zlacker

[parent] [thread] 68 comments
1. woodru+(OP)[view] [source] 2021-03-22 20:29:25
My understanding of the author's central thesis is this: the US, despite its world-class virology and disease study labs, regularly has lapses in procedure that regularly lead to situations in which the public might be exposed. Given that this is happening in our own backyard, we might reasonably expect countries of similar status (like China) to experience similar lapses.

That reads as reasonable to me, but raises a subsequent question: if these lapses are so common and so many countries possess the capacity for serious mistakes, why don't we see more regular outbreaks (if not full-blown pandemics) caused by labs? In other words, what makes COVID special? I didn't find a satisfactory answer to the latter question in the article.

It's my (uninformed, uneducated) opinion that the severity of the author's claims don't correspond to the reality of the last few national and international disease crises (AIDS, Ebola, Zika, COVID). Which isn't to say that we should absolutely dismiss the possibility that COVID originated in a lab, only that claims that it did amount to currently unsubstantiated claims about COVID's special status among other recent pandemics.

replies(15): >>medyme+r1 >>varjag+Q1 >>cowmoo+T2 >>renewi+V2 >>lamont+Mc >>orbliv+yh >>tgsovl+1j >>esja+ik >>SkyPun+Bl >>Spooky+pm >>cnasc+dn >>fendy3+qw >>beowul+MK >>Fomite+7e1 >>newbie+nh4
2. medyme+r1[view] [source] 2021-03-22 20:35:12
>>woodru+(OP)
Other viruses do escape the lab sometimes. The first SARS virus escaped the lab more than once.

https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/gb-...

replies(2): >>Engine+P2 >>woodru+F3
3. varjag+Q1[view] [source] 2021-03-22 20:36:26
>>woodru+(OP)
Lab outbreaks with numerous civilian fatalities are not unprecedented:

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

The official cover-up initially was blaming the outbreak on contaminated meat from a wet market.

◧◩
4. Engine+P2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 20:40:05
>>medyme+r1
Both in China no less.
5. cowmoo+T2[view] [source] 2021-03-22 20:40:30
>>woodru+(OP)
COVID-19 is one of the few serious diseases that can transmit when the carrier is asymptomatic. That could be a credible reason why a potential lab leak went unnoticed for long enough to begin uncontrolled community spread.
replies(2): >>hn_thr+55 >>mrfusi+tk
6. renewi+V2[view] [source] 2021-03-22 20:40:33
>>woodru+(OP)
> if these lapses are so common and so many countries possess the capacity for serious mistakes, why don't we see more regular outbreaks (if not full-blown pandemics) caused by labs? In other words, what makes COVID special?

Perhaps it is not special. One might as well ask what was special about a coin that lands heads three times in a row in its first three flips.

◧◩
7. woodru+F3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 20:43:35
>>medyme+r1
I'm not claiming that they don't! The article has multiple examples of viruses escaping either individual containment or the lab outright.

What I'm claiming is that the volume of attributed escapes indicates that the average escape has relatively local consequences. In other words: historically, when everything goes wrong, it hasn't resulted in a global pandemic. What, then, made or makes COVID special?

Maybe the answer is raw numbers, and that it was bound to happen eventually. But "one of these incidents was bound to cause a global pandemic" is the exact same reasoning as the (original, still mainstream?) "wet market" theory. What I'd personally like to know is why I should believe one over the other, apart from human propensity to believe conspiratorial claims.

replies(2): >>koheri+A4 >>reuben+fK1
◧◩◪
8. koheri+A4[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 20:48:03
>>woodru+F3
COVID-19 is special because it doesn't cause severe illness in most people. SARS killed a far far higher percentage of people it came in contact with, and made 100% of them sick, so it was much more easily detected, and therefore contained.
replies(1): >>rcpt+db
◧◩
9. hn_thr+55[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 20:49:52
>>cowmoo+T2
> COVID-19 is one of the few serious diseases that can transmit when the carrier is asymptomatic.

