The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins • Hacker News Board

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#311

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:25 AM UTC

lmm wrote: post #303

alexkcd wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article literally cites a statement put out by a respected medical journal on Feb. 29, 2020, and signed by 27 scientists, "roundly rejecting the lab-leak hypothesis, effectively casting it as a xenophobic cousin to climate change denialism and anti-vaxxism." Whatever your recollection of "rank-and-file scientists" attitudes is, the narrative on record is to the contrary.

Rank-and-file scientists tend to stay out of that kind of political statement-making IME, just as when you see a statement from the student union of XZY university condemning whatever that tells you very little about what rank-and-file students of that university are thinking. So I don't see a contradiction here.

[deleted]

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#312

Post by Jarwain » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:25 AM UTC

lamontcg wrote: post #185

> Wade devoted a full section to the “furin cleavage site,” a distinctive segment of SARS-CoV-2’s genetic code that makes the virus more infectious by allowing it to efficiently enter human cells. > Within the scientific community, one thing leapt off the page. Wade quoted one of the world’s most famous microbiologists, Dr. David Baltimore, saying that he believed the furin cleavage site “was the smoking gun for the…

There are so many "shocking" articles, but here's something I don't get:

The closest genetic match is only 3.8% similar. When it only has 29,903 base pairs, that's 1,136 mutations. I'm no bioscientist but my friends who are tell me that's a lot of changes, and that experiments might change a few base pairs or proteins at a time. A lab leak theory doesn't explain how gain of function study resulted in so many mutations, unless they were blasting these viruses with radiation, and what would be the point of that? Radiation mutations would cause too many changes to do useful science.

Everyone keeps looking at bats but the closest bat coronavorus is 20 years of evolution away. SARS and MERS came from palm covets and dromedary camels respectively, so what's the deal?

Every time I read about this I keep thinking "huh that's sketchy but circumstantial" and I've yet to find an answer to how the lab would've gotten to this point, undiscovered, with no published papers or research or notes or preprints anywhere

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#313

Post by version_five » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:25 AM UTC

bartart wrote: post #2

This is the most shocking article I have ever read in my life. I'd ask everyone to please read it because it is incredible. One thing I did not realize is that US researchers who conducted gain of function research tried to downplay and discredit the possibility of the virus originating from the wuhan lab. There was an anti-lab theory Lancet statement signed by scientists, and "Daszak had not only signed but organize…

To me, the only really horrible thing is the way that anything other than the mainstream version of events was treated. I think there are different plausible theories, and I'm not surprised they have different adherents that are mostly all motivated by something other than a pure quest for the truth. That's life. If this was e.g. a civil or criminal trial, you'd see the same thing.

The only difference is, in a trial, nobody would try and brand the other side as a conspiracy theorist, racist, denier, anti-xer, whatever the most popular inflammatory term is. Nobody would try and block dissent from all mainstream communication forums.

To me, that's the only thing that's new, is the institutional suppression of any suggestions outside of an orthodox version. And it's honestly way scarier than the idea that government labs are doing biological research, or that diseases can jump from animals to people.

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#314

Post by um_ya » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:25 AM UTC

tootie wrote: post #104

harryf wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying it's shady to provide that funding. What I'm saying is it demonstrates conflict of interest. Last year in May 5 2020 Fauci dismissed the idea that the virus came from a lab that his own organisation was providing funds to - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthony-fauci-wuhan-lab-coronav... Whether or not anything shady was happening, the conflict of interest is clear.

Fauci is clearly dismissing the notion that it was engineered. He says pretty clearly that if a natural virus escaped the lab it would still be a natural virus and hence not a useful topic when it comes to treating it. I don't think he ever said it wasn't possible just that there's no reason to believe it. And it's understandably not his primary concern to figure out.

I think this whole thing is a great example of why you don't ban alternative viewpoints, even if considered "conspiracy theories".

Zerohedge was reporting this early on, and Twitter banned them for "misinformation".

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#315

Post by knowaveragejoe » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:25 AM UTC

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #111

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Kevin Drum had a good summary of this a couple of weeks ago, much shorter. His take? There's no more evidence for the lab leak theory now than there was a year ago, BUT what has changed is that the cross-over theory implied that we would find certain evidence for the vectors, and that evidence has not shown up. KD's take was that it's not so much that the lab leak theory has become more likely, it's the that biologic…

Haha. No. It’s because of politics and TDS. People were taught that this was a Trump theory. That’s all the media needs to say to ensure that nobody will take it seriously and nobody will tolerate anyone else who takes it seriously.

