Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research • Hacker News Board

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#181

Post by ramraj07 » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 1:58 AM UTC

lamontcg wrote: post #83

1. There is no viral backbone anyone knows of which would have been used in this research 2. There is no spike protein anyone knows of which would have been used in this research 3. The PRRAR furin cleavage site is not one humans would have tried it is unlike any other known furin cleavage sites in coronaviruses 4. There are now many known related sarbecoviruses which have been found with furin cleavage sites 5. Furi…

All valid points, but let’s be real scientists and work the other way? Can you conclusively rule out that this virus wasn’t engineered (and then maliciously covered up) in a lab? The reason this approach is important is because the stakes here are higher. This means people who should have been careful weren’t, and are responsible for the death of millions and they’re happy continuing to cover up their part in it.

The more important part here is an investigation on the origins of the virus is more about beurecracy than the actual science so unless you can conclusively prove that this virus could have never been engineered by a human you should stop bringing “improbability” of all of these processes as why we should trust these scientists.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#182

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 1:58 AM UTC

015a wrote: post #103

martythemaniak wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've asked people to explain to me why I should care one way or another, beyond curiosity, and no one has been able to answer yet. That is to say, is there an actual person who is perfectly fine with all the terrible things the CCP plainly does, but finding out that they've been incompetently handling research will suddenly make them change their views?

The reason why you need to care is because this isn't a CCP problem; its a global problem. Sure, maybe the CCP screwed up containment, and that mistake cost millions of lives. Every single major government around the planet has facilities like the one we're discussing. Every single one has made mistakes like the CCP possibly did. The CCP were just unlucky in that their mistake wasn't confined to one person or the wel…

> it could also mean more of these facilities being shut down

... which is a critical thing to consider when reading virologists' opinions claiming that it couldn't be a lab leak. There is a very obvious conflict of interest here.

I don't have a good answer how to deal with this conflict, since it is hard for non-virologist to judge the arguments, but ignoring the conflict of interest entirely is not the solution.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#183

Post by ramraj07 » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 1:59 AM UTC

twobitshifter wrote: post #86

Daczak serves on the WHO team to investigate the virus origins, but this did not get mentioned in any reports. Instead he warns other not to discuss it. He does not include notes that research was done on modifying bat viruses to make them infectious to human cells. These behaviors look like a guilty person, do they not? The wuhan and eco-health researchers had already started work on the furin cleavage sites and why…

Do also note that damn near every lab today would not propose a new approach or project without already secretly having gone half the way in it with prior funds. No one proposes a potential novel idea without already being fully sure it will work.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#184

Post by dylan604 » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 2:00 AM UTC

abnry wrote: post #167

brendoelfrendo wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not my job, sorry.

It's easy to be a critic.

Sometimes, an issue needs to be called out even if you don't have the solution.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#185

Post by dylan604 » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 2:01 AM UTC

somewhereoutth wrote: post #150

Fairytales about lab leaks won't absolve us of our abject failure to deal with this novel pathogen, nor will they help us prepare for the next.

Unfortunately, the experience of the current situation is not helping us prepare for the next either. That's the sad part to me.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#186

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 2:02 AM UTC

Factorium wrote: post #68

angelzen wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Its unlikely the virus was engineered expressly to kill millions - it seems increasingly likely that the virus was engineered to drive mRNA vaccine sales, as well as to disrupt the 2020 American election (by forcing an unprecedent switch to mail-in paper ballots and upending a vibrant US economy - at the same time as China was struggling under international tariffs). Just look at what an investment in BioNTech would…

It is unlikely the virus was engineered specifically for some goal that would involve an intentional release.

The most likely explanation is that the lab was engaging in risky scientific research, because they wanted to do ground-breaking science and were asking themselves whether they could, not whether they should.

Then they made a mistake, had a gap in the protocols, didn't follow them out of laziness, or some other accident, and infected themselves.

As attractive as such theories sound, pandemics are unpredictable enough that noone sane would start one to further some specific goal. At a large scale, there are rarely true winners in a pandemic (or war).

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#187

Post by ramraj07 » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 2:07 AM UTC

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…

Professors never make proposals that they’re not sure would work nowadays. It’s too risky with an already uncertain grant system so most (especially successful) labs only write in proposals things they have already proven but not fully disclosed. They’ll then use the money they get to test and finish half of the next project and then write the next proposal with that knowledge. Thus it’s very likely they already did this research a good way through when this proposal was submitted.

While this doesn’t prove they made and leaked the virus, it doesn’t exonerate them either. A proper investigation is needed. When you say you rely on experts, you should definitely listen to them but unfortunately when people are defending their colleagues it’s much harder to do this. Further, many scientists would take any questioning of this persons ethics as castigation of the whole scientific establishment and become defensive. Even otherwise, it looks like the tide is changing among experts now, more and more are agreeing the lab leak is a viable hypothesis.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#188

Post by giardini » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 2:12 AM UTC

My first question is "What is China's next move?"

But there are so many other questions:

- intentional release? If so why?

- any other viruses/bacteria under study(almost undoubtedly, "Yes")?

- if so, where and what is planned?

China makes plans(written plans) for everything. Even if the release was an accident, there were reasons for doing the studies. What were/are they?

-What other viruses and/or bacteria are undergoing similar study in China? Are there any bacteriological production facilities in place now (as are present yet in Russia IIRC)?

- Can we count on Russia's past actions, facilities and quite clear warnings to provide a sufficient counterweight to China's fiddling in the lab? Or should we return to full scale biological warfare research ourselves? We can undoubtedly outpace both given time but at this point I see a need for some reasonable planning or we're likely to worsen the situation.

We still haven't considered non-governmental entities that may have an interest in biological warfare, ranging from the MIT grad student with a gene lab in his basement to the environmental organization that believes reducing the world's human population is a necessity.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#189

Post by djenendik » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 2:16 AM UTC

djenendik wrote: post #179

teh_klev wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Anecdotally"

That was a reference to your previous comment. Does anecdotal count for nothing? Fine, run a survey of virologists and epidemiologists and report the intersection of set. It will not be arbitrarily small.

I looked through the grant. To my eye, I consider some of the participants as epidemiologists.

Re: Leaked grant proposal details high-risk coronavirus research

#190

Post by newswasboring » Sat, Sep 25, 2021, 2:29 AM UTC

endisneigh wrote: post #107

newswasboring wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. We can do two things at a time. Investigation of origins does not block anyone from making and following policies to stop the spread. 2. I don't know about you but I have lost more than 1.5 years of my life to this. World around me has changed fundamentally in many ways. Just for closures sake I would like to know why this happened to me.

2. It has more to do with your country’s government than the source of the virus, hence my comment Even if you knew would anything change? I’m not advocating for ignorance, rather that it’s impossible to know conclusively without full cooperation and it’s in the interest of all parties to deflect

> Even if you knew would anything change?

Yes. Closure. I know it's a vague human need, but it is a need at least I have. It will definitely be good for my mental health. And why do you want people to cease just because something is hard? All criminal cases are hard. Some are solved. Let's try to solve this one.