Is this actually true? It is certainly not true for HIV, and of course is not relevant to diseases like Zika that are transmitted by mosquitos.

Edit: I found the answer to my own question: https://www.kff.org/infographic/ebola-characteristics-and-co... (see second bullet point). Given that this lists Hep C, HIV, Influenza, Malaria, Polio, and Tuberculosis as possible to transmit while asymptomatic, I'd say "COVID-19 is one of the few serious diseases that can transmit when the carrier is asymptomatic." is most definitely false.

replies(3): >>cowmoo+U6 >>inglor+0b >>tasssk+np
◧◩◪
10. cowmoo+U6[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 20:56:50
>>hn_thr+55
I can clarify it: COVID-19 is just about the only serious respiratory disease that undergoes rapid exponential spread and is transmissible while asymptomatic. That's a lot of qualifiers, but it makes for a uniquely scary pandemic threat.
◧◩◪
11. inglor+0b[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 21:13:09
>>hn_thr+55
As always, it is not a 1-0 situation, but a question of degree.

You can catch flu from an asymptomatic person, but Covid has a much higher reproduction factor. During the winter lockdown in England, regular flu was completely eradicated - literally not a single case was detected in entire England [0]. At the same time, Covid was still spreading happily. The measures that stopped flu in its tracks only slightly inconvenienced SARS-Cov-2.

Covid is simply too good at spreading, compared to other similar diseases.

(As an analogy: I can swim, Michael Phelps can swim, we can both call ourselves swimmers, but we are not really comparable.)

[0]https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/flu-cases-covid-en...

◧◩◪◨
12. rcpt+db[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 21:13:57
>>koheri+A4
Right. The last case of smallpox was from a lab leak but people knew better than to fuck around with that.

Covid is asymptomatic and mild enough in enough people that masks get political

13. lamont+Mc[view] [source] 2021-03-22 21:19:57
>>woodru+(OP)
The biggest difference between all of those and this virus is that those were leaks of already-known viruses. SARS-CoV-2 wasn't known to exist before 2019 and there's no known precursor virus. There's a somewhat closely related virus that infected the miners in Yunnan but it was only 96% similar. There's nothing at all in this article on how SARS-CoV-2 was discovered or created.

The problem I have is that China isn't interested in investigating the start of the pandemic. They've thrown away their wastewater samples, there's some evidence WHO found of SARS-CoV-2 spreading locally prior to December 2019, but no backtesting of any samples. Nobody seems to be looking at the bats in Hubei for sarbecoviruses.

By blocking study of the zoonotic origin of the pandemic, they can use the theory it was imported in food for domestic propaganda. For external propaganda they're happy to have conspiracy theories flying about this lab leak theory creating a "firehose of falsehoods" and distractions. They can rely on American scientists to get engaged with the conspiracy theory and debunk it, wasting their efforts and then they can use that also for domestic propaganda.

Meanwhile nobody gets fucking outraged that China isn't properly investigating the origin of the virus and isn't aggressively looking at the bats in Hubei and any animal farms in the surrounding area. My suspicion is that animal farms (like minks) functioned as a bioreactor that had many opportunities to spillover from bats and then the close contact allowed it to spread well and mutate to optimize it for a more human-like ACE2 receptor, then the mink contact with humans allowed multiple spillover events until it started to spread epidemically in humans.

replies(2): >>boombo+zp >>dillon+5H
14. orbliv+yh[view] [source] 2021-03-22 21:40:47
>>woodru+(OP)
The hypothesis is (or maybe this part is established fact?) that this lab was conducting Gain of Function research: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gain_of_function_research

It's purposely evolving diseases to spread faster or be more dangerous, for the sake of research. As I understand, it's at least a bit controversial. So maybe there's not as much of it going on as other research? If so, there probably wouldn't be as much opportunity for it to escape. But now that it has (per the hypothesis), it's ready to be very contagious right out of the gate. Thus, pandemic.

replies(1): >>2-tpg+Aw
15. tgsovl+1j[view] [source] 2021-03-22 21:46:46
>>woodru+(OP)
COVID hits the sweet spot of infectiousness, asymptomatic spread, incubation time, and low mortality. I would expect the R of Ebola to be pretty low in developed countries. People wash their hands more often when every place you go to has running water, and if you show Ebola symptoms, you're going to the hospital, and if it's a hospital with a city that has a BSL4 lab, there isn't going to be an outbreak - someone will recognize what it is, and you'll be in an isolation unit in no time and your contacts will be quarantined.

