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

An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

thelancet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 335 posts

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#161

Post by krull10 »

glitchc wrote: post #124
TheCowboy wrote: post #109

The best piece that one can read on the origin of covid is by Zeynep: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/25/opinion/coronavirus-lab.h... I am still confused how people think that it being an accidental "lab leak" is any more damning of the role China played in the initial outbreak. China made a lot of mistakes and also kept other countries in the dark for way too long no matter the origin. It can also serve as a warning…

I think what it really brings to light (at least for me) is the incompetence of the CCP in the matter. I have no qualms about China conducting research in this regard, other countries are doing it too and we would be naive to think otherwise. However, if it is proven to be true that gain of function research was being conducted at the Wuhan laboratory, it highlights the sheer stupidity of the government in thinking t…

I don’t know if they do gain of function research there, but NEIDL is in the heart of Boston. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emerging_Infectious_D...

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#162

Post by angelzen »

glitchc wrote: post #124
TheCowboy wrote: post #109

The best piece that one can read on the origin of covid is by Zeynep: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/25/opinion/coronavirus-lab.h... I am still confused how people think that it being an accidental "lab leak" is any more damning of the role China played in the initial outbreak. China made a lot of mistakes and also kept other countries in the dark for way too long no matter the origin. It can also serve as a warning…

I think what it really brings to light (at least for me) is the incompetence of the CCP in the matter. I have no qualms about China conducting research in this regard, other countries are doing it too and we would be naive to think otherwise. However, if it is proven to be true that gain of function research was being conducted at the Wuhan laboratory, it highlights the sheer stupidity of the government in thinking t…

Zing! This is how communist regimes work in practice:

* Utter incompetency. Got to promote the 'working class' in positions of authority across the board regardless of actual qualifications. Got to follow ideological prescriptions to a T regardless of real-world outcomes.

* Extreme message control. The communist society is perfect, except for those horrible people that refuse to support the party 100%. And also moving every day closer to perfection. Don't you dare ask questions, because then you become the reason why perfection has not been achieved, and the Party, as the legitimate representative of the people, will be justified to act against you.

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#163

Post by PeterisP »

markdown wrote: post #49
dkersten wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> An intentional lab leak makes no sense to me at all. Very few people are arguing that it was intentional. I agree that an intentional lab leak is highly, highly unlikely, but I think an accidental lab leak is at least just as likely as the wet market hypothesis and CCP certainly acted extremely suspicious.

> and CCP certainly acted extremely suspicious. They would have acted the same regardless of what the initial case was caused by. That's just the way they roll.

The initial response to the pandemic would likely be the same no matter of the cause; however, the later actions of restricting international researcher access to trace the possible origins is a bit different issue.

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#164

Post by PeterisP »

dreen wrote: post #74
PartiallyTyped wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you expand why it backfired massively?

I did in the next part of the sentence, because the cost of that information was too big, even for China

I disagree; although I have no reason to assume that this was intentional, I can certainly imagine that looking back at what happened, many military planners would consider the current cost of Covid-19 to China as completely reasonable if it meaningfully changes e.g. ww3. Taking their stats at face value, It would take some years until we properly see all the consequences, but I wouldn't be surprised if afterwards historians would note Covid-19 as a factor that benefited China in their long term competition w. "the west", not as a cost.

Like, 5k deaths is something that I wouldn't approve of for almost any reason, but looking back at documented 20th century history, planners (both in China and elsewhere) were clearly willing to pay such and even much higher costs for reasons of global politics/power play, so the mere existence of such a cost by itself certainly does not mean that it's implausible that someone would intentionally order a thing like that.

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#165

Post by timr »

krull10 wrote: post #161
glitchc wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think what it really brings to light (at least for me) is the incompetence of the CCP in the matter. I have no qualms about China conducting research in this regard, other countries are doing it too and we would be naive to think otherwise. However, if it is proven to be true that gain of function research was being conducted at the Wuhan laboratory, it highlights the sheer stupidity of the government in thinking t…

I don’t know if they do gain of function research there, but NEIDL is in the heart of Boston. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Emerging_Infectious_D...

Pretty much every BSL4 facility in the US is within easy commuting distance from a major city. The CDC being a great example.

These are not military, but it doesn't matter.

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#166

Post by 8note »

void_mint wrote: post #150
alecst wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kind of feel the same way. Like if our goal is vaccination, yea, republicans do have to eat some humble pie, but liberals shouldn’t make it harder for them than it has to be.

