Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid • Hacker News Board

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#181

Post by revelio » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:06 PM UTC

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 article is only facts and direct evidence. Where is the innuendo? It covers specific experiments they were doing, in order and in detail, complete with specific biological information and funding sources. It also provides extensive evidence of constant coverups by the lab, like this one:

There was also no mention of the mouse deaths in the grant renewal application Daszak filed to the NIH later that year. In this account, he said the mice had experienced “mild Sars-like clinical signs” when they were infected with the mutant virus. It had actually killed six of the eight infected humanised mice. Daszak eventually provided details of the experiment’s deadly results to the US authorities in a report after the Covid-19 pandemic. He now says his 2018 statement about the “mild” illness was based on preliminary results — even though the experiment in which the mice died had taken place several months before he issued the statement

So these people are all known liars. The US Government banned GoF research, they got around it by claiming their work was urgent and safe, they ignored reporting requirements, when they finally did report what they said was a lie, and now they're still lying to try and cover previous lies.

So when these people say they want to insert furin cleavage sites into coronaviruses, a coronavirus appears right next door that has a FCS - the first one ever seen - and they say, oh well we changed our minds and never did it, well, with overwhelming probability they're lying again.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#182

Post by asynchronous » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:08 PM UTC

bryanlarsen wrote: post #131

inciampati wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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]

[flagged]

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#183

Post by asynchronous » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:09 PM UTC

calderwoodra wrote: post #59

yyyk wrote: post #38

Leaving aside the question of where and how the virus emerged, it's interesting to note that the lab was nigh useless during the pandemic, despite its main specialty was investigating Coronaviruses! It looks like a lot of dangerous research went on, and even if nothing bad happened because of that research, nothing was gained. A lot of risk for nothing.

Are you implying the lab shouldn't have existed at all? And/or future coronavirus labs shouldn't exist either?

Heaven forbid we hold people accountable and/or learn from our mistakes as a species.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#184

Post by denton-scratch » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:09 PM UTC

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 article implies (but doesn't state) that RaTG13, although discovered in the Mojiang cave, was worked on in the Wuhan lab. It does state that it was being worked-on by Shi Zhengli ("Batwoman") and her team at the lab.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#185

Post by darkerside » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:10 PM UTC

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 map presented upfront from is also misleading, the early cases clustered around the market not the lab

Is this a case of yet another heat map being a population density map? I assume the wet market is a popular local destination and gathering place, while the lab is not. You would expect there to be more cases where there are more people.

I speculate in ignorance of the actual social dynamics in the city of Wuhan.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#186

Post by asynchronous » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:12 PM UTC

laserbeam wrote: post #20

This is the kind of writing you need to properly discuss the lab leak hypothesis. It's not perfect, there are no good links to sources which suggests a lot of it is made up. However, this kind of writing should only happen after years or months of investigation. You can't do the lab leak panic 2 days into the pandemic. You can't even really do it half way through the pandemic. I'm glad such investigations are being c…

Oh? But we can publish the Lancet document, asserting with ridiculous grandeur that it was NOT a lab leak, a mere 3 months into the pandemic?

The same document that turned out to have been paid for and produced despite having numerous errors and lies, simply to turn a narrative?

Let’s hold everyone to the same standard shall we?

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#187

Post by revelio » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:13 PM UTC

prepend wrote: post #154

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…

> indication of any ill-intent I don’t think ill-intent is the accusation, I think the argument is that the lab has poor safety protocols and made errors. I haven’t studied the “lab leak theory” extensively, but everything I read seems to be about lab failures resulting in a leak, not anything purposeful or ill-intentioned.

Unfortunately, the article states explicitly that there was ill intent and extensive PLA involvement with the lab.

The military was also given positions of responsibility in the Wuhan institute, according to a US Senate report. A book published in 2015 by the military academy discusses how Sars viruses represent a “new era of genetic weapons” that can be “artificially manipulated into an emerging human disease virus, then weaponised and unleashed”.

The authors are PLA researchers, and one of the book’s editors has collaborated on numerous scientific papers with Wuhan scientists. They discuss how Sars can be weaponised by fusing it with other viruses and “serial passaging” the resulting mutant to make it more dangerous.

The investigators believe the Chinese military had taken an interest in developing a vaccine for the viruses so they could be used as potential bioweapons. If a country could inoculate its population against its own secret virus, it might have a weapon to shift the balance of world power.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#188

Post by revelio » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:14 PM UTC

calderwoodra wrote: post #59

yyyk wrote: post #38

Leaving aside the question of where and how the virus emerged, it's interesting to note that the lab was nigh useless during the pandemic, despite its main specialty was investigating Coronaviruses! It looks like a lot of dangerous research went on, and even if nothing bad happened because of that research, nothing was gained. A lot of risk for nothing.

Are you implying the lab shouldn't have existed at all? And/or future coronavirus labs shouldn't exist either?

That seems reasonable, yes.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#189

Post by BryantD » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:14 PM UTC

jakear wrote: post #180

BryantD wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That point is inaccurate. I quoted the stats; they are what they are.

Stats say nothing of relative severity, why do you think they’re relevant in any way? Edit: is your argument seriously “uhm actually, event X happens 0.054% of the time, so when you said {more rare version of X} doesn’t happen you’re wrong”

Um, those are the numbers for hospitalization. So yes, there’s information about severity there.

And yep, that’s my argument! The frequency of deadly viruses escaping from a bio lab is even lower, so if we’re going to eliminate possibilities based on percentages there are a few others that should get thrown out.

It’s a minor point but, as I said, it’s sloppy reasoning. If the anonymous researcher had said “low probability” I wouldn’t care. Instead, this reads like someone who’s willing to hand wave specifics for the sake of rhetoric.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#190

Post by asynchronous » Sun, Jun 11, 2023, 2:14 PM UTC

arisAlexis wrote: post #39

I remember still when it was considered a conspiracy theory and we got downvoted here and banned on reddit for even implying the possibility. Unfortunately something similar is happening with AI x-risk right now.

I won’t forget no matter how many times they try to make me.

What happened several years ago was a clown show of the highest order.