I would expect such a case to make the headlines, but it's quite possible it would be quietly swept under the carpet. How well known was Reston back when it happened? If that didn't make the news, would a lab-originated outbreak?

With COVID, a worker could get infected, hide the exposure out of fear/shame, never show any symptoms... and yet start a pandemic.

With a low-probability high-impact event like a global pandemic, near misses are the only indicator you have until the one time it does go catastrophically wrong.

replies(1): >>Pyramu+Qm
16. esja+ik[view] [source] 2021-03-22 21:52:09
>>woodru+(OP)
In general labs are not both a) bad at safety, and also b) doing gain of function research to make dangerous viruses more infectious to humans. The latter has been banned a few times due to the risk (see below). Both A and B were happening in Wuhan.

"In 2014, after a series of accidents involving mishandled pathogens at the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the NIH announced that it would stop funding gain-of-function research into certain viruses — including influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) and Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) — that have the potential to unleash a pandemic or epidemic if they escaped from the lab. Some researchers said the broad ban threatened necessary flu-surveillance and vaccine research."

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00210-5

p.s. The US NIH did ultimately stop funding that research locally, but continued funding it in Wuhan. Including the exact type of virus we're dealing with now.

replies(1): >>samatm+jJ
◧◩
17. mrfusi+tk[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 21:52:46
>>cowmoo+T2
CNN sold us on asymptomatic spread but it’s actually highly unlikely: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-020-19802-w
replies(2): >>geoduc+7u >>yosito+GE1
18. SkyPun+Bl[view] [source] 2021-03-22 21:58:03
>>woodru+(OP)
If this Wuhan lab theory is correct, I think the wet markets play a huge role in the outbreak. They place a huge number of diverse, weakened, living animal in a relatively confined area. This seems to give an ideal breeding ground for a leaked virus - which perhaps can be incubated in a host species found at the wet market. Either the animals are in too poor of condition to notice the infection or they're a natural reservoir - eliciting no symptoms.

My understanding is most other countries don't have wet markets like China does. Even if a virus escapes, it may not have access to the hosts it needs truly become problematic.

19. Spooky+pm[view] [source] 2021-03-22 22:01:41
>>woodru+(OP)
The difference is easy. It’s an aerosol. Known leaks from biological weapons programs are mostly things like anthrax.

That also makes the biological warfare scenario less likely — armies like to control where the bomb goes.

The other factor to discount this conjecture is that if you hear about covid as a biological weapon, it’s less likely to be true as it would potentially expose research in other places. If China is doing this, the US, Russia and others are too.

◧◩
20. Pyramu+Qm[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 22:03:45
>>tgsovl+1j
Not disagreeing with your general point that SARS-CoV-2 is an interesting mix of infectiousness and low mortality.

From what I've read Ebola has killed many healthcare professionals because they infected themselves when disposing off PPE. As a result a disproportionally large portion of deaths were healthcare workers.

> With COVID, a worker could get infected, hide the exposure out of fear/shame, never show any symptoms... and yet start a pandemic.

In many countries workers are actually incentivised to come to work sick and infect others.

replies(1): >>Fomite+pe1
21. cnasc+dn[view] [source] 2021-03-22 22:05:23
>>woodru+(OP)
The armies of statisticians and (human) computers working for the war department found that most munitions fired off don’t hit people. One figure often used is 25,000 bullets per casualty (where casualty does not imply killed). How many disease bullets have been accidentally fired since we’ve had disease study labs?
◧◩◪
22. tasssk+np[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 22:14:56
>>hn_thr+55
Why is Malaria in the list?
replies(1): >>fuzxi+KF
◧◩
23. boombo+zp[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 22:16:10
>>lamont+Mc
>The problem I have is that China isn't interested in investigating the start of the pandemic.

