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

Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

thetimes.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 1001 posts

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#131

Post by bryanlarsen »

inciampati wrote: post #63
pcrh wrote: post #55

After a quick read of the article, it presents no new data, and is replete with innuendo pointing at the Wuhan lab, rather than any direct evidence. Most importantly, the general reader should know that all labs researching viruses do research on dangerous viruses. After all there is no incentive to research benign viruses. So the fact that the Wuhan lab worked on coronaviruses is not in itself an indication of any i…

No, not all labs working on viruses do research on dangerous viruses. Bacteriophages for instance, are a deep research topic, and (aside from potential effects on our microbiome) are completely benign to humans. That's just one of many counterexamples.

[flagged]

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#132

Post by kortilla »

th0ma5 wrote: post #123
khazhoux wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd avoid loaded terms like "smoking gun" in this discussion. My point is that if the pandemic was caused by a leak, then that would be a prior that could aid in future decision-making. I don't understand your position that we should not seek the truth. Somehow knowing the truth about a past event can have no bearing on the future?

I don't think it is ultimately knowable in a way that is helpful. We need to act as if any of the possibilities happened because any of them could. I guess I also don't see why articles like this are needed to work on pandemic prevention. I can totally see why people need them for at the very least getting clicks and attention.

It’s possible aliens came from space and dropped the virus off to see how we would handle it. How much effort should we put into preventing that pandemic path?

Nearly every airline regulation that results in air travel being so safe today is because we spend such an enormous amount of resources investigating the root causes of accidents with the NTSB. Try suggesting to them “it doesn’t matter why the plane crashed, let’s just push for generic improvements to planes”. You’ll get (rightfully so) laughed out of the room.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#133

Post by th0ma5 »

kortilla wrote: post #132
th0ma5 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it is ultimately knowable in a way that is helpful. We need to act as if any of the possibilities happened because any of them could. I guess I also don't see why articles like this are needed to work on pandemic prevention. I can totally see why people need them for at the very least getting clicks and attention.

It’s possible aliens came from space and dropped the virus off to see how we would handle it. How much effort should we put into preventing that pandemic path? Nearly every airline regulation that results in air travel being so safe today is because we spend such an enormous amount of resources investigating the root causes of accidents with the NTSB. Try suggesting to them “it doesn’t matter why the plane crashed, l…

The limit is five why's and often you can't even get that. Planes still crash. Perhaps we've pulled on this thread as much as we can. Especially with long ass articles like this that say nothing new.

Seriously, what are we expecting to learn. This is like a plane at the bottom of the ocean never to be found. We'll never know what happened to this plane, and we don't have to.

We know that situation was probably poor pilot mental health but pilots still have to lie about antidepressants. We don't need to find that plane to fix that.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#134

Post by zosima »

ratg13 wrote: post #91
pcrh wrote: post #55

After a quick read of the article, it presents no new data, and is replete with innuendo pointing at the Wuhan lab, rather than any direct evidence. Most importantly, the general reader should know that all labs researching viruses do research on dangerous viruses. After all there is no incentive to research benign viruses. So the fact that the Wuhan lab worked on coronaviruses is not in itself an indication of any i…

>Additionally, the closest relative to SARSCov2 that has been identified (RaTG13) As of 2022, this is no longer true. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RaTG13

And crucially, researchers from the Wuhan lab were studying bat virus samples from Laos, before covid.

https://www.business-standard.com/amp/article/current-affair...

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#135

Post by zosima »

pcrh wrote: post #55

After a quick read of the article, it presents no new data, and is replete with innuendo pointing at the Wuhan lab, rather than any direct evidence. Most importantly, the general reader should know that all labs researching viruses do research on dangerous viruses. After all there is no incentive to research benign viruses. So the fact that the Wuhan lab worked on coronaviruses is not in itself an indication of any i…

The Huanan Seafood market paper has been heavily critized.

Especially the fact that covid was not found in a single animal sample does make the evidence rather weak.

