Live data from Hacker News

Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

eu.usatoday.com

901–910 of 1001 posts

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#901
I believe US intelligence already knows this was lab leak because one of the Biden's intel guys said it was probably "gain of function" research that led to leak. But I think it was accidental not on purpose because the US would retaliate as fiercely as it was retaliation to Japan for Pearl Harbor.

Not the first not the last pandemic that originated in China: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/article/140123-...

Some time ago I shared here on HN a US research on "The debate on potential pandemic pathogen creation" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OaTwPAQ3v0

Interesting research on bio weaponry.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#902

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. We could also invoke Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation is usually the correct one. A coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan China miles away from a Virology Lab that studies coronavirus and has in the past exercised gain of function research on cornoviruses specifically with novel lung ACE2 bind may have had a lab accident and a live virus broke out if the lab. The problem is the media labeling common sense as con…

Yup, though to nitpick, Occam's Razor actually says that the explanation requiring the fewest assumptions is most likely the correct one. Subtle but important difference. Otherwise, /agree, especially with the media being confused.

Why do people rush to differentiate, e.g, the diffs bt correlation and causation, but never question Occam's razor (I'm officially leading the charge to cease its capitalization), which isn't science, isn't a law, but merely a design principle.

It's been treated as an irrefutable endpoint at best and as a spell at worst. I find it a convenient false authority for lazy thinking.

Consider a statement like: "an expressive programming language is necessary to manage a resource distribution system such as a food production, processing, and delivery system." One could quote Occam and say "nah let's hunt and gather," but how is that consistent with our values? Ergo, Occam's quote is a selectively applied false authority. We need to use our heads and put it to bed!

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#903

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can be pride over shame of incompetence maybe ? the wuhan labs are said to be lacking in standard safety biohazard practices.. so investigating may reveal that.

You gotta remember the culture, and that everything in China is political. You can't just say "oops" and learn the lessons. Any investigations will have the goal not of finding the truth, but of minimising damage to the political powers that control it.

but what the motivations of us scientists like Peter Daszak who were single handedly responsible for suppressing lab leak theory.

It wasn't the ccp, it was Peter Daszak and co.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#904

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m baffled at what branch of science involves being able to call it the “China virus” rather than COVID. When was Science about prescribing blame?

Gee I don't know.. maybe going 100 years back with the Spanish Flu? West Nile virus, Zika virus, Ebola.. all those are okay but saying Wuhan virus is considered racist.

None of those follow WHO's best practices for naming new human infectious diseases, published in 2015.

https://www.who.int/news/item/08-05-2015-who-issues-best-pra...

“In recent years, several new human infectious diseases have emerged. The use of names such as ‘swine flu’ and ‘Middle East Respiratory Syndrome’ has had unintended negative impacts by stigmatizing certain communities or economic sectors,” says Dr Keiji Fukuda, Assistant Director-General for Health Security, WHO. “This may seem like a trivial issue to some, but disease names really do matter to the people who are directly affected. We’ve seen certain disease names provoke a backlash against members of particular religious or ethnic communities, create unjustified barriers to travel, commerce and trade, and trigger needless slaughtering of food animals. This can have serious consequences for peoples’ lives and livelihoods.”

Diseases are often given common names by people outside of the scientific community. Once disease names are established in common usage through the Internet and social media, they are difficult to change, even if an inappropriate name is being used. Therefore, it is important that whoever first reports on a newly identified human disease uses an appropriate name that is scientifically sound and socially acceptable.

The best practices state that a disease name should consist of generic descriptive terms, based on the symptoms that the disease causes (e.g. respiratory disease, neurologic syndrome, watery diarrhoea) and more specific descriptive terms when robust information is available on how the disease manifests, who it affects, its severity or seasonality (e.g. progressive, juvenile, severe, winter). If the pathogen that causes the disease is known, it should be part of the disease name (e.g. coronavirus, influenza virus, salmonella).

Terms that should be avoided in disease names include geographic locations (e.g. Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, Spanish Flu, Rift Valley fever), people’s names (e.g. Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, Chagas disease), species of animal or food (e.g. swine flu, bird flu, monkey pox), cultural, population, industry or occupational references (e.g. legionnaires), and terms that incite undue fear (e.g. unknown, fatal, epidemic).

WHO developed the best practices for naming new human infectious diseases in close collaboration with the World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), and in consultation with experts leading the International Classification of Diseases (ICD).

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#905

This is a great article explaining why a lab leak should always be a suspect. The alternative theory is that a virus traveled on its own (via bats or other animals) from bat caves 900km away to Wuhan where there are 2 labs researching bats. One of the labs is lesser known but is right next to the seafood market and the hospital where the outbreak was first known. [1] This article points out that a lab outbreak could…

> We need to avoid demonizing China over this if we want to ever find out the truth and learn how to prevent another pandemic outbreak.

I think it was western scientists like Peter Daszak who suppressed lab leak theory in fear that their research will be demonized forever.

It wasn't CCP who called everyone consipiracy theorists it was Peter Daszak and co [1]. I don't understand how he can be the WHO investigator of his own lab [2].

1. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/947620

2. https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4119101

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#906
post #580

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WHO should sequence all the Virus DNAs from that lab in 2015-2019 compare that with all the Covid sequences.

I can’t find the link but the virus they took from sick miners to study and what is now called covid-19 were 95-99% the same. A fellow did their masters thesis on it in 2016 or so

Couple of clarifications. (The fact that the term 'Mojiang' does not show up in the comments yet is telling about where awareness currently is on the topic).

1. RaTG13 came from the copper mine in Mojiang in 2013. (The TG in RaTG13 refers to TongGuan, a township in Mojiang, all per Shi Zhengli's accounting of the sequence's provenance).

2. Prior to which and also in 2013, six miners in this same Mojiang mine came down deftly ill with a respiratory illness. Three of them died from their illness.

3. One report on their cases says they had IgM antibodies to SARS. Another report says they had IgG.

4. There's been no data to support Shi Zhengli's assertion that they died of a fungal infection. (That said, independent of her account, there is a background precedent that there have been examples of people who have had strong fungal infections from exposure to bat guano in certain caves).

5. Shi Zhengli's team returned to the same Mojiang cave again and again to sample for viruses from the mine's bats and rodents. (Goal for this and the broad purpose of her teams' research is to demonstrate for pandemic prevention purposes which viruses are evolutionarily close enough to be able to hop to humans).

https://twitter.com/Ayjchan/status/1279755695382986757?s=20 (Starting-point source for the above: Broad Institute genomics postdoc Alina Chan)

Multiple coronaviruses gathered from this mine remain unpublished, despite a year into the pandemic and an entire WHO-convened study group to Wuhan. https://twitter.com/jbloom_lab/status/1372383456081027076?s=... (source: Bloom Lab of Fred Hutch Institute)

If you're interested in learning more, I would highly recommend following members of the Washington Post-cited DRASTIC team.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/02/05/coronavir...

The DRASTIC folks, some of them postdocs themselves, have been at this for a year, gathering & archiving evidence like the case reports described above (that unsurprisingly typically become scrubbed from the source after getting brought to light).

The twitter hashtag #DRASTIC is a reasonable place to start.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#907

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's been my impression too fwiw. There's now a large segment of people who are primed to immediately accept the conspiracy theory over the Hanlon's Razor principle: "Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity (or accident)".

Sure. We could also invoke Occam's Razor. The simplest explanation is usually the correct one. A coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan China miles away from a Virology Lab that studies coronavirus and has in the past exercised gain of function research on cornoviruses specifically with novel lung ACE2 bind may have had a lab accident and a live virus broke out if the lab. The problem is the media labeling common sense as con…

I invoked Occam's Razor when I wondered what was more likely: that it was spread via a wet market or escaped from a lab with biosecurity protocols staffed by professionals?

Of course I still don't know and my ideas regarding the latter have changed because of this article but I'm now pretty sure that I don't have enough information to invoke Occam's Razor in any kind of insightful or effective way.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#908

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not a cultural thing, it's a universal human/organizational thing.

That is true, but the difference is the lack of accountability, which is cultural/societal/political - there are virtually no external forces to counter a potentially dishonest official narrative. A one party state means that there is no pressure from political opponents (political battles inside the party will never trump the party itself). And there is no pressure from journalists - China has the worst score for pr…

In theory that might be true, and it's the way they teach it in American civics class.

In practice, Xi went on an 'anti-corruption campaign' that purged all his political enemies from power as his first initiative. The exact opposite of what your theory predicts, and actually a stronger cyclical purge than our typical repubs->dems->repubs one.

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#909

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> TLDR; The likelihood of it being lab related is high. The likelihood of it being directly malicious low. And this sounds like a reasonable possibility to be explored. Accidents happen. Lapses in procedures happen. The problem is that early on, and still in some circles, lab related equates to malicious bio-weapon and/or China purposely attempting to destroy the world. It's important to separate the two, and hopeful…

> in some circles, lab related equates to malicious bio-weapon Well that's the problem with reducing every argument to absurd extremes. It's part of why modern political discourse is fundamentally broken. We counter discourse out of fear of what the extreme form of that accusation will be - not based on what the argument is actually saying.

Exactly ! And this applies in other 'ever-controversial' issues

Re: Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed

#910
post #846
post #785

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I uh, don’t see anything in this article except fluff? It basically says ‘researchers were in wuhan’. The original I read had such helpful statements as ‘the chinese government insisted that every outside researcher was accompanies by a chinese partner’, ‘the government took days to procure the data, and when they finally did, a lot was missing’ and ‘a visit to x was denied for unclear reasons’. I’m sorry, I’m vaguel…

Also an interesting thing - the WIV used to put all their virus sequences in a publically available database. Around autumn 2019 they took it down they said because people were trying to hack it. I think it's still confidential even to the WHO. I mean if they were worried about hackers they could just publish a copy of the data.

Is there a source for this? My Google-fu isn't turning up anything.
Post reply on HN