Why should they be interested? We know how SARS type viruses can spread to humans, we know what other species are vulnerable, and we know what things make it more or less likely. A new outbreak was not a surprising result. What benefit is there to aggressively investigating the exact transmission method?

If your mink idea was found to be accurate, would you advocate closing mink farms? It being the source this time doesn't make it likely to cause the next transferrable virus.

replies(4): >>throwa+Fq >>kittie+Nr >>lamont+k61 >>wonnag+lx1
◧◩◪
24. throwa+Fq[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 22:23:00
>>boombo+zp
I'd argue China needs to engage in proper sanitation and stop treating citizens as disposable.
replies(1): >>dang+Ju
◧◩◪
25. kittie+Nr[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 22:29:03
>>boombo+zp
Science is about collecting data, verifying, collecting more, in a repeating never ending cycle. Stopping science (especially in areas of active present day research) in the belief that we know and are done with it, just isn't sound logic. Viruses are not yet solved.
replies(1): >>boombo+dB
◧◩◪
26. geoduc+7u[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 22:41:41
>>mrfusi+tk
I personally know people who went to a party and got sick from an asymptomatic person.
replies(1): >>geoduc+AX
◧◩◪◨
27. dang+Ju[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 22:44:24
>>throwa+Fq
Please do not post nationalistic flamebait to HN. It leads to flamewars, which we're trying to avoid here.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

While I have you: could you please stop creating accounts for every few comments you post? We ban accounts that do that. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

You needn't use your real name, of course, but for HN to be a community, users need some identity for other users to relate to. Otherwise we may as well have no usernames and no community, and that would be a different kind of forum. https://hn.algolia.com/?query=community%20identity%20by:dang...

replies(1): >>throwa+c15
28. fendy3+qw[view] [source] 2021-03-22 22:52:03
>>woodru+(OP)
Covid is special because it's highly contagious and has delayed symptoms.

However in my opinion, chinese governments (esp. lower levels) like to lower the severity of any issue / risks and they like to repress / solve the issue with local power until it is solved or gets too big. The central gov that like to hide wrongdoings aren't helping either.

In case of covid, they either underrate the severity or tried to suppress the outbreak locally, which they failed and it already spread too wide enough to be contained.

If covid outbreak happened in europe or us, I believe it'll spread almost the same, albeit slower and you'll knew faster since it'll be in news faster.

replies(1): >>abacad+Lb1
◧◩
29. 2-tpg+Aw[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 22:53:09
>>orbliv+yh
Established fact. Biowarfare is often coated as "defense": we need to develop vaccines for future viruses or engineered pathogens. The offense is top secret.

SARS-COV are classed Category C pathogen by CDC, in line with Hanta virus. SARS-COV is documented as a viable bioweapon, precisely for the things we have seen in the last year, and studied as such by all capable militaries around the world.

The hypothesis is that this lab (and labs in Iran, China and Iran share biowarfare research) was conducting gene-targeted coronavirus research. Using proxy DNA-testing companies serving Western populace to get their data. A good weaponized coronavirus would have an extremely high R. It would look similar to the flu in the first stages. Then at a later stage (after two weeks) it would deliver a "payload" in the brains of the targeted populace, stopping breathing or causing haemorrhage. The non-targeted races would just have a flu and contribute to the spread. Other engineered viruses focus on plausible deniability, straining the hospitals with patients with vague symptoms, hard enough to visit the hospital and contribute to the strain on public services, soft enough not to actually kill them. It would throw the targeted country into chaos and unprepared for a war.

