with a grain of salt.
◧◩◪◨
272. tal8d+HH3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 07:41:06
>>PeterS+082
The very public shuttering of facilities, the absence of military doctrine, etc. Yes, there could be secret congressional funding for a secret research lab serving a secret component of the military that secretly maintains readiness to do something that is strategically counterproductive and categorically denied. Do I really need to go on with how silly that line of thought is?
replies(1): >>joshua+dN4
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
273. anonym+tH4[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 16:07:40
>>sverha+ej1
I turned into a jaded citizen. When first reports from China emerged, and we saw how the CCP was dragging people out of their homes over a ‘flu.’ I knew something was very, very wrong. I told my parents and immediate family to secure provisions for at least 3 months and to prepare for a time to not leave the house at all until c19 passes.

Then, nothing happened. Not one country stopped their domestic travel, no one prepared and mandated a ‘3 month summer staycation’ (my poor attempt at marketing a terrible circumstance with some positive spin)... and we all started blaming each other.

That was sickening to me... it’s bad enough when we don’t take the proper action to protect our fellow neighbor, but even after acknowledging the cause is basically lost, we turn on each other.

So my quip was in that jaded poor taste, when I saw the finger pointing beginning again... and I should have just commented this to begin with...

◧◩◪◨⬒
274. joshua+dN4[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 16:44:41
>>tal8d+HH3
I really don’t understand how anyone can have such a profound level of trust in organisations that have proved themselves utterly unworthy of that trust. Have the lessons of Snowden really been forgotten this quickly??
replies(1): >>tal8d+Xez
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
275. SuoDua+9m5[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-15 19:53:45
>>nervlo+T51
It's creepy how some people keep trying to memory hole what our own health officials said about masks in the early days. I wonder whether they really think this kind of thing flies under the radar or they are so embarrassed they parroted the 'masks are worse than useless' line that they genuinely forgot about that part of the story themselves.

Though IMHO, given the role vitamin D deficiency seems to have on mortality rates, I think the harshest criticism (charges?) should be reserved for any mayor who ordered tanning beds to close in his or her city.

◧◩◪◨
276. Stanis+w86[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-16 00:20:03
>>tim333+Ip1
>Most of the gain of function research is either well meaning

It doesn't matter how good your intentions are when your behavior is extremely dangerous and can (and possibly did) result in a global pandemic that kills millions of people. Risk/reward calculations should be performed without regard to intent.

>Banning it would reduce the amount done greatly.

It would also reduce the risk of a man-made virus killing millions of people.

◧◩◪◨⬒
277. qubit0+3L6[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-16 08:08:01
>>whythr+a13
It insures that people aren't emotionally triggered by disinformation which often results in social divisiveness if not violence as is happening in the US.
◧◩◪◨⬒
278. mkolod+UT6[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-16 09:45:34
>>mkolod+2H2
To be clear, I would guess that if SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab in Wuhan, it was created with good intentions, and escaped from the lab by mistake. And rather than figuring out where to point fingers, we can work together to prevent future pandemics by preventing research that creates deadly diseases.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
279. infami+Exb[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-17 19:17:31
>>qubit0+tD2
The link you posted states that bioweapons research stopped in 1969 (including at Ft. Detrick) as the grandparent stated.
replies(1): >>qubit0+djd
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
280. qubit0+djd[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-18 07:40:29
>>infami+Exb
It stopped being the 'central' bio research lab in US but still continued such research thereafter.
replies(1): >>infami+cem
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯▣
281. infami+cem[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-21 06:38:11
>>qubit0+djd
The only bio research done after 1969 anyhwere in the US was to find cures, treatments, and the like which is in the link you provided.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
282. tal8d+Xez[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-02-25 10:01:06
>>joshua+dN4
Well that is a major mischaracterization of my views on the US government. It is funny that you mention Snowden, because many of us were called paranoid conspiracy nuts for using the exact same logic I just demonstrated to warn about dragnet surveillance programs. Watch: the USG has the disposition to spy on its citizens and the capability to do so without fear of consequences, therefor it is almost certainly happening. You can see that argument commonly popping up all over the 90s cypherpunks mailing list.

Now, try to apply that same reasoning to your allegation without looking silly. Yes, the USG has secretly run certain aspects of a public biowarfare program - and when it came to light they paid. Boom, they couldn't keep it secret and they couldn't escape the consequences (lots of very damaging legal cases and hearings). Finally, do they have an incentive? No - as I said, it makes no sense for them to reduce the cost of yet another world ending weapon. Now you could point to Russia getting caught with massive stockpiles of Anthrax after they claimed to end the program... but their nuclear program's credibility isn't comparable - they've always demonstrated clear signs of insecurity about it. That isn't the case for the USG.

[go to top]