Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out • Hacker News Board

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#241

Post by rPlayer6554 » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 9:55 PM UTC

jeduehr wrote: post #217

rPlayer6554 wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry man, but wouldn't you be able to just reply directly if you feel inclined to disagree with the parent. I'm not saying HN is entitled to your opinion but it feels a little lazy and disrespectful to the parent to say "you're wrong" then drop a link off site to a massive general summary of the situation in order to respond to a few specific points. Especially since point 3 has a source from a decently reputabl…

Hi, I actually ended up responding below to point 3 in particular but I also respond to it in my original post. Very few, if any of these arguments are novel. The reason you will find extremely few people with actual credentials in the science we're discussing in these discussions is that working scientists don't have the time or will to get into these debates with people who wouldn't have the faintest idea how to ac…

That's fair if you don't want to engage because you feel you don't have time, but the spirit of the website is to have an open discussion. That means people will say wrong things. If you don't have time to engage with that....it's totally fine. But just saying I'm right and dropping a large read goes against the spirt of discussion. No one is forcing you to. If you wanted to just do a general response to everyone just make a comment on the main article with your link.

Good luck on your exam as well.

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#242

Post by jeduehr » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

mistermann wrote: post #224

jeduehr wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone is citing the evidence of the SARS-CoV-1 leak as reason to believe that viruses escape labs. But you know what's interesting about that? We know about the CoV-1 leak because /the chinese scientists told us about it./ They owned up to it and told the world and the biosafety community (the people with degrees in these things) helped china become more standard and respectable and safe. And now 15 years later, w…

What you wrote here is not wrong, but point number 3 stated: > 3. Lab leaks happen more often than most people realize[1] As I see it, there are two variables involved: - how frequently lab leaks happen (total number of historic leaks - known + unknown) - people's realization / awareness of how often they happen > And now 15 years later, with zero evidence, we're accusing them of covering up the same thing. Regardles…

Re: inspections, Shi Zhengli has been yes.

Her government, not so much.

I am definitely not a fan of the Chinese government. But the scientists I've met at conferences and the papers I've reviewed from their labs have been of a very high quality.

Not saying such people could not commit atrocities or coverups like this. But I do find it personally less likely.

That isn't the evidence I rely on most in my personal assessment, though. The epidemiology and molecular clock data points to a zoonotic origin outside of Wuhan. Check out here to see what I mean: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/-/fqpcfs2

Which makes the lab leak a whole lot less interesting of an idea since its' circumstantial evidence isn't actually the circumstance anymore.

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#243

Post by endisneigh » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

neolog wrote: post #223

endisneigh wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've completely misunderstood my point. My point is that we're McDonalds - not Chipotle. Should McDonalds be investigating Chipotle's problems or their own? It's really that simple... If you believe McDonalds in this analogy should be investigating the origins of Chipotle's problems as opposed to resolving their ongoing issue then we'll just have to agree to disagree.

American Airlines can't reduce its risk by reading Delta's FAA incident reports?

That situation isn't analogous, but American Airlines would reduce its risk more by reading its own incident reports compared to Delta's, yes. In general focusing on one's own failings is superior to focusing on another's.

Are you serious?

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#244

Post by Banyonite » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

jeduehr wrote: post #209

ricksunny wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we can afford to wait and let experts do their jobs We can emphatically not expect the experts to do their job. Those cited as having the most expertise (virologists who undertake gain-of-function research, symbolically under the auspices of HHS’ toothless P3CO regulation framework) have the most to lose from a finding that the pandemic’s source was a lab leak. They lose all the grants and public financial support,…

Actually a lot of virologists are also critical of GOF. Just look at public health people, epidemiologists. Folks like Andrea Sant, Michael Osterholm, David Topham, etc. These folks criticize GOF all the time, and are a big part of the group that helps write regulations to make Virology research safe. But you know what these same virologists also don't believe? That SARS-COV-2 was cooked up in a lab. That should tell…

> That's why when consensus exists about something, you should respect it. There is quite a large consensus about this one.

Respecting a consensus is reasonable. That having been said, I would be interested to hear what the virologists to whom you refer think about Ralph Baric's work. Ralph Baric is a very well-known virologist specializing in corona virology. His group synthesized quite a few SARS-CoV variants, a number of years before SARS-CoV-2 made its appearance. While there's no proof that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab, there are quite a few studies describing the synthesis of different SARS-CoV variants, some quite dangerous.

From one of many papers on which he was a co-author (https://www.pnas.org/content/113/11/3048.full):

"Using the SARS-CoV infectious clone as a template (7), we designed and synthesized a full-length infectious clone of WIV1-CoV consisting of six plasmids that could be enzymatically cut, ligated together, and electroporated into cells to rescue replication competent progeny virions (Fig. S1A). In addition to the full-length clone, we also produced WIV1-CoV chimeric virus that replaced the SARS spike with the WIV1 spike within the mouse-adapted backbone (WIV1-MA15, Fig. S1B)"

EDIT: jeduehr, given your background in virology, I would be interested in any technical critique you may have regarding the Yuri Deigin article referenced in my post below.

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#245

Post by axiosgunnar » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 9:57 PM UTC

jeduehr wrote: post #238

axiosgunnar wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can't expect him to restrict his criticism to the content of your arguments and not your person if you claim your argument must be true because you have a PhD and no time to retype your essay for us lowlifes.