◧◩◪◨
30. boombo+dB[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 23:18:38
>>kittie+Nr
I am not arguing to stop science, I don't see the benefit we're hoping to get out of aggressively researching various theories about how exactly the 2019 covid virus spread to humans.
replies(2): >>french+oD >>arctic+9I
◧◩◪◨⬒
31. french+oD[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 23:31:14
>>boombo+dB
Presumably a better understanding of the origins of the 2019 virus would be useful for predicting the likelyhood of a similar outbreak from the same source, or allow people to alter practices to reduce that likelyhood.
replies(1): >>boombo+qF
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
32. boombo+qF[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 23:45:19
>>french+oD
Our current understanding of everything you mention is already good, and there have been no indications that I'm aware of that this case happened in a way that would alter that understanding.

To show my point, even if we aggressively investigate the source and discover it did not originate in a lab, nobody would then argue that it's alright to lower security on such biolabs.

replies(1): >>sooheo+PL
◧◩◪◨
33. fuzxi+KF[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 23:46:54
>>tasssk+np
Malaria can be (very rarely) transmitted through blood transfusions.

https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/about/us_transmission.html

replies(1): >>Fomite+Ae1
◧◩
34. dillon+5H[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-22 23:56:28
>>lamont+Mc
CCP would also not release serology from blood banks and other blood from before dec which from what I understand would be a gold mine showing earlier spread.

Which wouldn't that be in China's interest?

I don't get why the 'cover up' (maybe i'm too biased with that term, utter lack of cooperation) beyond just the top down controlling nature of the CCP.

Their actions don't lend us any trust so we do have to ask why..

https://www.wsj.com/articles/possible-early-covid-19-cases-i...

replies(2): >>codeze+yO >>lamont+X61
◧◩◪◨⬒
35. arctic+9I[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 00:04:15
>>boombo+dB
Why would we not "aggressively" research it? What if we could have stopped it by catching it early?

Knowing whether it was a lab leak or zoonotic would be a massive hint in the direction to invest in. N=1, but it's a big 1 that would have massive public support.

replies(1): >>boombo+XT
◧◩
36. samatm+jJ[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 00:14:37
>>esja+ik
You don't even have to be bad at safety, just less than completely perfect.

There is also the matter of biosafety levels. Something like smallpox is studied at biosafety level 4, which is very intrusive and difficult. The alleged gain of function research would have been BSL 3 or even 2, meaning a lot fewer precautions are taken, and a leak is correspondingly more likely.

replies(1): >>esja+9k1
37. beowul+MK[view] [source] 2021-03-23 00:27:21
>>woodru+(OP)
Honestly if it was the source, its probably just probability. It is not 100% guaranteed that an outbreak happens from an accident, but there is a chance. And with enough of them happening, eventually one of them will spread.
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
38. sooheo+PL[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 00:37:03
>>boombo+qF
But people may come up with 80/20 improvements to mitigate the actual source of the virus. Why is improved data a bad thing, in your view?
replies(1): >>boombo+LU
◧◩◪
39. codeze+yO[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 00:57:40
>>dillon+5H
I’ve come to terms in understanding China’s actions by this assumption, which is made up by me, but seems true enough and maybe even true for most nation states when pushed against a wall:

They are acting without any concern for the outside world - not for how they are perceived, not for any consequences. They are acting with pure self-determination. This works because they know they can be self sufficient and have a long term plan to get there.

Controlling the information/narrative domestically is the only variable they need to manipulate that matters. So as an outsider, it all seems quite inexplicable, but if you see it as a way to achieve long term political and infrastructure goals while maintaining social harmony locally - most of their actions make sense, even if they may not be morally justifiable to some/many/all people in some/many/all situations :)

replies(1): >>wayout+632
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
40. boombo+XT[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 01:39:34
>>arctic+9I
>What if we could have stopped it by catching it early?

So we should be aggressively researching all the known possible future causes, not wasting time trying to figure out what the exact cause this time was.

>Knowing whether it was a lab leak or zoonotic would be a massive hint in the direction to invest

We know both are possible causes, investing in just the one that caused this leaves us open to the other.

◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
41. boombo+LU[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 01:46:16
>>sooheo+PL
I think this data will only lead to results orientated thinking, where we ignore all the other sources we know possibly could have caused it. Heavily financing research into finding the exact source provides no benefit I can find, and could cause further harm.
◧◩◪◨
42. geoduc+AX[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 02:09:14
>>geoduc+7u
Why was this down voted?
replies(1): >>vixen9+4F1
◧◩◪
43. lamont+k61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 03:26:00
>>boombo+zp
That means that mink, and particularly the practice of mink farming is likely to lead to another outbreak (or whatever the actual species is determined to be). That animal would have sufficiently similar biology to humans, including the ACE2 receptor so that zoonotic transmission could happen. Those farms would definitely need to be closed.
replies(1): >>boombo+H71
◧◩◪
44. lamont+X61[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 03:31:03
>>dillon+5H
Because the intermediate animal is likely animal farming, and they don't want to take the economic and political hit of shutting down an entire industry. We don't have the will to do that either, we still haven't shut down our mink farms.

And just for domestic propaganda reasons. If it came from China they could be blamed for it, and they want to deny/deny/deny and defect blame. Serves their propaganda purposes to have people believe it was imported and generates an us-vs-them bunker narrative where the rest of the world is unfairly blaming them. That leaves their citizens questioning the rest of the world and not their own government.

replies(1): >>wonnag+Gw1
◧◩◪◨
45. boombo+H71[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 03:36:31
>>lamont+k61
I have not researched this mink idea, so I don't know how likely they are to lead to cross species contamination, but remember the swine flu? We already know pigs are capable of such transmission and we still farm them.

Lots of mammals are capable of this, and we can determine which ones are even if we don't isolate the cause of thie pandemic.

replies(1): >>aden1n+pA1
◧◩
46. abacad+Lb1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 04:17:17
>>fendy3+qw
Yup no doubt they fucked up and all the coverup bs cost lives, but there is a 0% chance we would have kept it contained in any major American city.
47. Fomite+7e1[view] [source] 2021-03-23 04:41:15
>>woodru+(OP)
There's been a number of very short transmission chains. One of the things that's difficult for infectious diseases is that they have extremely long-tailed distributions. "This has happened before, and it got a couple people sick" is a distinct possibility. It also happens relatively frequently with diseases that have a lower pandemic potential than a coronavirus.

So the answer to "What makes COVID special?" is possibly "We failed our pandemic save."

I did some research during the early stages of the West African Ebola epidemic, when a lot of people were asking why, instead of the usual sporadic, self-limiting outbreaks of the past, we were seeing something larger and different. As it turns out, if you use the parameters people estimated from the older, smaller outbreaks, there's a small but not breathtakingly so probability of a very large epidemic. It's sort of the null hypothesis for pandemics.

◧◩◪
48. Fomite+pe1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 04:44:46
>>Pyramu+Qm
I've described SARS-CoV-2 as an RPG character who shows up to a session with a stat block you'd describe as "Okay", and then in the first encounter, you realize everything lines up well for a scary rules interaction.

It's not exceptional in many of the ways viruses can be. It's not as deadly as Ebola. Or as durable as Norovirus. Or as transmissible as Measles. It's just...really good at its job.

The lack of fomite transmission for SARS-CoV-2 has saved a lot of healthcare workers.

replies(1): >>Pyramu+2b3
◧◩◪◨⬒
49. Fomite+Ae1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 04:46:43
>>fuzxi+KF
Or sharing needles! There's a small outbreak in Newark of injection drug users that's one of my favorite "Weird epidemiology papers" for journal clubs.
◧◩◪
50. esja+9k1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 05:58:23
>>samatm+jJ
I agree. In this context “bad at safety” basically means less than perfect.
◧◩◪◨
51. wonnag+Gw1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 08:14:12
>>lamont+X61
Shutting down wildlife farms and consumption was actually one of the first actions taken, this was widely reported last year: https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2021/03/15/9775278...