In addition it seems that the lack of sampling from outside the market and the fact that the market is a busy place in the center of the city where the virus would likely be once it's spreading from person to person , does not really lend support to the conclusions in the paper at all.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#136

Post by secondcoming »

pcrh wrote: post #55

After a quick read of the article, it presents no new data, and is replete with innuendo pointing at the Wuhan lab, rather than any direct evidence. Most importantly, the general reader should know that all labs researching viruses do research on dangerous viruses. After all there is no incentive to research benign viruses. So the fact that the Wuhan lab worked on coronaviruses is not in itself an indication of any i…

Some janitor or whatever sold an infected animal to the market.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#137

Post by dendriti »

yyyk wrote: post #108
wwtdtgotiatl wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> yet the lab itself did nothing to help during the pandemic. Which people in this thread are somehow believing as truth instead of the bald-faced propaganda it is. Do you actually think a virus research lab in the epicentre of an outbreak would not be put to use? From Wikipedia: > As the virus spread worldwide, the institute continued its investigation. In February 2020, a team led by Shi Zhengli at the institute we…

Gene sequencing is table stakes with modern tech, and many countries did that during the pandemic. We don't need a BSL-4 level lab in the middle of a large city to do a gene sequence. It happened that they published early what many other labs would have done (and did do). On the other hand, the vaccines and effective cures had nothing to do with their work. The benefit/risk ratio seems very poor here.

So you're not going to admit you were ignorant or just lying?

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#138

Post by pcrh »

zosima wrote: post #134
ratg13 wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Additionally, the closest relative to SARSCov2 that has been identified (RaTG13) As of 2022, this is no longer true. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/RaTG13

And crucially, researchers from the Wuhan lab were studying bat virus samples from Laos, before covid. https://www.business-standard.com/amp/article/current-affair...

Those viruses are slightly more related to SARSCoV2 than RaTG13, however note 1) that they were found even further away from Wuhan than was RaTG13 and 2) that they still remain too different from SARSCoV2 to be its direct ancestor.

One of the things we know for sure is that that about 50 years of evolutionary changes separate RaTG13 and BANAL-52 from SARSCoV2, so they are not its direct ancestors.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#139

Post by pcrh »

zosima wrote: post #135
pcrh wrote: post #55

After a quick read of the article, it presents no new data, and is replete with innuendo pointing at the Wuhan lab, rather than any direct evidence. Most importantly, the general reader should know that all labs researching viruses do research on dangerous viruses. After all there is no incentive to research benign viruses. So the fact that the Wuhan lab worked on coronaviruses is not in itself an indication of any i…

The Huanan Seafood market paper has been heavily critized. Especially the fact that covid was not found in a single animal sample does make the evidence rather weak. In addition it seems that the lack of sampling from outside the market and the fact that the market is a busy place in the center of the city where the virus would likely be once it's spreading from person to person , does not really lend support to the…

>The Origins of Covid-19 — Why It Matters (and Why It Doesn’t)

>More than half of the earliest Covid-19 cases were connected to the Huanan market, and epidemiologic mapping revealed that the concentration of cases was centered there. In January 2020, Chinese officials cleared the market without testing live animals, but positive environmental samples, including those from an animal cage and a hair-and-feather–removal machine, indicated the presence of both SARS-CoV-2 and Covid-susceptible animals.5 Recently released findings included raccoon dog DNA, pointing to a possible SARS-CoV-2 progenitor.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMp2305081

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#140

Post by dotandgtfo »

pcrh wrote: post #138
zosima wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And crucially, researchers from the Wuhan lab were studying bat virus samples from Laos, before covid. https://www.business-standard.com/amp/article/current-affair...

Those viruses are slightly more related to SARSCoV2 than RaTG13, however note 1) that they were found even further away from Wuhan than was RaTG13 and 2) that they still remain too different from SARSCoV2 to be its direct ancestor. One of the things we know for sure is that that about 50 years of evolutionary changes separate RaTG13 and BANAL-52 from SARSCoV2, so they are not its direct ancestors.

>50 years of evolutionary changes separate RaTG13 and BANAL-52 from SARSCoV2

Do you have a source for this?

Also, I'm no biologist, but is comparing the base rate of evolutionary changes still relevant if SARSCoV2 wasn't of natural origins? E.g. through creating chimeras or 'serial passaging' as described in this article? Wouldn't that create an environment where 50 years could pass in a way shorter timeframe?

Post reply on HN