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

Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

theintercept.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 494 posts

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#31

Post by dekhn »

BellLabradors wrote: post #27
justapassenger wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've flagged it. Article is ok. But the title on HN is a cheap clickbait. Someone, in USA, asking for a grant in the past doesn't point to anything about origins of SARS-CoV-2.

What do you think of these quotes?: "“Some kind of threshold has been crossed,” said Alina Chan, a Boston-based scientist and co-author of the upcoming book “Viral: The Search for the Origin of Covid-19.” Chan has been vocal about the need to thoroughly investigate the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 emerged from a lab while remaining open to both possible theories of its development. For Chan, the revelation from the pr…

Are you a scientist?

I was. I can tell you that all of those quotes require a great deal of inspection and you cannot take them at face value.

At the very least, most scientists speak ultra-confidently about this beliefs (beyond their own internal level of confidence) because they've learned to use narrative techniques to make their beliefs sound true.

Any scientist who is actively speculating that this funding is "strong evidence" rather than saying "it's logically consistent and seems more than coincidental" is just wrong. That's a big mistake a lot of the early folks who claiimed it was human engineered made. The evidence is not strong, but not strong enough to convince a rational person.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#32

Post by WarOnPrivacy »

dabbledash wrote: post #13
WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is reasonable & responsible to downplay theories that get constructed in absence of sufficient and meaningfully qualified evidence.

GP didn’t say “if you thought there was insufficient evidence before, you have some reflecting to do!”

I'm advocating a principle that applies well to the OP.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#33

Post by dabbledash »

WarOnPrivacy wrote: post #32
dabbledash wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GP didn’t say “if you thought there was insufficient evidence before, you have some reflecting to do!”

I'm advocating a principle that applies well to the OP.

Then your comment would make more sense as a response to the OP.

If anything it seems like you would agree that in the absence of evidence humility is appropriate. People who acted like only fringe conspiracy theorists would even consider lab origins should reflect on their overconfidence and arrogance. It’s not a slam dunk either way and probably never will be, if i had to guess.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#34

Post by speed_spread »

jtdev wrote: post #22
imbnwa wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, even in the case that occurs, what is the endgame? Fine China? Sanction China? Demand accountability from China? Not happening, not when they make everyone's chips among other things. Can someone enlighten me about the value of this theory? It just seems like another vector of anti-establishment distrust discourse with a more intelligent veneer; easy to profit off of (clicks, book sales, etc) and doesn't requ…

They don't "make everyone's chip's"... that would be Taiwan. Regarding what should be done: stop giving money to China for GoF research would be a great start...

GoF? Is China still caught in the OO Design Pattern trap?

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#35

Post by gmkiv »

imbnwa wrote: post #18
chrsw wrote: post #7

I could be missing something but this isn't exactly the smoking gun the title makes it seem. I'm sure there are proposals, plans and applications for all types of things. What I'm waiting for, perhaps naively, is strong evidence, revelated an independent investigation, that there was some foul business going on here. Until I see that, I'm more inclined to rely on the word of experts who have no connection to any of t…

I mean, even in the case that occurs, what is the endgame? Fine China? Sanction China? Demand accountability from China? Not happening, not when they make everyone's chips among other things. Can someone enlighten me about the value of this theory? It just seems like another vector of anti-establishment distrust discourse with a more intelligent veneer; easy to profit off of (clicks, book sales, etc) and doesn't requ…

The value is to inform the larger discussion of the risks and benefits of gain of function research.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#36

Post by speed_spread »

recursivedoubts wrote: post #2

if you called someone crazy at some point for suggesting this as a possibility, it is time to pause and reflect

My problem with people saying "but it was engineered!" is that it the origin does not change what our reaction should be. The virus is here and now we have to face it. Whether it's a natural mutation, part of a big masterplan, or an accidental release is a matter of international politics, in which most of us have very little, if anything to contribute.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#37

Post by cameldrv »

imbnwa wrote: post #18
chrsw wrote: post #7

I could be missing something but this isn't exactly the smoking gun the title makes it seem. I'm sure there are proposals, plans and applications for all types of things. What I'm waiting for, perhaps naively, is strong evidence, revelated an independent investigation, that there was some foul business going on here. Until I see that, I'm more inclined to rely on the word of experts who have no connection to any of t…

I mean, even in the case that occurs, what is the endgame? Fine China? Sanction China? Demand accountability from China? Not happening, not when they make everyone's chips among other things. Can someone enlighten me about the value of this theory? It just seems like another vector of anti-establishment distrust discourse with a more intelligent veneer; easy to profit off of (clicks, book sales, etc) and doesn't requ…

Perhaps if we have zero recourse against China in this sort of situation, then the first step would be to work to remove the conditions that lead to that lack of recourse.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#38

Post by baja_blast »

speed_spread wrote: post #36
recursivedoubts wrote: post #2

if you called someone crazy at some point for suggesting this as a possibility, it is time to pause and reflect

My problem with people saying "but it was engineered!" is that it the origin does not change what our reaction should be. The virus is here and now we have to face it. Whether it's a natural mutation, part of a big masterplan, or an accidental release is a matter of international politics, in which most of us have very little, if anything to contribute.

yes, but if this research continues we are all at risk of another highly contagious human adapted virus escaping again. The goal should be to try and ban this type of research worldwide. While zoonotic viruses are always a risk, they are far easier to contain due to the time it takes for a virus to gain enough mutations to be easily infectious to other humans such as what happened with SARs1 and MERS. Researchers developing viruses to be highly adapted for humans just creates viruses that are impossible to contain like COVID.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#39

Post by angelzen »

speed_spread wrote: post #36
recursivedoubts wrote: post #2

if you called someone crazy at some point for suggesting this as a possibility, it is time to pause and reflect

My problem with people saying "but it was engineered!" is that it the origin does not change what our reaction should be. The virus is here and now we have to face it. Whether it's a natural mutation, part of a big masterplan, or an accidental release is a matter of international politics, in which most of us have very little, if anything to contribute.

If we go back to business as usual, covid will be far from the last allegedly engineered virus to kill millions. The health sciences establishment is in dire need of a reality check, their actions have consequences reaching well beyond petty grant politicking.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#40

Post by rich_sasha »

AlbertoGP wrote: post #17
jasonlaramburu wrote: post #4

Was EcoHealth Alliance, the group referenced in the article, working in Wuhan?

Yes they were, in particular with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and Peter Daszak himself was in Wuhan in October 2019. EcoHealth just got defunded by the US Congress with bipartisan support: https://twitter.com/GReschenthaler/status/144122144752803020...

In addition there was some controversy as they were behind the Lancet open letter that first renounced the idea of a lab origin. They got a bunch of scientists associated with their organisation to sign it, without mentioning EcoHealth by name or stating competing interest.

My spidey sense is certainly tingling, though of course no smoking guns. But the jigsaw pieces fit. Can’t get the funding in North Carolina? Let’s try Wuhan.

Post reply on HN