111–120 of 281 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s an interesting theory and i suppose not even that far fetched
It is far fetched. Labs typically engage in destructive testing of their animals.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is also not limited to just COVID discussion either. Most things that aren't somehow related to day-to-day software development devolve into unsubstantiated, or ill-informed, "ranting." It's a source of constant disappointment.
Personally if I were constantly disappointed by a website I would take the extraordinary step of simply... not using that website anymore, rather than coming on that website and telling everybody how ill-informed they were. I always have been a bit odd though.
I also frequently choose not to engage with ill-informed comment threads; I'm regretting my lapse in judgement today.
This was known for two years. Markets are breeding grounds for zoonotic diseases. They often even jump from human to animal and back. The real question is--how did the virus get to the live market? The study accurately says, "While there is insufficient evidence to define upstream events, and exact circumstances remain obscure, our analyses indicate that the emergence of SARS-CoV-2 occurred via the live wildlife trad…
Can't world leaders put pressure on china to clean up these wild life markets? Like better health practices and what not?
Due to various policies, China is a relatively low-trust society. Of course, it's also low trust because ripping people off isn't necessarily seen as bad, it's seen as clever.
For anyone reading these kinds of stories and reports but is not a regular China follower, there is one thing you really should know. Anytime the Chinese government reacts very negatively to a story (Denial, attacking, undermining, deflecting), it usually means the story is true. The Chinese government is really terrible at information management and addressing anything that might make them look bad or lose face.
Just admitting a Chinese lab collected, studied and by accident a lab worker got infected with COVID is just something China can not admit. It is perfectly reasonable that some lab somewhere would collect and study the COVID virus. What is unreasonable is that the lab or a lab worker just got sloppy and accidently released that virus out to the world.
A virus of (human)/(animal) origin was (un)intentionally (released)/(spread)/(detected) in Wuhan, starting at a (lab)/(market).
Narrative 1: Animal origin with extensive spread in a food market
Narrative 2: Animal origin with accidental release from lab study
Narrative 3: Intentional creation/modification of a virus for purposes of scientific study and subsequent (un)intentional release
Narrative 4: Intentional creation/modification of a virus for nefarious purposes with (un)intentional release
Narrative 5: Animal origin with slow undetected community spread somewhere and possibly random mutation that lead to more viral fitness in Wuhan.
---
What would actually change if you had certainty around one of these theories? Are you certain that there will not be a zoonotic viral pandemic in the future? If you aren't certain that there will never be a zoonotic pandemic again, then we should ramp up vector and disease surveillance.
Also, China has had no problem disciplining people that cause trouble and embarrassment. If they thought someone caused this, that person is fucking gone.
I wonder how many people who are seemingly willing to believe the self-serving CCP party-line on this, would be just as believing of the owners of a nuclear power plant in their town, once the drinking water became radioactive, claiming "it didn't come from the plant, someone else down the street must have done it" - that is just about as believable as this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one seems to be doing that. Can you tell us where anyone is claiming with 100% certainty?
The top comment in this thread: >I wonder how many people who are seemingly willing to believe the self-serving CCP party-line on this, would be just as believing of the owners of a nuclear power plant in their town, once the drinking water became radioactive, claiming "it didn't come from the plant, someone else down the street must have done it" - that is just about as believable as this. Absolutely sure the CCP ar…
The problem is that there really isn't any evidence. SARS-COV-2 has never been detected in any Chinese land animals associated with the market. We know that birds can transmit it, but it needs to come from somewhere. There's no reservoir of the stuff found in the wild...unlike viruses like Ebola, Marburg, MERS, etc.
There were two variants in the market...but given the speed at which SARS-COV-2 variants have mutated in humans, well, how likely is it that the market was the source? SARS-COV-2 went through millions of humans before the first variant popped out. Is it reasonable to assume that some progenitor virus went though millions of iterations to become SARS-COV-2 in the market, then did it again and again?
But however unlikely, this is where we are today. Was it just bad luck that some virus entered an immuno-compromised animal at the market and mutated...twice?
I wonder how many people who are seemingly willing to believe the self-serving CCP party-line on this, would be just as believing of the owners of a nuclear power plant in their town, once the drinking water became radioactive, claiming "it didn't come from the plant, someone else down the street must have done it" - that is just about as believable as this.
You made no effort at all to criticize the methodology (which looks pretty standard to me, consistent with methods used to pinpoint the origin of other disease outbreaks besides COVID), or the raw data. Not one of the listed authors is Chinese, nor do any of them have any Chinese institutional affiliations.
What is your actual argument for why I should disregard this, beyond 'CCP bad'?
What do the logicians among us conclude? Occam's Razor? I am not smart enough to deduce the truth of all this nonsense.