Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid • Hacker News Board

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#751

Post by shri_krishna » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 3:50 PM UTC

fumar wrote: post #703

shri_krishna wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Because you can't blame dear grandpa's death on Russia maybe however you try ? And what does it have to do with State censorship of information? The State has no societal relationships (like grandpa/grandma/brother/sister/husband/wife/son/daughter etc) that can pressure it to shutdown flow of information. We are talking about State apparatus censoring information here. With Big Tech actively aiding it. > You're pre…

> No it is not normal. Even post 9/11 no conversation was censored in US media No true. 9/11 was a nearly perfect military industrial play and no one could publicly question the US actions post the event. It felt like a lockstep war machine with vengeance at an all time high. You must’ve not lived through it.

Was born in late 80s. Lived through all of the major events post that. And no you could publicly question everything back then. There were no calls for cancellations or boycotts just because you believed in controversy theories.

Look up 9/11 Truthers movement and "Bush Did It!" to get an idea of the conspiracy theories that emerged right after 9/11. The "Bush Did It!" rallies took place in September 2002, just 1 year after 9/11.

Personally I don't believe in the 9/11 Truthers movement but I wouldn't even know about it if COVID level censorship was adopted back in 2001. Mainstream media was very different back then. Compared to what it has devolved into now.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#752

Post by Manjuuu » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 3:50 PM UTC

realjhol wrote: post #744

Manjuuu wrote: post #741

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't forget anything. As I can't forget all the times that I had to explain, since the beginning, that the only statistics available where about reducing to 0 the risk of serious illness. Don't try to change history, please. And don't link me some random idiot's tweet as proof, we are better than this. Just stop now and accept reality, it's a good thing that they got rid of your mother in law, I wonder in how much…

> And don't link me some random idiot's tweet as proof, we are better than this. Watch the video clip in the tweet. It shows a montage of officials and talking heads claiming that the COVID vaccines would prevent you from getting COVID and transmitting it. Here's another one if you prefer: https://twitter.com/alliemarie777/status/1667561378398318592 > Just stop now and accept reality, it's a good thing that they got…

> The NHS now has chronic shortage of nurses.

Why? Because it's not an attractive profession nowadays. Not for the few hundreds of deniers that were fired.

> You're rather proving my point. So many people are just not ready to have a rational conversation about these narratives. It's all just tribalism and dogma, and we will have to wait years for people like you to calm down to the point where you are able to have reasonably conversations on these topics again.

I haven't seen any rational or unique point in everything you have written, only spitting the usual covid deniers nonsense.

You know what my real fear is? The fear that people that have this kind of opinions regarding the pandemic will apply the same reasoning to the next one or to the next crisis. I have a different opinion of preppers now.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#753

Post by Manjuuu » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 3:55 PM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #705

carimura wrote: post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and that right there is how you promulgate a social suppression campaign.

When did people start conflating people disagreeing vehemently with them and censorship/suppression? I've been called a moron for saying that I don't think the evidence is fully there yet for lab leak, does that make me a victim of a counter-censorship? It's nonsense.

They are just too enamored with their opinions, you are ok, let them make a fool of themselves.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#754

Post by Manjuuu » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 3:58 PM UTC

cubefox wrote: post #657

Manjuuu wrote: post #643

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that right there is how I remind you that if you want your hypothesis to be taken seriously you need proofs or at least a very compelling argument. There was neither.

Nonsense. There were plenty of arguments from the very beginning for the lab leak theory. The alternative "bat cave" hypothesis had plenty of implausiblies (e.g. huge distance) and was far from being "proven".

Plenty? Which kind of arguments? The ones you can hear only in podcasts for crazy people with unknown sources?

