Is there a way to disprove the lab leak hypothesis?
Yes, clear animal reservoirs, viral lineage, old samples from human or animal infections with precursor variants. No position on the question, just answering your question about proof.
Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
11–20 of 833 posts
Re: Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
#12Is there a way, outside full transparency from China in some "perestroika" type situation which seems highly unlikely, we will ever really know for sure?
Re: Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
#13[But a leading scientist told Sir Jeremy that “further debate would do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular”. Dr Collins, the former director of the US National Institutes of Health, warned it could damage “international harmony”.] The entire foundation of science is based upon empirical observation and asking hypothetical questions. It is discouraging that scientists can make sta…
Scientists do not have the luxury of pretending politics and bad actors don’t exist.
Politics and bad actors have always existed. Scientists should counter them with facts and honesty not censorship.
Re: Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
#14[But a leading scientist told Sir Jeremy that “further debate would do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular”. Dr Collins, the former director of the US National Institutes of Health, warned it could damage “international harmony”.] The entire foundation of science is based upon empirical observation and asking hypothetical questions. It is discouraging that scientists can make sta…
A charitable interpretation would read the statement as "further speculative debate". Indeed, several of the lab leak arguments mentioned in that very article were subsequently disproven months later, and their unqualified and categorical assertions were arguably no less unprofessional (indeed, perhaps more unprofessional) than other scientists simply exclaiming, "Ssshhhhhh".
We can't know the precise motivations behind those who suggested Sir Jermey pipe down, but indeed that's the problem with such speculative discourse. When speaking with a public voice--which can arguably include private communications to political leadership--there's nothing per se untoward, IMHO, with demanding that professionals speak carefully.
It's a fine line, but I don't see anything damning in these e-mail disclosures even though I'll readily admit that many people, including professionals (scientists, journalists, etc), prematurely dismissed the possibility of a Wuhan lab leak.
Re: Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
#15Is there a way to disprove the lab leak hypothesis?
If a virus essentially identical to the original wild type SARS-CoV-2 is found in a wild animal population that would be fairly strong evidence against the lab leak hypothesis, although not an absolute disproof. Researchers have looked and not found such, so it remains an open question.
So far the closest we've come is a bat virus in Laos but it has some significant genetic differences.
Re: Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
#16No post body was provided.
Re: Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
#17No post body was provided.
Re: Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
#18[But a leading scientist told Sir Jeremy that “further debate would do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular”. Dr Collins, the former director of the US National Institutes of Health, warned it could damage “international harmony”.] The entire foundation of science is based upon empirical observation and asking hypothetical questions. It is discouraging that scientists can make sta…
> warned it could damage “international harmony”. I've never understood the argument that people would want to suppress the (accidental) lab-leak hypothesis out of a desire to protect the image of China. If the lab-leak hypothesis is incorrect, that doesn't change the fact that the virus originated in that country, it just means that the virus emerged from a wet market. I'm not Chinese, but I'd imagine that a country…
I agree. Should Galileo have suppressed his observations to protect the Catholic Church? If he had, would it have been in the name of science or something else?
Re: Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
#19Is there a way to disprove the lab leak hypothesis?
An animal sample from the wet market that was shut down. (I spooned they were all bagged).
If they were all destroyed, then go get a sample from their natural reservoir (wherever those animals came from)
Re: Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab, but feared debate could hurt
#20> "Professor Andrew Rambaut, from the University of Edinburgh, also said that furin cleavage site “strikes me as unusual”." > "He added: “I think the only people with sufficient information or access to samples to address it would be the teams working in Wuhan.”" This pair of quotes has a completely different meaning from the original quote it sliced up: > "I am also agnostic on this – I do not have any experience of…
The article shouldn’t have quote this person in the first place - there are plenty of serious investigations into the lab leak theory from reputable virologists. I recommend Alina Chan’s new book: Viral.
This clarification also masquerades as a clarification of something important. This person quoted by the tabloid is irrelevant here. In fact this article does more damage to the credibility of lab theory than otherwise and your clarification just shows.
Frustrating both the article and your clarification of basically a meaningless source.
There is a vast amount of information regarding lab leak theory and potential origin spanning back 20 years even though China has shut any investigation with gag orders and complete lack of transparency. Too much to unpack.
My concern is this: People will read your clarification of the quote as if it’s something important to clarify. Source itself is garbage.