Live data from Hacker News

The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

newrepublic.com

181–190 of 233 posts

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Didn't the article cover the scenarios you mentioned? The article said that the lab's normal job was to look for new bat viruses, and that it's pretty hard to get infected from a qtip swabbed over a bats anus stored in a stabilizing solution. The bottom line is that the evidence we have at this time points to nature as the most probable origin, and it's not unusual for it to take many years to figure these things out…

Here's a question: How many times did classic SARS escape from a lab? https://www.researchgate.net/publication/346413716_A_review_...

So that is the basis for what? Is that a fact that changed your mind about the origins of covid?

We know that lab leaks happen. Scary stuff. Even how many lab leaks there are here in the U.S. The paper you link to describes several lab leaks during a period of time while SARS was being widely studied.

Its quite a leap from knowing there are lab leaks to implying that covid, or any other virus, leaked from a lab. There's relevant genetic evidence indicating that the earliest covid-19 cases were 600 miles south of Wuhan [0]. Also it is estimated, based on antibody testing, that there are millions of people every year who get infected with various bat coronaviruses [1].

More/better evidence is needed to prove a lab leak, given that nature does things like this all the time.

[0] https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-05-...

[1] https://www.vox.com/2020/4/23/21226484/wuhan-lab-coronavirus...

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

China can't imprison people outside of its own borders.

Wrong: > Since 2017, it says, at least 695 Uyghurs have been detained or deported to China from 15 countries. https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/jun/25/b...

I’m not a PRC citizen.

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A totalitarian state acted like a totalitarian state by not addressing rumors and suppressing them, because it can. You can't judge them like a Western Democracy with a free press and think that they'd just "come clean".

It has nothing to do with ability (it can), and everything to do with reasoning and motive. The government (and party) only acting in their self interest means they'd share and push any explanation that wasn't nefarious. No they don't have to do anything, but an innocent explanation is something they'd benefit from by disclosing.

No. By addressing conspiracy theories in an Authoritarian system you give them credence through something more or less like the Streisand effect. If you have information control mechanism like the Great Firewall of China and you do not have a free press, then you can more effectively control your domestic population through information suppression. You don't have to explain anything if nobody talks about it in the first place.

You're applying the logic of a democracy with a free press, which assumes people will talk about it. You also probably think that China worries about what you think and that they would care to address your concerns, when the 1.4 Billion Chinese citizens is of much greater concerns to them.

This is the same delusion that Western intelligence agencies like the CIA had with Saddam Hussein. Everyone expected that his putting up a fight against the weapons inspectors was a very clear sign that he had something to hide. If he had nothing to hide why not let them in. After the fact we found out he didn't actually have a functioning weapons program. His failure to be open to the weapons inspectors seems deeply weird and irrational from the perspective of a Western Democracy. But he was running a strong-arm totalitarian state. He needed to stand up to the US and the rest of the world for domestic political points.

China doesn't care what you think or what the US thinks. China cares what 1.4 billion Chinese think. China can better control what they think by flat-out suppression of information, because they've built those systems of control.

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article covered this. When collecting samples from the wild they aren't collecting viable virus, they're collecting samples which have mRNA in them. Those samples just won't infect anyone at all. While collecting the samples they're of course exposed to the environment and could have gotten sick, but they have dramatically less exposure to the environment that the workers who collect bat guano for fertilizer in C…

The difference between us and gorillas is best understood as the number of genes, not the % of nucleotides. Virus genomes are much, much smaller. Since viruses can multiply so quickly, when grown in large numbers of lab mice they can mutate relatively quickly into something with a "desirable" trait. In fact if as you say the virus has passed through millions of wild hosts on its way to being perfectly adapted to infe…

They're still several decades of evolution away, given how fast viruses mutate in the wild.

> We confirm that a direct proximal ancestor to SARS-CoV-2 is yet to be sampled, since the closest relative shared a common ancestor with SARS-CoV-2 approximately 40 years ago

https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.01.22.427830v3

And do you have any idea how many animals there are in China? There's 1.4 billion people to start with. There's 100 to 100,000 more vertebrates than people in the world. Take even 50,000 samples and you're still barely scraping the surface.

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The real motive behind most of the lab leak articles: "Please shut up about zoonotic origins, we don't want to have to worry about factory farming of animals, and for fucks sake could you imagine a world where we had to admit the goddamn VEGANS were right? That certainly can't ever happen. They're already insufferable assholes, could you imagine?" (p.s. be very, very angry at China so you don't think about the US pol…

Hmmm...maybe there are articles that slant that way, but I haven't run across them. Can you cite an example?

Can you cite an example of an article which literally says "we need to shut up about this to calm China down?"

