"I have heard so many news about a guy winning more than 100 millions from Powerball. I couldn't image that it won't happen to me in the future." That's my translation of this article.
Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
131–140 of 1001 posts
Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
#132IMO it's very likely to have originated in a lab leak. It doesn't matter much however since there is no evidence, and any evidence of such will likely be covered up. Being culpable for a disaster on this scale would be unprecedented in the economic reparations, so much so that we'll likely never find the origins.
> it's very likely to have originated in a lab leak What evidence is informing this belief? i.e. what is your model for assigning "P>0.5" to the probability here? For example do you think the SARS outbreak circa 2002 was also a lab escape?
You misquoted me, I said 'IMO...'
I've worked in several labs, created several viruses (non-pathogenic) myself. People are careless, did you read the article?
Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
#133Except that experts have visited Wuhan and never found evidence of the theory proposed in this article. I think it is time to stop spreading even more disinformation about this deadly disease. If the US government had taken the virus seriously as the Chinese did, we most certainly wouldn't be in this situation.
When did experts ever visit the labs in question?
Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
#134This reminds me of the conspiracy theory book, Lab 257. There was a lab on Plum Island in the Long Island Sound that studied infectious diseases. If you trace back the spread of Lyme disease in time, you get two points. One in Connecticut, and one on Long Island, where workers got on the boats to Plum Island. The lab was studying diseases similar to Lyme disease at the time. All those are facts. The conspiracy theory…
> Archived specimens show that Lyme disease was endemic well before the establishment of Plum Island laboratory. > Additionally, Lyme disease was never a topic of research at Plum Island, according to the US Department of Homeland Security and Department of Agriculture. These are facts, too, in your link. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
You should read the actual book, because it addresses both of these points.
Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
#135Earlier quoted context omitted.
Outside of some noteworthy scummy politicians and a few partisan media outlets. I really haven't seen much in the way of MSM media pushing that theory as fact.
It doesn't matter if they're pushing this far-fetched hypothesis as "fact" or not, they're pushing it by continuously regurgitating such speculative FUD without evidence.
Not everything reported has to be a proven fact. Theories, ideas, there's room for all sorts of things in life that aren't certain.
Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
#136This article is written by a journalist who is clearly knowledgeable about safety practices and mistakes in US labs, but does not consider the extensive knowledge we have about the sequence of SARS-COV2. The preponderance of evidence supports a natural origin of the virus. This is no way exonerates the Wuhan government from possible culpability—indeed government officials did deliberately suppress information—but thi…
You are indeed misunderstanding the point.
Smallpox is also naturally originating virus. That doesn't prohibit it from leaking from a lab.
Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
#137This has honestly been my unbiased opinion since essentially day 1. I believe that the release was almost certainly a complete accident, but there's just no realistic chance a novel virus coincidentally originates in the same isolated place as a lab that specializes in that exact same type of virus. The denialists, including the WHO and CDC and everyone else, need to get real and own up to what happened and figure ou…
I'm not sure that this virus even behaves in this way where a BSL-4 worker could become infected. What we know now is that you need a concentration of virus particles over time in order to come down with the disease (in other words, you are most likely to catch it drinking in your friends living room for 4 hours with an infected person, than in a grocery store where an infected person might cough on you in line but t…
[deleted]
Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
#138I wouldn't dismiss it. I just haven't seen any evidence of it that I think 'proves' it.
Serious coronaviruses have jumped into people like, twice in the last 20 years entirely naturally[0], and so many more people have contact with animals outside of labs than within labs (orders of magnitude!), that it seems much more likely that SARS-CoV-2 jumped the same way than any lab-leak idea. Like, it's physically possible, and it would be important to know if that's what happened- people shouldn't dismiss it!-…
[deleted]
Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
#139This article is written by a journalist who is clearly knowledgeable about safety practices and mistakes in US labs, but does not consider the extensive knowledge we have about the sequence of SARS-COV2. The preponderance of evidence supports a natural origin of the virus. This is no way exonerates the Wuhan government from possible culpability—indeed government officials did deliberately suppress information—but thi…
I think you are confusing “lab leak” with “lab manufactured.”
Why would it be more feasible this virus is leaked from the lab other than some wild animals from the market itself?
Either can be equally believable yet impossible to prove.
Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed
#140Wow. Why every comment questioned your argument is downvoted or even dead?
> is-ought 34 minutes ago [dead] [–]
> Can you link to something that proves this is the criteria used for lab placement?
How is this even dead? It's only asking for a reference.