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

Lab Leak 2.0?

bprice.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 319 posts

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#211

Post by Taniwha »

rob_c wrote: post #127
nnx wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Omicron could have evolved over an entire year in an immunocompromised individual before finally infecting others" Is it likely that this infected person would not have started any detectable cluster this whole time? How do you explain the ratio of functional vs silent mutations?

More simply, I don't think people tend to remain infected (and infectious) for a whole year (not saying they can't just that this seems a farcical assumption) Yeah I agree with the going undetected too unless they're potentially asymptomatic (in which case why should we ever expect to find/treat them). All leading to the same response of you can't control highly transmissible virus(vurii) once they have infected a la…

The mouse theory is interesting .... because omicron is more benign - one of the problems we have with covid is that because of all this modern medicine saving lots of lives (not enough though sadly) there's not a lot of evolutionary pressure to make things more benign.

But if omicron has been in a wild mammal population without vaccination or hospitals then there might be more evolutionary pressure to become more benign.

It's worth noting that some vaccines in the past have been 'live' vaccines - essentially viruses that get passed around with a sniffle or two but no more harm. This actually what we all hope omicron would be .... I can't see why we shouldn't give the virus a bit of a help along .... the right lab leak might be just what we all need

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#212

Post by roenxi »

boublepop wrote: post #190

> “If a $1000 PhD side project could kill millions of people, we must end viral [gain-of-function research], or it may end us.” This sentimental reminds me of a talk given by a government bomb expert where a naive student asked “why do we allow the ingredients for bombs to be sold in store, shouldn’t we ban them all?” The answer of cause is that if we do that, then we suddenly don’t have gasoline, orange juice, basic…

It isn't a question of sentiment, it is a question of magnitude. Even in the worst case, a psychopath bomb maker just can't do that much damage.

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#213

Post by marktucker »

monocasa wrote: post #9

All of the GoF research procedures I've read stress natural evolution, but still rely on random mutations at the end of the day, which would still leave you with a natural looking count of silent mutations in the general case. As a GoF researcher you don't want to cull 'silent' mutations because those are a major source of building blocks for useful mutations.

This may be the standard approach, but the question is how else it could have happened other than some GoF procedure. Any idea what the odds are of this ratio happening by chance?

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#214

Post by rajup »

alanfranz wrote: post #203
dawnerd wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There sure is. I flagged it because it’s speculation and conspiracy stuff shouldn’t be on HN. Sure it could be a leak but armchair detective work can be dangerous.

It’s quite well written. It may be false, but why should it be a conspiracy?

It is a conspiracy because it does not fit into GPs world view and what they think is right. Apparently presenting citations and data is “speculation” these days…

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#215

Post by fer »

indigodaddy wrote: post #205

I posted this article on my Facebook feed and it was promptly auto-deleted by Facebook. A sad state of affairs indeed. *EDIT* it looks like it didn’t actually get deleted. When I went to edit the post my edit wouldn’t take and it said the post was deleted. But I am still seeing the post, so I think it’s “there” at least..

At this point I'm no longer sure if that'd be good or bad. It's highly speculative, and does a lot of cherry picking, and an informed reader can read it for what it is, but it dumbs down some things so far as to make it fodder for the tinfoil hat crowd. And it's especially ugly when it justifies the cherry picking as "it's because these people don't make their living with GoF research".

Substack is becoming YouTube for text at this point.

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#216

Post by gojomo »

abecedarius wrote: post #166
ayjchan wrote: post #37

This is Alina Chan, one of the co-authors of Viral: The Search for the Origin of Covid-19. In defense of a natural origin of Omicron, this study describes the remarkable evolution of SARS-CoV-2 during convalescent plasma treatment of an immunosuppressed patient for 3-4 months; the mutations also reduced sensitivity to neutralizing antibodies: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03291-y We know that there is a…

What do you think of this suggestion that labs in southern Africa are not the only relevant ones? > Omicron COVID was in Italy as early as 2021-10-13 – 7 weeks before alarm from South Africa. > per upthread, Italy also where SARS-CoV2 immune-escape gain-of-function variants bred, since 2020, in less-than-max-biosecurity labs. https://twitter.com/gojomo/status/1473471612112441344 (IANA biologist)

Thanks for referencing my tweet - & asking some questions I would!

I 1st learned of the referenced Italy antibody-escape gain-of-function paper via an HN post which appeared almost concurrently with the first reports of the (not-yet-named) Omicron variant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29359125

As Twitter user @Vbruttel has pointed out (https://twitter.com/VBruttel/status/1466930489026093056), similar published research was done in Durban South Africa, which has at most a BSL-3 lab.

This is not to say either of those are the origin; just that this kind of research seems pretty common: within the capability & interest of many labs, who cheerfully report their creation, via selective pressure, of immune-escape variants in published papers.