I didn't say my argument must be true because I have a PhD. I said you should trust that I'm not talking out of my ass because I have a PhD. I'd much rather you read my arguments and criticize my content. The fact is, criticisms in these things come from all angles. I was simply preempting one type of criticism in saying I have a PhD so I have thought about this and studied it a lot. And then directly responding to a…

I would like to criticise your content but you haven't posted any. You have simply claimed the posters claims #1 and #3 were false "because you said so".

Anyways I applaud and respect you for working your way up to the PhD and I am sure you are trying your best to spread the truth, but it would be more effective if you rehashed the main parts of that essay for all the readers here to see if you want to clear up whatever errors the poster has put out into the world.

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#246

Post by jeduehr » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 9:58 PM UTC

rebelos wrote: post #213

throwaway4good wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are missing the important bit: The lab leak would have to be covered up by the Chinese authorities and the WHO would some how have had to be in on it. Read the section in the WHO report on COVID19 and listen to the reputable international scientist that actually went and visited the lab and interviewed the people who worked there. https://www.who.int/health-topics/coronavirus/origins-of-the...

To think that China couldn't or wouldn't carefully control this situation and what information is available to external parties is being credulous to the point of this sounding like propaganda. They did everything they could to downplay the severity of the issue for months while they had people in hazmat suits trying to decon Wuhan.

Why didn't they do the same for the SARS-CoV-1 leaks that happened in Beijing over a decade ago, then?

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#247

Post by DharmaPolice » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 10:00 PM UTC

muskox2 wrote: post #195

mywittyname wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's cuts both ways. Some of the UK Politicians happily throwing around "China/Wuhan virus" got butt-hurt on Twitter when people called the B117 strain the "UK Variant." We shouldn't be using that terminology for variants either. While I understand that people largely use location names for the sake of convenience, it really doesn't feel good to be a person from one of those locations.

In my opinion, location names are the easiest and most memorable way to refer to variants. The tradition is as old as the "Spanish flu"... which isn't from Spain at all.

They might be the easiest way to refer to variants but it does seem to incentivise countries/regions not disclosing/testing for new variants in the first place.

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#248

Post by ChemSpider » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 10:00 PM UTC

mywittyname wrote: post #149

yumraj wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not xenophobic for people from the US.... While racism and xenophobia is real, it has been and is being used very effectively, especially by China but others too, to deflect/blunt genuine criticisms and claims. Just as an amusing example, we talk openly about UK variant, SA variant, Brazil variant - but never talk about original as Wuhan variant - it is simply coronavirus.

It's cuts both ways. Some of the UK Politicians happily throwing around "China/Wuhan virus" got butt-hurt on Twitter when people called the B117 strain the "UK Variant." We shouldn't be using that terminology for variants either. While I understand that people largely use location names for the sake of convenience, it really doesn't feel good to be a person from one of those locations.

"Some...". Well, a few right wing idiots. Even the BBC calls it UK variant: https://www.bbc.com/news/health-55659820

> it really doesn't feel good to be a person from one of those locations.

I am from one of these locations and could not care less.

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#249

Post by endisneigh » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 10:03 PM UTC

ckw wrote: post #88

endisneigh wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for your comment, but your comment is precisely the kind of comment I disagree with. What difference does it make? Let's say that it's both lab-grown and wild game. OK, so that means we should scrutinize both. OK, then. Now what? No amount of scrutiny can prevent an accident from occurring. It's not as if this pandemic happens every year. We're talking about a once in a century event. Not to mention some co…

If the virus was a product of gain of function research, the primary purpose of which is to reduce the risk of pandemics, then the research becomes much more difficult to justify. The argument I guess becomes then, yeah, periodically we’ll cause a pandemic, and millions of people will die, but we’ll be so much better at dealing with diseases that arise naturally, as SARS and MERS did, that on balance it will be worth…

OK, so what. What can we do to make China stop doing this research if they want to? Are we going to go to war over this? No. Are we going to have an embargo with China? No?

So effectively this becomes a situation of "oh yeah they should've not had that accident, oh well." In the USA we've had the same problem ourselves (lab accidents with pathogens), and we banned gain of function research and ended up removing the ban a few years later.

The entire exercise is meaningless. Note - I'm not even saying we shouldn't research the origins of COVID, what I'm saying is, the result doesn't really matter.

Re: Scientists who say the lab-leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 shouldn't be ruled out

#250

Post by rebelos » Fri, Apr 09, 2021, 10:04 PM UTC

jeduehr wrote: post #246

rebelos wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To think that China couldn't or wouldn't carefully control this situation and what information is available to external parties is being credulous to the point of this sounding like propaganda. They did everything they could to downplay the severity of the issue for months while they had people in hazmat suits trying to decon Wuhan.

Why didn't they do the same for the SARS-CoV-1 leaks that happened in Beijing over a decade ago, then?

That's a terrible counterargument full of logical holes coming from someone who's supposedly a "PhD in virology". But you're also a green account that's so rabidly and suspiciously coming to China's defense throughout these comments that I literally assign no credence whatsoever to anything you've said. Several other scientists here have already eviscerated the arguments in your r/science post as well.

I don't know who you are, but "unbiased virologist commenter" is definitely not it.