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#186
To make the argument that, because in the past the transmission from animal to human happened in nature, that in the present it could only happen there, implies that your assumptions stay constant.

Things have changed since Ebola 50 years ago and Sars1 20 years ago. For one thing, millions of dollars have been invested in gain-of-function research. There are many more labs, many times more investigators and projects running. These scientists are working to create the characteristics in viruses that make them more deadly and more infectious.

Also, today powerful new bio-engineering tools are available, in the past 10 years especially. Today the situation is different, since there are now new pathways for a deadly virus to come into being.

I don't think anyone can argue that the number of dangerous viruses being studied in laboratories around the world is the same now as it was 20 years ago.

If you want to argue against a lab-leak today, you really need to argue that the BSL-rated laboratories are perfectly leak-proof.

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article covered this. When collecting samples from the wild they aren't collecting viable virus, they're collecting samples which have mRNA in them. Those samples just won't infect anyone at all. While collecting the samples they're of course exposed to the environment and could have gotten sick, but they have dramatically less exposure to the environment that the workers who collect bat guano for fertilizer in C…

"When collecting samples from the wild they aren't collecting viable virus, they're collecting samples which have mRNA in them. Those samples just won't infect anyone at all." None of this is right. RNA (of which mRNA is just a subtype) is extremely unstable and degrades almost immediately unless carefully protected, which is why viruses need a capsid and why mRNA vaccines need cold chains. You can't just touch some…

Yeah I meant RNA but it was early in the morning and my fingers autocorrected to mRNA.

And many samples ARE degraded and only partial reads can be recovered.

> “These samples are not like huge vials of blood,” Rasmussen said. “It’s not like a big Erlenmeyer flask of green liquid.” Researchers would have to grow the virus in cells in order to stand a real chance of infecting people, she added, and it’s difficult to grow viruses from these swabbed samples even if you try to. There’s not much virus in them, and what you get tends to be contaminated with virus-killing detritus. “Technically it’s very challenging to directly isolate virus from field samples from wild animals. So that makes it unlikely that just handling those samples would result in some kind of infection.” Finally, Rasmussen added, the chemical solution that’s used to stabilize the viral RNA for sequencing is a very potent disinfectant its own right.

(from the title article)

PCR amplification means that you can find the needle in the haystack and find enough RNA to construct aa genome out of it. A lot of the time you only get partial reads or don't get the whole genome. There isn't enough viable virus there in order to infect anyone.

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#188
post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, the cover up and hostility towards the lab leak hypothesis may actually be the strongest evidence for it. Which is to say, not much. But we have no evidence for the natural origin story, and it's a somewhat strange coincidence that the initial outbreak was near a lab studying these very same kinds of viruses. Granted you might put such a lab in places where there are lots of bat viruses to be found, but that's s…

Did you know that there's been evidence pointing to an origin 600 miles south of Wuhan [0], based on sampled early cases and genetic sequencing? [0] https://www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2020-05-...

It's worth noting that the paper this article is based on is somewhat contested. For example

"There are several serious flaws with their findings and interpretation." [1]

"The authors’ misinterpretation of MJNs fosters misconceptions, inaccuracies, and misrepresentations of fundamental phylogenetic principles."[2]

[1] https://www.pnas.org/content/117/23/12522

[2] https://www.pnas.org/content/117/23/12518

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#189
"WIV officials told the investigators that serum samples for all staff and students in the bat coronavirus group subsequently tested negative for Covid antibodies. We have only their word to go on because the lab hasn’t been independently audited, but if that’s true,..."

My goodness, that statement from the essay is missing critical context. The lab hasn't been independently audited because the CCP refused permission for any independent inspections.

And yes, you are allowed to take into account their refusal to allow inspections when making a judgement on whether the CCP is covering up a lab-leak.

Re: The Case Against the Covid-19 Lab Leak Theory

#190
"Rasmussen notes another major piece of new evidence against a lab origin: If Covid-19 were invented as part of a benevolent gain-of-function experiment, the goal would be to make it more transmissible, or more lethal to people, in order to study that strain in the lab. But when current strains of Covid-19 are cultured in cells in the laboratory, the virus tends to mutate fast and become less contagious to humans. "

The author presents the mutation history as an argument against a 'benevolent gain-of-function experiment.' But the key word there is 'benevolent.' And it is there on purpose. Let me formalize this: Set(gain-of-function experiments) - Set(benevolent gain-of-function experiments) => Set(non-benevolent gain-of-function experiments).

So if it was a lab leak from a gain-of-function experiment, it is, according to Rasmussen, a lab leak from a biowarfare gain-of-function experiment.

Post reply on HN