This is a totally fair reaction to all "trump theories".

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#316

Post by triceratops » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:25 AM UTC

timelincoln wrote: post #281

triceratops wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "do your own research" How? I barely have enough time to do my day job. You think I have the time or expertise to research the origins of a virus? Where does it end? Do I grow my own food? Make my own clothes? Build my own car after mining ore, smelting it and doing a million other things?

Perhaps begin by entertaining ideas as possible until proven otherwise. No scientists ever provided conclusive proof the virus didn’t originate in a lab. If you were to look at what some scientists were saying such as the former director of the CDC you would hear explanations including evidence that suggested it probably did leak from a lab. But since the dawn of search engines, we’ve been suggesting that lazy people…

> Perhaps begin by entertaining ideas as possible until proven otherwise

You're assuming I didn't already do that. I'm just objecting to the exhortation to "do your own research". I'm not going to do that, because we live in a modern society with labor specialization.

> No scientists ever provided conclusive proof the virus didn’t originate in a lab.

Where the virus originated from is nice to know for later. But I really care about getting my life back right now. The scientists and experts can debate all the evidence, consider all the options, and report back their findings. "Doing my research" isn't going to help anyone.

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#317

Post by lifeformed » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:25 AM UTC

kaesar14 wrote: post #54

It’s crazy to me how many people on even this forum, a place purportedly of science, continue to dismiss a lab leak origin out of hand citing it as some sort of crackpot theory. The serious questions raised in this article have been around since last April but it’s only now it’s even allowed to talk about them on digital forums. Excellent write up by Vanity Fair.

The way I remember it was that people conflated the lab leak theory with it being engineered in a lab. Those are very different things but easy to mix up in a headline.

It being engineered as a bioweapon is in the realm of a crackpot theory, but it being just a poorly contained natural research project was fairly reasonable. Some prominent people mixed the two up on purpose and eventually the whole thing - both ideas - got labeled a crackpot theory by people who just saw some headlines.

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#318

Post by rayiner » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:27 AM UTC

arrosenberg wrote: post #95

harryf wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying it's shady to provide that funding. What I'm saying is it demonstrates conflict of interest. Last year in May 5 2020 Fauci dismissed the idea that the virus came from a lab that his own organisation was providing funds to - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/anthony-fauci-wuhan-lab-coronav... Whether or not anything shady was happening, the conflict of interest is clear.

It's not a conflict of interest because Dr. Fauci wasn't gaining anything. The agency he is head of is specifically interested in infectious disease and has a large budget for grants. $120K per year pays for a couple plate of genetic samples and tech time to run them. Maybe in China you can run a few more for that cost, I don't know. As head of that agency, it's also his job to share his professional opinion with the…

Avoiding reputation and harm is certainly a major incentive, especially for a scientist, leading to a conflict of interest.

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#319

Post by rhodozelia » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:28 AM UTC

peter422 wrote: post #25

tpfour wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The calculation is simple and could have been made in early 2020. What's the joint probability of occurrence given everything you know about the origins of SARS-CoV-2? There is _very_ high probability that this is just a human error.

Was every other emerging virus also created in a lab? SARS? MERS? Influenza? Polio? The highest probability is this virus originated like every other virus in history.

The lab leak theory doesn’t imply that the virus was created, or gain of functioned, in the lab, merely that it was studied there and escaped. The lab leak theory doesn’t imply unnatural origins.

Re: The lab-leak theory: inside the fight to uncover Covid-19’s origins

#320

Post by triceratops » Fri, Jun 04, 2021, 3:28 AM UTC

lmm wrote: post #259

triceratops wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "do your own research" How? I barely have enough time to do my day job. You think I have the time or expertise to research the origins of a virus? Where does it end? Do I grow my own food? Make my own clothes? Build my own car after mining ore, smelting it and doing a million other things?

The more important takeaway is don't shout down those who are skeptical if you haven't actually investigated the authorities' credibility yourself. Get comfortable with not knowing, with being agnostic on a lot of issues, because it's often the only reasonable position. (The most important takeaway is to ignore Twitter - not "social media", but specifically Twitter).

All fair points. But again I question the part where you said "if you haven't actually investigated the authorities' credibility yourself". How would I, a person with no training in virology, do that?

At some point, you have to trust someone or some institution or organization or system.