The Lab Leak Hypothesis • Hacker News Board

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#41

Post by InTheArena » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:28 AM UTC

InTheArena wrote: post #38

mabbo wrote: post #27

> There is no direct evidence for these zoonotic possibilities, just as there is no direct evidence for an experimental mishap But there is so much more opportunity for the zoonotic possibilities. In fact, this is the seventh time we've seen Betacoronavirus cross from bats, through another animal, and then into humans. SARS came via palm civets. MERS came via camels. Four more types cause a mild cold only and so they…

Except this is not just a USA story. The reality is that China is shutting down any research into the origins of the virus - at least by doctors not loyal to the government. They are arresting journalists who don’t tell the story they want to tell. In the vacuum of information, it’s fair to point out that the market not being the source means something else was - and - there was a lab that had the closest variant to…

Never mind that the author is dealing with a country that is committing genocide right now simply because some Muslims believe in Allah and not the state.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#42

Post by cma » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:28 AM UTC

andi999 wrote: post #24

cma wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We see around one base pair mutation per host transmission, so that would likely already put us outside 99.9% similarity even among humans with coronavirus wouldn't it? Rough estimate: (29,000 base pairs, just assuming 3.5 days between generations, 395 days since first affected person (probably it was a bit more), would be 112 mutations = 99.6% similarity) And I think we'd expect more changes to be selected for in th…

Your first sentence is missing the number, did you mean 'one bas pair'?

Yes thanks, fixed

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#43

Post by InTheArena » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:33 AM UTC

MilnerRoute wrote: post #40

InTheArena wrote: post #34

I might have missed this in the article - but I believe a separate recent article pointed out that none of the animals tested from the market had any signs of this virus - this China was looking at other sites. Just not the wuhan lab which is a few hundred yards from the market? There were also articles about a year before covid about how people were dealing out about the lax security of the Wuhan lab. https://thebul…

It's probably more helpful if you can share the URLs of the articles you're citing. Snopes.com delved into the one about lax security, and it turned out to just be something somebody shared on a social media web site. (It had the name "ResearchGate", which many wrongly assumed meant it was an actual research paper when it was just a social media post.) https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/04/01/covid-19-bioweapon/

https://www.nature.com/news/inside-the-chinese-lab-poised-to...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions...

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#44

Post by dasudasu » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:33 AM UTC

This is from a country that lets its state officials run wild with claims that it was imported from the US army into Wuhan, while keeping a tight enough leash to disappear any citizen when they cross arbitrary lines, and whose official line is now that it came to Wuhan through imported frozen seafood. We'll never know the origins, realistically.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#45

Post by anon9001 » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:33 AM UTC

MilnerRoute wrote: post #21

I'd like to ask everyone commenting on this article: who wrote it? Seriously -- what do you know about the author of these words? (There's no "author's bio" anywhere on the page, or even if you click on his name.) So what do any of us know about him? If you look him up on Wikipedia, it lists his occupation as novelist and fiction writer, as well as an "essayist." ("His fiction generally de-emphasizes narrative in fav…

Thanks for pointing this out. I'm not going to read the article.

This long-form stuff is particularly sticky. If the story is told well, you're likely going to remember it as true (or at least credible) even the story wasn't credible in the first place.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#46

Post by InTheArena » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:34 AM UTC

MilnerRoute wrote: post #40

InTheArena wrote: post #34

I might have missed this in the article - but I believe a separate recent article pointed out that none of the animals tested from the market had any signs of this virus - this China was looking at other sites. Just not the wuhan lab which is a few hundred yards from the market? There were also articles about a year before covid about how people were dealing out about the lax security of the Wuhan lab. https://thebul…

It's probably more helpful if you can share the URLs of the articles you're citing. Snopes.com delved into the one about lax security, and it turned out to just be something somebody shared on a social media web site. (It had the name "ResearchGate", which many wrongly assumed meant it was an actual research paper when it was just a social media post.) https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/04/01/covid-19-bioweapon/

“ What the U.S. officials learned during their visits concerned them so much that they dispatched two diplomatic cables categorized as Sensitive But Unclassified back to Washington. The cables warned about safety and management weaknesses at the WIV lab and proposed more attention and help. The first cable, which I obtained, also warns that the lab’s work on bat coronaviruses and their potential human transmission represented a risk of a new SARS-like pandemic”

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#47

Post by kbaker » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:35 AM UTC

ineedasername wrote: post #6

I don't see any evidence for the speculation it was lab created (or modified into it's current form) except for an acknowledgement that the capability to do so exists. I don't doubt the possibility of such a thing occurring, but I just haven't seen any evidence to support this.

For any skeptics out there, take an open-minded look at this article:

https://nerdhaspower.weebly.com/blog/scientific-evidence-and...

It goes quite deep into the genetic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 relative to existing bat coronaviruses, laying out the case that it is definitely of a non-natural origin.

I am not anywhere near knowledgeable enough to fully evaluate the claims, but I would really enjoy seeing a rebuttal that is as clearly written to make the case for a natural cause. To me the Nature article just says 'nah, evolution is random, therefore SARS-CoV-2 randomly happened.' but it would be nice to see more detail. Especially with the closest ancestor of RaTG13 being decades of evolution away. (not to mention the questions around the origin of RaTG13 on the author's site...)

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#48

Post by mantap » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:38 AM UTC

mabbo wrote: post #27

> There is no direct evidence for these zoonotic possibilities, just as there is no direct evidence for an experimental mishap But there is so much more opportunity for the zoonotic possibilities. In fact, this is the seventh time we've seen Betacoronavirus cross from bats, through another animal, and then into humans. SARS came via palm civets. MERS came via camels. Four more types cause a mild cold only and so they…

Perhaps paradoxically the fact that other betacoronaviruses have made the jump to humans naturally, would increase the probability that this was a lab accident: scientists want to study the most likely candidates for a pandemic.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#49

Post by InTheArena » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:38 AM UTC

https://thebulletin.org/2014/03/threatened-pandemics-and-lab...

Coronavirus a have escaped labs on at least ten occasions. At least four times from China.

Why is this article controversial and this comment being downvoted - Other then China doesn’t like it? Isn’t it reasonable to think they might have been a eleventh?

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#50

Post by InTheArena » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:40 AM UTC

MilnerRoute wrote: post #40

InTheArena wrote: post #34

I might have missed this in the article - but I believe a separate recent article pointed out that none of the animals tested from the market had any signs of this virus - this China was looking at other sites. Just not the wuhan lab which is a few hundred yards from the market? There were also articles about a year before covid about how people were dealing out about the lax security of the Wuhan lab. https://thebul…

It's probably more helpful if you can share the URLs of the articles you're citing. Snopes.com delved into the one about lax security, and it turned out to just be something somebody shared on a social media web site. (It had the name "ResearchGate", which many wrongly assumed meant it was an actual research paper when it was just a social media post.) https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/04/01/covid-19-bioweapon/

In April 2004, China reported a case of SARS in a nurse who had cared for a researcher at the Chinese National Institute of Virology (NIV). While ill, the researcher had traveled twice by train from Beijing to Anhui province, where she was nursed by her mother, a physician, who fell ill and died. The nurse in turn infected five third-generation cases, causing no deaths.

Subsequent investigation uncovered three unrelated laboratory infections in different researchers at the NIV. At least of two primary patients had never worked with live SARS virus. Many shortcomings in biosecurity were found at the NIV, and the specific cause of the outbreak was traced to an inadequately inactivated preparation of SARS virus that was used in general (that is, not biosecure) laboratory areas, including one where the primary cases worked. It had not been tested to confirm its safety after inactivation, as it should have been.