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/06/28/8839000...

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/world/asia/china-coronavi...

etc.

replies(2): >>dillon+Nz3 >>lamont+KU3
◧◩◪
52. wonnag+lx1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 08:20:36
>>boombo+zp
In any case, the original statement is silly in light of the fact that the origin of the much smaller SARS epidemic was still diligently researched and traced for 15+ years until it was finally found, in 2018: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-017-07766-9
replies(1): >>boombo+lJ1
◧◩◪◨⬒
53. aden1n+pA1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 08:49:19
>>boombo+H71
Minks (and other mustelids) are extraordinarily capable of transmitting human respiratory viral diseases. Ferrets (same genus as Minks) are used as an animal model for human influenza research for that reason.

SARS-CoV-2 also spreads exceptionally well on mink farms. Out of a total of 128 mink farms in the Netherlands, at least 69[0] had an outbreak of SARS-CoV-2 in 2020, with more suspected cases. On at least two farms, there were confirmed transmissions from the animals to farm workers. It is likely mink would form a natural reservoir SARS-CoV-2 if allowed to spread in the wild.

Mink farming has subsequently been banned since early 2021 in the Netherlands.

[0]: https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/onderwerpen/coronavirus-covid-1... (Dutch)

◧◩◪
54. yosito+GE1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 09:32:38
>>mrfusi+tk
I've seen this study shared around anti-vaxer groups trying to claim that asymptomatic spread is unlikely. But this study does not prove that at all. They screened 10 million people with no symptoms, and found 300 asymptomatic cases. Then they re-screened 1200 contacts of those cases and didn't find any more cases that they missed. This doesn't prove that asymptomatic spread is unlikely. It proves that the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 when they did the screening was very low, and that 100% of the cases they found were asymptomatic. I'd be careful to draw conclusions from just one Chinese study, but if anything, this study suggests the opposite of what you're claiming.
replies(1): >>mrfusi+gr3
◧◩◪◨⬒
55. vixen9+4F1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 09:36:11
>>geoduc+AX
You really have tabs on all the innumerable factors involved in a scenario where someone goes to a party and later becomes infected - and pinpoint the reason ?
replies(1): >>geoduc+r14
◧◩◪◨
56. boombo+lJ1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 10:09:50
>>wonnag+lx1
And thankfully confirming what was suspected prevented future outbreaks of similar diseases.
◧◩◪
57. reuben+fK1[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 10:15:26
>>woodru+F3
SARS-CoV-2 is spectacularly well-adapted for infecting humans, the original SARS and other animal-origin viruses are not.

The idea that this thing sprang out of the wild, in Wuhan of all places, perfectly adapted to infect human beings, is fucking laughable.

◧◩◪◨
58. wayout+632[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 12:47:53
>>codeze+yO
I think this is an oversimplification. Chinese culture places a lot of value on saving face — so low and mid-level bureaucrats will massage the numbers so as not to appear to be the weak link in the chain. Do this at every level of an enormous country and you can see how hard it is to even know the truth when the first instinct is to cover everything up, even if it’s a scandal that won’t be published outside China.

Of course, all this allows the media to disclaim the party’s responsibility for basically everything.

Also, yeah; they view China as a self-determined empire stretching back 5000 years. The Chinese generally view Americans as arrogant children and not that smart. I suggest any white person who doesn’t understand racism go to China — they don’t give a fuck that you’re white and in many places will actively disdain you. If you tried to date a Chinese woman outside the large coastal cities you’d likely be literally run out of town. They are reaching the point where they don’t really need us; their own internal consumption is overtaking their exports to the US.

replies(3): >>mbg721+N32 >>codeze+NP2 >>dillon+Cz3
◧◩◪◨⬒
59. mbg721+N32[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 12:53:27
>>wayout+632
It doesn't take very many steps of face-saving to reach an absurd outcome--compare CYA culture in the US.
◧◩◪◨⬒
60. codeze+NP2[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 17:11:36
>>wayout+632
100% agree it's an oversimplification, and appreciate the view on how white people would be treated there socially.
◧◩◪◨
61. Pyramu+2b3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 18:47:43
>>Fomite+pe1
I will violate HN guidelines for once and state that user name checks out ;)
◧◩◪◨
62. mrfusi+gr3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 20:03:05
>>yosito+GE1
I can’t quite follow the line of reasoning here. Can you simplify or rephrase?