> but liberals shouldn’t make it harder for them than it has to be. It's not hard. It's insanely not hard. It's so unfathomably not difficult that this comment reads like satire. Walk into any grocery store or pharmacy.

Emotionally difficult*

The comment is calling republicans special snowflakes who can't change their minds without being coddled to do so, so they can keep an air of superiority over the liberal degenerates

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#167

Post by cwp »

Thorentis wrote: post #154
cwp wrote: post #128

This is stupid. You can't debate facts. Either SARS-CoV-2 escaped from a lab, or it didn't. Unless somebody comes forward to say, "Yeah, I tore my glove while transporting some test tubes and I got sick two days later," we're never going to know for sure. The only sensible thing to do is assume that it's at least possible that it was a lab leak and reevaluate the risk-benefit tradeoff of this type of research. That i…

The issue they are addressing, is that some people assert a natural origin of COVID-19 as fact, when in fact as shown in this article, there is no evidence to support it. So in one sense you're right, we can only debate the likelihood of finding facts to support the theory of lab leak vs natural origin right now. The aim of this paper is to encourage that debate rather than try to silence it, the way the natural orig…

I understand all that. My point is that "debate" is about persuading people to hold your point of view, while this is a question of fact. You can't change a fact no matter how persuasive you are, because facts aren't subject to debate.

Now, in this case, the fact is hidden from us. SARS-CoV-2 had a natural origin or it didn't, but we don't have enough evidence to decide that question either way. In the absence of evidence, people are using prejudice to decide what is true, and trying to persuade others to adopt their prejudices. That is utter folly.

What we should do is give up on trying to establish the facts unless and until new evidence emerges. Instead, let's admit that lab leaks are possible, and regardless of whether it happened in this case, it should cause us to reexamine our assessment of the risks inherent to this type of virology. We have a demonstration of how bad we are at containing epidemics, and how damaging even a relatively benign virus is. We don't know what a more deadly virus would do, but we can safely assume it would be very bad.

Ok, I grant that I was a little harsh on the authors of this paper; they're really only saying that the lab leak is plausible, and we should examine it seriously. Fine. But I still think it's a red herring. Even if we could find patient zero and nail down the animal that infected him to conclusively prove a natural origin, we should still revisit our thinking on whether and how to conduct research with viruses. That we're a long way from that sort of conclusion makes it all the more important.

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#168

Post by [deleted] »

8note wrote: post #166
void_mint wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but liberals shouldn’t make it harder for them than it has to be. It's not hard. It's insanely not hard. It's so unfathomably not difficult that this comment reads like satire. Walk into any grocery store or pharmacy.

Emotionally difficult* The comment is calling republicans special snowflakes who can't change their minds without being coddled to do so, so they can keep an air of superiority over the liberal degenerates

[deleted]

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#169

Post by 8note »

ISL wrote: post #101
motohagiography wrote: post #99

Working closely to the issue on a couple of fronts, I think debate about the disease origin is a distraction from the real debate everyone has a stake in, which has been the policy response and the legitimacy of lockdowns, vax passports, mandates for health status disclosure, and discrimination based on health information. Who cares if it came from a lab, there are zero consequences to anyone whether it did or not, a…

The origin matters for two major reasons: 1) So we can learn and mitigate the risks of something similar happening again. and 2) In the event that the virus was leaked from a laboratory, the world would like to send the lab a small invoice for costs incurred and damages.

2 doesn't sound right. Folks around Wuhan could sue, sure, but once you're outside of the locality, countries are responsible for their own response. That's why countries have border controls - to decide what comes in.

Re: An appeal for an objective, open, transparent debate re: the origin of Covid-19

#170

Post by 8note »

noptd wrote: post #126
motohagiography wrote: post #99

Working closely to the issue on a couple of fronts, I think debate about the disease origin is a distraction from the real debate everyone has a stake in, which has been the policy response and the legitimacy of lockdowns, vax passports, mandates for health status disclosure, and discrimination based on health information. Who cares if it came from a lab, there are zero consequences to anyone whether it did or not, a…

>Who cares if it came from a lab, there are zero consequences to anyone whether it did or not, and it's the least impactful detail of what has happened This is a nonsensical argument for reasons ISL pointed out in their reply (among others), and framing the issue as a question of origin OR is a false dichotomy - they are all important questions worth seeking answers to and will inform different aspects of how w respo…

Theoretically it's a false dichotomy, but there are limit resources shared between the two, eg. Cooperation with the chinese government
Post reply on HN