We can be better than this... cmon.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#755

Post by realjhol » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 4:02 PM UTC

mft_ wrote: post #719

realjhol wrote: post #517

It's going to take a long time before the mainstream is ready to think critically about the COVID narratives, but it's good to see first steps toward the recovery of rationality. But there's still a lot to cover: - Lockdowns did little to prevent the spread of COVID and lead to increased deaths by other causes, egregious violation of people's fundamental rights, massively destruction of the economy, and many people's…

Wow, there're a lot to parse here, and it looks like you're coming at this from an "I've already decided" and "axe to grind" angle. > - Lockdowns did little to prevent the spread of COVID... > - Cloth masks were pointless security theatre - and most rational people (and countries) immediately switched to N95 masks as soon as supply chains could support the demand. That said, I'd bet that even less-proven masks would…

>> - Lockdowns did little to prevent the spread of COVID...

>

https://iea.org.uk/publications/did-lockdowns-work-the-verdi...

>> - Cloth masks were pointless security theatre

>

https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD...

> I was happy to accept changes to my lifestyle to diminish risk of harm to individuals.

We now have a massive unexplained excess deaths crisis, but suddenly it's "see no evil, hear no evil".

>> - The vaccines never prevented transmission

> That's a straw-man argument - that's not the primary purpose of a vaccine.

That is not public officials and talking heads were saying at the start. See this montage:

https://twitter.com/XvirtueSignaler/status/16657702694186147...

> With widespread vaccination, the world was able to 'get on top of' the pandemic

The world never "got on top of" COVID. It never had any significant control over it. Omicron came along, and spread through the population with mild symptoms, leading to widespread natural immunity.

> its effects of healthcare over-utilisation.

That never happened anywhere in the world.

>> - The rate of side effects (including serious side effects up to and including death) is a lot higher than anyone wants to admit.

>

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36055877/

In randomized control trials of the mRNA COVID-19 vaccines here in the UK, we now know that the risk of serious adverse effects from the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines was 12.5 per 10,000 vaccinated i.e. a ~1 in 800 chance of serious adverse effects.

>> - To most segments of the population, the danger of death by vaccine side effects is greater than the danger of death by COVID-19

>

The UK government has now published its estimate of the number of people needed to vaccinate to prevent a COVID-19 hospitalisation:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

In Table 3, notice how in every age group except 70+, the number-needed-to-vaccinate to prevent a hospital visit figure is higher than 1 in 800.

And in Table 4 notice not even 70+ are more in danger of severe hospitalisation than 1 in 800.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#756

Post by realjhol » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 4:09 PM UTC

Manjuuu wrote: post #752

realjhol wrote: post #744

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> And don't link me some random idiot's tweet as proof, we are better than this. Watch the video clip in the tweet. It shows a montage of officials and talking heads claiming that the COVID vaccines would prevent you from getting COVID and transmitting it. Here's another one if you prefer: https://twitter.com/alliemarie777/status/1667561378398318592 > Just stop now and accept reality, it's a good thing that they got…

> The NHS now has chronic shortage of nurses. Why? Because it's not an attractive profession nowadays. Not for the few hundreds of deniers that were fired. > You're rather proving my point. So many people are just not ready to have a rational conversation about these narratives. It's all just tribalism and dogma, and we will have to wait years for people like you to calm down to the point where you are able to have r…

So did you watch the montage?

If so, please admit that you were wrong when you made this comment:

> I'm hoping that in a decade or so, people will stop using "vaccines never prevented transmission" as an argument since it has been said at least a billion of times since the beginning, VACCINES PREVENTED SERIOUS ILLNESS.

My montage showed you (if you had watched it), many talking heads and officials at the time accusing the unvaccinated of increasing transmission.