(Also nice touch to question the credibility by associating it with anti vaxxers)

That’s by no means the only study though. Here’s a meta-analysis of 54 studies (link to paper is in article)

https://alachuachronicle.com/university-of-florida-researche...

replies(1): >>yosito+xF3
◧◩◪◨⬒
63. dillon+Cz3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 20:48:30
>>wayout+632
I've read a lot about this structure where local party leaders lie - often times to save face - and keeps getting passed up.

Chernobyl is a great example of this with deadly consequences. COVID is far worse sadly.

I don't think we could have contained it within China if they had a best response it was already out - well maybe 99.99% chance a not that educated guess - but we could probably have given ourselves a good amount more time. And hard shut down borders quickly if we knew the true vast numbers & death rates in early Wuhan. Then put out the 'embers' locally.

Gives at least some countries a chance of keeping it under control within their borders. Though I don't have faith our (US) CDC would have been up to the task...

◧◩◪◨⬒
64. dillon+Nz3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 20:50:05
>>wonnag+Gw1
And mink farms were also culled in Denmark. Though I can't find any news about whether or not they resumed farming.
◧◩◪◨⬒
65. yosito+xF3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 21:25:17
>>mrfusi+gr3
> I can’t quite follow the line of reasoning here. Can you simplify or rephrase?

I was pretty clear, and so was the original study you linked from nature.com. If you can't follow the reasoning of something that simple, should anyone take your claims to be coming from someone who knows what they're talking about?

From the second meta-study you linked:

> We found significantly higher secondary attack rates from symptomatic index cases than asymptomatic or presymptomatic index cases, although less data were available on the latter. The lack of substantial transmission from observed asymptomatic index cases is notable. However, presymptomatic transmission does occur, with some studies reporting the timing of peak infectiousness at approximately the period of symptom onset.

They state very clearly that though their analysis showed a lower secondary attack rate from asymptomatic index cases (0.7-4.9%), they have limited data from which to draw that conclusion, and that presymptomatic transmission does occur. Which means, you can catch SARS-CoV-2 from someone who doesn't know that they're sick.

That's according to the study you linked, and it's far from the claim you made that asymptomatic spread is "actually highly unlikely".

◧◩◪◨⬒
66. lamont+KU3[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-23 23:09:49
>>wonnag+Gw1
Those wildlife farms were linked to the Huanan Seafood Market which we pretty much at this point know were not the source. That was not ground zero. It is more likely that larger and more economically important fur farming or agriculturally significant animals were responsible. The articles you link to all talk about shutting down exotics (which confines the economic and political damage for China).
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
67. geoduc+r14[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-24 00:06:02
>>vixen9+4F1
At the party, there were 42 people present. 16 got sick. In many cases husbands got sick first, then wives. All of these are in a close social network (they either work together, or are married to an employee) - so keeping tabs on each other is very likely. Many of them were socially distancing before hand (I can attest to 4 of them, directly) - so external infections are unlikely, but possible.

Due to the timing, the general consensus is that the husbands contacted the disease from one male (close hugging or extended talking) and then gave it to their wives that night.

68. newbie+nh4[view] [source] 2021-03-24 02:38:47
>>woodru+(OP)
Covid is special because it arrived at just the right time to be politically useful.
◧◩◪◨⬒
69. throwa+c15[view] [source] [discussion] 2021-03-24 11:23:25
>>dang+Ju
Sorry dang, have no intention of spamming the website with different accounts. I'll pay more attention to the rules next time.
[go to top]