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#217

Post by gojomo »

dawnerd wrote: post #186
ibejoeb wrote: post #35

There is no legitimate reason for this to be flagged. What happened to the vouch option?

There sure is. I flagged it because it’s speculation and conspiracy stuff shouldn’t be on HN. Sure it could be a leak but armchair detective work can be dangerous.

There's nothing in the HN Guidelines which would suggest this sort of article is disallowed: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Also, everything that's unpleasant to consider isn't a 'conspiracy'. Labs have performed gain-of-function experiments that create nastier viruses fairly regularly, often proudly publishing their work. Those same kinds of labs, while they always try not to, sometimes leak dangerous disease-causing agents - typically by infecting a researcher who then infects others in the community.

So the speculated chain of events doesn't even require any malice – just known-to-happen events cooccuring at an inopportune time.

And how can "armchair detective work" like this be "dangerous"? Hackers love to engage in armchair detective work! Unless there are reckless accusations placing potentially innocent people in danger – not at all true of this article – there's no grounds for suppressing good faith discussion, at least not in any culture that values open discussion of ideas, including even suspect ideas, to confirm/refute/improve them.

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#218

Post by fer »

abecedarius wrote: post #166
ayjchan wrote: post #37

This is Alina Chan, one of the co-authors of Viral: The Search for the Origin of Covid-19. In defense of a natural origin of Omicron, this study describes the remarkable evolution of SARS-CoV-2 during convalescent plasma treatment of an immunosuppressed patient for 3-4 months; the mutations also reduced sensitivity to neutralizing antibodies: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-03291-y We know that there is a…

What do you think of this suggestion that labs in southern Africa are not the only relevant ones? > Omicron COVID was in Italy as early as 2021-10-13 – 7 weeks before alarm from South Africa. > per upthread, Italy also where SARS-CoV2 immune-escape gain-of-function variants bred, since 2020, in less-than-max-biosecurity labs. https://twitter.com/gojomo/status/1473471612112441344 (IANA biologist)

First detection is an indicator of that, when it was first detected, not a guarantee that it was first there. Only a very small fraction of RT-PCR positive samples are sent for sequencing under normal conditions.

> Omicron COVID was in Italy as early as 2021-10-13 – 7 weeks before alarm from South Africa.

7 weeks before the alarm, but only 10 days before in retrospective sampling, and even less in other places in Africa.

Saying it appeared in Italy but somehow it spread in Southern Africa first goes against normal epidemiological dynamics, especially given how contagious Omicron is. The chances are it started where the first cluster is detected, not where the first retrospective case is detected, because the possibility of it escaping in Italy, flying to SA, and somehow staying dormant in Italy while giving SA a head-start is extremely unlikely.

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#219

Post by indigodaddy »

fer wrote: post #215
indigodaddy wrote: post #205

I posted this article on my Facebook feed and it was promptly auto-deleted by Facebook. A sad state of affairs indeed. *EDIT* it looks like it didn’t actually get deleted. When I went to edit the post my edit wouldn’t take and it said the post was deleted. But I am still seeing the post, so I think it’s “there” at least..

At this point I'm no longer sure if that'd be good or bad. It's highly speculative, and does a lot of cherry picking, and an informed reader can read it for what it is, but it dumbs down some things so far as to make it fodder for the tinfoil hat crowd. And it's especially ugly when it justifies the cherry picking as "it's because these people don't make their living with GoF research". Substack is becoming YouTube f…

Hmm, dunno, I thought it was a great article, with the main takeaway being that GoF research is unequivocally and inarguably dangerous AF, should be halted ASAP, if not forever then for a long period of time where we can proverbially have a breather such that the scientific community can engage in an official reassessment/reexamination upon its safety and viability.

Re: Lab Leak 2.0?

#220

Post by bArray »

ei8htyfi5e wrote: post #207
bArray wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it's important to separate China and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). I don't doubt that the Hong Kong protests were a major problem for the CCP and that COVID allowed them to implement a series of restrictions and laws to stop protests. I also don't doubt the very real possibility of a lab leak in Wuhan (in fact, given how the CCP have responded, I find it very likely). What I do doubt is that this virus…

Should other countries distinguish between the USA and the American government? That’s something I don’t see.

> Should other countries distinguish between the USA and the American government? That’s something I don’t see.

I think it's important when you are discussing some actions taken by a minority leadership - an unelected leadership at that. If Biden did something bad on behalf of the US, I would be tempted to say "Biden did X" rather than "America did X", especially if potentially speaking to an American.

I also think in terms of geopolitics, it's important to criticise the Chinese government rather than the Chinese people - especially with increasing nationalisation ongoing in China.

Post reply on HN