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

331–340 of 1001 posts

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#331

Post by adh636 »

onethought wrote: post #328
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…

Exactly. The lab leak theory is a story of cherry picking evidence to match your conclusion. Why was the wet market on the other side of the city the only identified outbreak site if it came from the lab? There were/are many markets on the other side of the river that would be much more relevant to residents living and working on that side. People looking up flu symptoms in the middle of winter is not evidence of any…

Trying to better under the origins of a global pandemic is not an inconsequential endeavor.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#332

Post by onethought »

adh636 wrote: post #331
onethought wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. The lab leak theory is a story of cherry picking evidence to match your conclusion. Why was the wet market on the other side of the city the only identified outbreak site if it came from the lab? There were/are many markets on the other side of the river that would be much more relevant to residents living and working on that side. People looking up flu symptoms in the middle of winter is not evidence of any…

Trying to better under the origins of a global pandemic is not an inconsequential endeavor.

That’s not what people are doing, they are trying to prove a lab leak theory, else all this effort would be in “how’d it get to that wet market” if you can’t answer that, then you do not have a logical chain to its true origin lab leak or not.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#333

Post by arcticbull »

nextos wrote: post #327
HardlyCurious wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, the closest natural viruses to covid were sent to Wuhan for study. I mean, that is what the Wuhan institute of coronaviruses was built to do right? The indirect evidence of a lab leak theory is overwhelming frankly. And it doesn't require any malice. No one credible is saying china intentionally released the virus or built it with the intention of building a weapon. Gain of function research is real, scient…

I think it is also worth adding that there is good evidence of some lab leaks that caused pandemics in the past. See for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_United_Kingdom_foot-and-m... In my opinion, gain of function is too dangerous with current security measures, and we should consider a moratorium. Lab biocontainment is exceptionally hard.

More specifically there were a few lab escapes of coronaviruses (SARS) in China that Beijing copped to in the early 2000s [1]. It happens to everyone, way more than it should. Yes, including America. [2]

[edit] To be clear, I'm not saying this definitely did or did not happen, I don't know. I'm saying if it came out later that it did, I wouldn't be surprised.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7096887/

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_laboratory_biosecurity...

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#334

Post by nextos »

MathMonkeyMan wrote: post #329
nextos wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is also worth adding that there is good evidence of some lab leaks that caused pandemics in the past. See for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_United_Kingdom_foot-and-m... In my opinion, gain of function is too dangerous with current security measures, and we should consider a moratorium. Lab biocontainment is exceptionally hard.

I saw an interview with a virologist, but I don't remember where (somewhere on YouTube). He said that there _is_ a moratorium on gain of function research, but that it's a joke because virology is pretty much about studying gain of function.

There was a NIH moratorium, but it was lifted in 2017.

I don't agree about the point of virology being just about studying gain of function. There are tons of things you can study in virology without needing to create novel viruses.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#335

Post by AbrahamParangi »

snowwrestler wrote: post #303
AbrahamParangi wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This would all be more compelling if the WIV were not explicitly experimenting with creating viruses like SARS-COV-2 ! If HIV had emerged proximal to a lab experimenting with creating viruses like HIV then that lab origin theory would be much more credible!

Saying “viruses like SARS-COV-2” only makes sense for broad applications of the word “like.” As other comments have pointed out, while that lab was working with coronaviruses, none of the strains were genetically close to SARS-COV-2. Coronavirus is a broad category of viruses.

Betacoronaviruses with SARS-like attributes and natural reservoirs in bats is supposed to be a “broad application of the word ‘like’”? Bit of a stretch, no?

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#336

Post by makmanalp »

HardlyCurious wrote: post #304
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…

Actually, the closest natural viruses to covid were sent to Wuhan for study. I mean, that is what the Wuhan institute of coronaviruses was built to do right? The indirect evidence of a lab leak theory is overwhelming frankly. And it doesn't require any malice. No one credible is saying china intentionally released the virus or built it with the intention of building a weapon. Gain of function research is real, scient…

> Actually, the closest natural viruses to covid were sent to Wuhan for study

Please don't "actually" something with an uncited statement without backing it up with any sort of detail. A news article? Anything, honestly.

> that is what the Wuhan institute of coronaviruses was built to do right?

Really? It's "Wuhan institute of virology". Not "coronaviruses". Right?

I have no specific horse in this race but I feel like I'm losing my mind every time I read any discussion on this subject because there's always folks throwing around random statements as if they're established fact and I feel like at this point, on this specific subject, on this website, we should know better, geez.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#337

Post by MathMonkeyMan »

nextos wrote: post #334
MathMonkeyMan wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw an interview with a virologist, but I don't remember where (somewhere on YouTube). He said that there _is_ a moratorium on gain of function research, but that it's a joke because virology is pretty much about studying gain of function.

There was a NIH moratorium, but it was lifted in 2017. I don't agree about the point of virology being just about studying gain of function. There are tons of things you can study in virology without needing to create novel viruses.

Fair enough, I know almost nothing about it.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#338

Post by mensetmanusman »

th0ma5 wrote: post #260
epups wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand this line of argument. The facts are that 1) the virus outbreak was in Wuhan, 2) that there ws a local lab working on virus samples that come from all over the world and 3) as far as we know, the particular strain that affected Wuhan is not local. Altogether, this should add confidence to the lab leak theory, not detract from it.

[flagged]

A particular city center?

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#339

Post by whyenot »

nextos wrote: post #327
HardlyCurious wrote: post #304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, the closest natural viruses to covid were sent to Wuhan for study. I mean, that is what the Wuhan institute of coronaviruses was built to do right? The indirect evidence of a lab leak theory is overwhelming frankly. And it doesn't require any malice. No one credible is saying china intentionally released the virus or built it with the intention of building a weapon. Gain of function research is real, scient…

I think it is also worth adding that there is good evidence of some lab leaks that caused pandemics in the past. See for example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_United_Kingdom_foot-and-m... In my opinion, gain of function is too dangerous with current security measures, and we should consider a moratorium. Lab biocontainment is exceptionally hard.

In the mid 1960s, my mom worked in an infectious disease lab. One day, her and her colleagues were tasked with cleaning out a freezer full of samples. Shortly thereafter her and everyone else in the lab got a flu-like illness that did not clear up for many days.

It really makes me wonder how many lab leaks may have happened during this time period when we started collecting and storing samples but we didn't yet have the ability to track diseases like we do today.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#340

Post by pessimizer »

onethought wrote: post #328
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…

Exactly. The lab leak theory is a story of cherry picking evidence to match your conclusion. Why was the wet market on the other side of the city the only identified outbreak site if it came from the lab? There were/are many markets on the other side of the river that would be much more relevant to residents living and working on that side. People looking up flu symptoms in the middle of winter is not evidence of any…

> I assume to just keep a negative view on China in people’s minds.

America was involved with that lab, too. It should really be the rest of the world with a negative view of America and China.

Post reply on HN