Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 662 posts

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

#271

Post by cronix »

endisneigh wrote: post #92
engineer_22 wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good, I'm glad we agree that investigation matters :)

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.

I don't understand your analogy. If a sizeable population of the world got sick from eating at Chipotle...and it was easily communicably spreadable infecting even those that never ate there...and people died as a result (3 MILLION)...and it caused massive world-wide economic damage...I'd bet they'd be quite interested in the cause no matter where they worked. In your analogy, the impact wasn't just limited to those who ate at Chipotle. It was everyone.

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

#272

Post by AndrewBissell »

jeduehr wrote: post #236
loveistheanswer wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which part of #1 is false? 1.1 Gain of function research primarily uses samples collected from nature 1.2 and seeks to stimulate their evolution in as natural a way as possible to learn how viruses evolve in nature. 1.3 If such viruses were to escape the lab, they would appear "natural"

1.3. you cannot take any virus known in nature (like Ratg-13 for example) and "cook" it for long enough or in any specific way to make it look like SARS-CoV-2. You can't do it in the time we've been able to handle viruses like this or modify them in the ways we can. You'd have needed to start a few decades ago, have tools that we've only just invented, and a huge number of willing test subjects. I cover this in extre…

> and a huge number of willing test subjects

Who said the test subjects have to be willing? That's never stopped our government before.

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

#273

Post by tinus_hn »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #263
tinus_hn wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s because they have been trained to think: corona leaked from a lab is tin foil hat conspiracy theory.

Heh when can we start discussing the "lab intentional release" hypothesis?

As far as I’m concerned you can start right now, I’m not afraid of ideas. I think however that, unless someone makes a really big mistake, it’ll never be possible to prove such a hypothesis.

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

#274

Post by rossdavidh »

endisneigh wrote: post #42

Every time this comes I ask - "so what?" So again, I ask - even if it's true, so what? It's impossible to conclusively prove, and even if proven what exactly is proven? That an accident occurred? OK, so what? The article attempts to answer this: > The vitriol also obscures a broader imperative, Relman says, which is that uncovering the virus’s origins is crucial to stopping the next pandemic. Threats from both lab ac…

"Even if China was malicious and deliberately sent it off to us, it could've been easily stopped but we didn't do it..."

Hmmm...if it could "easily" have been stopped, then why did every single country in Europe and North America simultaneously fail to do so?

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

#275

Post by rossdavidh »

So, I agree, but I find myself thinking it doesn't matter now. What matters is:

1) could an accident at a lab lead to another pandemic in the future? yes, certainly

2) ok then, how are we going to prevent that?

This seems much like what the world had to figure out after nuclear power became widespread; how do we keep this new technology from leading to catastrophic problems? It required international inspection, sanctions for nations who don't comply, and even big powers had to play along.

Whether this pandemic started in a lab or not, we need a system to prevent the rapid proliferation of biologically advanced research, in more and more countries, from resulting in pandemics. So, the question of whether China had a lab leak that caused this one seems irrelevant at this point; what we need to do going forwards is the same regardless.

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

#276

Post by jeduehr »

loveistheanswer wrote: post #253
jeduehr wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1.3. you cannot take any virus known in nature (like Ratg-13 for example) and "cook" it for long enough or in any specific way to make it look like SARS-CoV-2. You can't do it in the time we've been able to handle viruses like this or modify them in the ways we can. You'd have needed to start a few decades ago, have tools that we've only just invented, and a huge number of willing test subjects. I cover this in extre…

Thank you for the detailed response. As a layperson, these specifics are over my head. Assuming everything you say is true, that still would not rule out a lab leak of a virus collected from nature, would it? >You can't do it in the time we've been able to handle viruses like this or modify them in the ways we can. You'd have needed to start a few decades ago, have tools that we've only just invented, and a huge numb…

Yes, a lab leak of a virus collected from nature is the most plausible of these lab theories.

But the epidemiological evidence points to covid-19 originating outside wuhan entirely, that's why I find that theory less likely, among other reasons. See here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/-/fqpcfs2

Also if they had collected it in nature, it would have been in their freezers, or likely that people involved in that research would have been patient zero etc. See here:

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/-/fqpcf33

https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/-/fqpce2z

Wuhan institute of virology also aren't the labs I'm worried about. They were built and designed by very reputable people in the virology community. Not saying you should trust them, but at least recognize that the people who are most qualified to distrust them think it's unlikely.

See here: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/-/fqpccr1

>Does this imply covid-19 has been circulating in humans a long time?

No, it implies it was relatively stable passing amongst several species of bats (and other related mammals) before a single or a few crossover events into humans recently.

It's behaving exactly like we would expect a zoonotic transmission to behave. It's not very well adapted to bats, it's not very well adapted to humans. It's sort of "promiscuous" likely because it has infected several different species over several decades before arriving in humans.

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

#277

Post by jeduehr »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #272
jeduehr wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1.3. you cannot take any virus known in nature (like Ratg-13 for example) and "cook" it for long enough or in any specific way to make it look like SARS-CoV-2. You can't do it in the time we've been able to handle viruses like this or modify them in the ways we can. You'd have needed to start a few decades ago, have tools that we've only just invented, and a huge number of willing test subjects. I cover this in extre…

> and a huge number of willing test subjects Who said the test subjects have to be willing? That's never stopped our government before.

Okay they at least need to stay quiet, sit in their warehouse of cages, and no journalists need to find out about it. And there can't be any leaks from anyone involved suddenly gaining a deathbed conscience.

The conspiracy becomes so immense it's absurd the many thousands of people who would have to keep quiet.

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

#278

Post by [deleted] »

jeduehr wrote: post #264
ChemSpider wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Alina Chan seems at least equally qualified and disagrees: https://twitter.com/Ayjchan/status/1374108473571557377

Alina Chan, also not a virologist. She's a geneticst or biochemist. She just uses some viruses in her research sometimes, like basically all biochemists. Calling her qualified in virus biosafety is like saying someone with a PhD in Visual Arts is qualified as an expert in ballpoint pens because they've used them to draw. Sure they know some things about using ballpoint pens and which ones they prefer, but would you t…

[deleted]

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

#279

Post by defen »

rossdavidh wrote: post #275

So, I agree, but I find myself thinking it doesn't matter now. What matters is: 1) could an accident at a lab lead to another pandemic in the future? yes, certainly 2) ok then, how are we going to prevent that? This seems much like what the world had to figure out after nuclear power became widespread; how do we keep this new technology from leading to catastrophic problems? It required international inspection, sanc…

> ok then, how are we going to prevent that?

By not doing bioweapons or gain-of-function research? Wasn't the whole point of that research to prevent these sorts of pandemics? Even if COVID-19 wasn't from a lab leak...were those experiments actually helpful in being able to combat the pandemic? The answer seems to be no.

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

#280

Post by erdos4d »

endisneigh wrote: post #42

Every time this comes I ask - "so what?" So again, I ask - even if it's true, so what? It's impossible to conclusively prove, and even if proven what exactly is proven? That an accident occurred? OK, so what? The article attempts to answer this: > The vitriol also obscures a broader imperative, Relman says, which is that uncovering the virus’s origins is crucial to stopping the next pandemic. Threats from both lab ac…

I'm with you, this has a borderline culture-war vibe to it, especially how some people are very into it and bring it up a lot. I don't see how an accident or natural origin changes anything.
Post reply on HN