The Lab Leak Hypothesis • Hacker News Board

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#51

Post by ivanhoe » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:43 AM UTC

peteradio wrote: post #31

CoffeeDregs wrote: post #13

This is a good, balanced article. I've been of a similar mind for over a year now. The chances of the CCP releasing a self-harming bioweapon in order to harm the US seems silly. But an accident involving a well-intentioned gain-of-function experiment seems quite possible and was something that the US was concerned about with its own gain-of-function research. In any case, this, like so much of this other nonsense aro…

Not disagreeing with your Likelihoods but I'm not sure your evidence really makes sense. It does not really follow that a self-harm would always be avoided, the game of chess is all about sacrifice. Perhaps China thinks the West is short-sighted and would be politically bound to act against its long term interest, so why not? Maybe there are other reasons why you think the "CCP Virus" hypothesis is 360 stupid besides…

Wouldn't it be way easier and more logical to start the infection on a foreign soil? All the previous similar epidemics were successfully contained before reaching Europe, and if there was not for quite serious fuck ups in the beginning (Italian dude not even showing up on the meetings, etc.) perhaps even this one could have been stopped early on. So if it was China wanting to hurt US, then they'd have to be seriously stupid to first infect themselves and hope it will somehow reach US over Europe. It'd be like a terrorist who sends a bomb to their own address in hope that it will somehow eventually reach their enemies. It makes zero sense.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#52

Post by incrudible » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:43 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…

> So why would Covid-19 even need to come from a lab? We (humans) had wet markets filled with animals, including the very bats that carry the base virus. It's the perfect breeding ground to create a pandemic-level virus and probably a few thousand more viruses of lesser impact.

The question of how it got to Wuhan all the way from Southern China remains unanswered. There weren't any bats sold on the wet markets, nor has any other host animal been identified.

The virologists working in Wuhan did travel all the way to Southern China to collect bat coronavirus samples and they did perform gain-of-function experiments. Viruses - even highly pathogenic ones - have escaped labs on numerous occasions. There is a plausible scenario here.

There is another plausible scenario, which is that "ground zero" for Sars-CoV-2 is actually Southern China, just like Sars-CoV-1. However, the virus wasn't discovered there first, because it didn't cause enough illness. The outbreak in Wuhan, the 9th largest city in China, would've been discovered by chance.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#53

Post by travisoneill1 » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:44 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…

There are thousands of wet markets in China, but very few virus labs. Out of all the wet markets in China, the virus just happened to originate at the one right next to the virus lab? That alone is enough evidence to make the lab escape theory the most likely origin. Though it's far from certain.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#54

Post by dehrmann » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:47 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…

> "Out of a total of ten fiction books, he also wrote three erotic novels."

I recently listened to the 99% Invisible mini stories episode, and one was on novel adaptations of films. One of the points about the authors who write them is they often take the work to pay the bills.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#55

Post by incrudible » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:49 AM UTC

travisoneill1 wrote: post #53

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…

There are thousands of wet markets in China, but very few virus labs. Out of all the wet markets in China, the virus just happened to originate at the one right next to the virus lab? That alone is enough evidence to make the lab escape theory the most likely origin. Though it's far from certain.

The virus likely didn't originate at the wildlife market, because many of the early patients had no connection to it.

There is a building of the Wuhan CDC (not the WIV) near the wildlife market, but the Wuhan CDC has numerous buildings and this particular one doesn't seem to be implicated in coronavirus research.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#56

Post by travisoneill1 » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:49 AM UTC

MilnerRoute wrote: post #26

CoffeeDregs wrote: post #13

This is a good, balanced article. I've been of a similar mind for over a year now. The chances of the CCP releasing a self-harming bioweapon in order to harm the US seems silly. But an accident involving a well-intentioned gain-of-function experiment seems quite possible and was something that the US was concerned about with its own gain-of-function research. In any case, this, like so much of this other nonsense aro…

The "likely vector" would be the millions of peasants living near bat caves in rural China (who actually have already been shown to have antibodies to bat viruses). And some of whom traveled to the market. https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/23/8417296... So I would upgrade that quite a bit from "moderate-low." (One of the researchers in this NPR article seems to rate it as an obvious suspect, so I'd ca…

Those millions of peasants living near bat caves would have traveled to thousands of markets all over China, but the virus originated at the one market in China that is basically across the street from a virus lab? It's not impossible, but my money is on the lab.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#57

Post by setgree » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:51 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…

I read Baker's 'House of Holes' in 2014 and enjoyed it a lot. At least among a certain set, he's a well-known & respected author (here's a NYT review of House of Holes [0]). It's perfectly intelligible for a book about sex to be whimsical, raunchy, and intellectually serious all at once. He's also written a pacifist take on the Allies' involvement in WW II [1].

I agree that neglecting to include a bio was a strange choice. But, as Jim Geraghty at National Review points out today [2], The venue (New York Magazine) is what puts this hypothesis into the mainstream. Conservatives have been suggesting this was a possibility for a long time, but a NYM piece (potentially) legitimizes the idea to a very different audience:

> Baker is pretty blunt about the fact that many scientists have had these suspicions, or at least concerns, since the beginning of the pandemic, but didn’t want to speak publicly about the possibility of a lab accident while the Trump administration was touting the same idea... New York magazine reaches a different audience from National Review, and it is good that a more left-of-center audience will be exposed to all of the evidence and arguments about this possibility. The possibility of a lab accident should not be seen as another crackpot conspiracy theory in a year full of them.

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/books/house-of-holes-nich...

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/books/review/Toibin-t.htm...

[2] https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/01/the-wuhan-lab-leak-hy...

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#58

Post by dehrmann » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:51 AM UTC

anon9001 wrote: post #45

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.

I recently read the Atlantic piece about semi-rich kids getting world-class coaches of prep school sports (crew, lacrosse, etc.) so they might be able to get on the team at elite colleges. Oops. At least it sounded like the general gist of the story was accurate.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#59

Post by travisoneill1 » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:51 AM UTC

incrudible wrote: post #55

travisoneill1 wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are thousands of wet markets in China, but very few virus labs. Out of all the wet markets in China, the virus just happened to originate at the one right next to the virus lab? That alone is enough evidence to make the lab escape theory the most likely origin. Though it's far from certain.

The virus likely didn't originate at the wildlife market, because many of the early patients had no connection to it. There is a building of the Wuhan CDC (not the WIV) near the wildlife market, but the Wuhan CDC has numerous buildings and this particular one doesn't seem to be implicated in coronavirus research.

2 good points. Being in the same city as the virus lab is a lot less suspicious than being across the street.

Re: The Lab Leak Hypothesis

#60

Post by onionisafruit » Tue, Jan 05, 2021, 2:52 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…

You point out the author lacks credentials. That’s a fair point. What isn’t relevant is whether he’s written novels...erotic or otherwise. No need to being that up.