The rest of your remarks about "covid deniers" are irrelevant to the point.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#757

Post by stormfather » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 4:13 PM UTC

Snacktivist wrote: post #479

nononotme wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not all of the early lab-leak voices were racist. Some people went for that conclusion because of the proximity of the outbreak to the Wuhan lab which was researching that sort of virus. They may have been a little quick to do so but they guessed right. It wasn't that big of a leap, and it wasn't anti-Chinese to think that, just sort of obvious. I know that because I felt that way at the time. And then there were the…

> Not all of the early lab-leak voices were racist. That sort of statement is always true, but that doesn't negate the real dangers of the Right using it for political advantage. Their general approach is to drive a wedge between different groups in the US (and abroad), pit them against each other, and have them take out their rage on each other as a means to distract them from the real issues going on. It was clear…

Anytime anyone starts talking about left or right in a scientific discussion I instantly discount the rest of their view, because we aren't talking about science anymore. Nothing is gained from making this discussion part of that asinine tribal tug of war.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#758

Post by anthonypasq » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 4:14 PM UTC

Manjuuu wrote: post #749

anthonypasq wrote: post #676

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the issue is that the conversation is so polarized and religious its literally impossible to discuss any of these issues. the poster you are responding to states some things which are reasonable and others which are complete nonsense. Its like people cant help themselves once picking a side to just wholesale accept every position all the way to "covid isnt real" on one end and "no one should ever leave their house ag…

> as having a 95% effectiveness against transmission for the original strain. 95% reduction of serious illness. The objective of the mass vaccination was having as much people as possible survive the pandemic. Herd immunity was just noise. There were a lot of noise and nonsense. > Cloth masks are objectively useless for personal protection. Proper masks are effective as measured multiple times, tons of statistics on…

[flagged]

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#759

Post by anthonypasq » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 4:20 PM UTC

Mechanical9 wrote: post #689

anthonypasq wrote: post #670

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oppositions to lockdowns were never about whether they would reduce deaths or not in the short term. Anyone with a brain could understand that if people weren't in a position to breath on each other, the virus wouldnt spread as quickly. Oppositions to lockdowns were always about tradeoffs and whether they were worth it. Its just such a boring critique. My main question still remains, what would your plan have been if…

Pushing cases into the future was always the stated goal of lockdowns. That was what "flatten the curve" meant. The idea was to accept some temporary consequences in order to prevent deaths until vaccines could be made. I also don't think it was any stroke of luck that resulted in vaccines being made quickly. Our scientific establishments correctly devoted their resources to developing vaccines. A lot of us were clos…

When "flatten the curve" came out as a slogan they told us 2 weeks. Absolutely no one in public health believed that would be true. It doesnt make sense on any level whatsoever. i mean it just beggars belief that they told the public that with a straight face. the only person i recall in early days of 2020 saying this was going to be many months if not years was Mike Osterholm which i respect for not gaslighting the public.

heres an article in the NYT about managing vaccine expectations.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/04/30/opinion/coron...

also you argument falls apart when lockdowns (restrictions, npis, whatever you want to call them) continued way beyond vaccine rollout. I was first in line to get vaccinated and im very glad i did, because they promised us that would be a return to normal, but it wasnt for at least a year afterwards and i still havent been given an explanation why.

Re: Inside the Wuhan lab weeks before Covid

#760

Post by Izkata » Mon, Jun 12, 2023, 4:22 PM UTC

anthonypasq wrote: post #758

Manjuuu wrote: post #749

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as having a 95% effectiveness against transmission for the original strain. 95% reduction of serious illness. The objective of the mass vaccination was having as much people as possible survive the pandemic. Herd immunity was just noise. There were a lot of noise and nonsense. > Cloth masks are objectively useless for personal protection. Proper masks are effective as measured multiple times, tons of statistics on…

[flagged]

And here's some links from a few months earlier showing we knew it was never tested for preventing infection/transmission:

https://www.washington.edu/news/2020/12/02/covid-19-vaccines...

https://www.businessinsider.com/who-says-no-evidence-coronav...

https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/center-news/2020/12/covid-...

Here's Pfizer's press release: https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta...

Notice how it switches between SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19? That's because they're very specifically saying it prevents sickness, and not making any claims about infection/transmission. That came months later, per your links, from media and politicians who either didn't understand or were just straight lying. The 95% they're claiming came straight from the press release which was only about sickness, not infection.

It's pretty amazing just how hard this got memory-holed.