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

What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

unherd.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 43 posts

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#11

Post by 99_00 »

benjohnson wrote: post #5

Nothing. Because we Americans funded the lab. So the combined propaganda power of both the CCP and the USA will make this a non-issue. Everybody is also going to think I'm nuts - but we should be very very thankful that the first airplane tranported pandemic was so mild. It's prepared us for something that could be vastly worse.

"funded the lab"

This can mean anything from fully funding it to giving it some small amount of money and having no real control or transparency, or even funding people from the lab to do research in America. Can you provide a source?

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#12

Post by primis »

daenz wrote: post #6

>Bear in mind researchers in Wuhan were combining snippets from strains of bat coronaviruses to increase virulence, injecting viruses into “humanised” mice, testing how diseases can jump the species barrier and creating chimeric diseases using cloning techniques that show no sign of human manipulation. Can someone explain to me in layperson's terms what the purpose of this is, and why the risk of a global pandemic wi…

Research labs attempt artifical evolution of viruses and bacteria under extremely controlled situations in order to attempt to find cures preemptively. They also identify symptoms and severity before natural evolution has a chance outside the lab to create these novel pandemics itself.

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#13

Post by thorw3747 »

It is even worse. SARS-CoV-2 virus has not yet been found in wild animals. That indicates it has no natural origin. And there are interviews with scientists and job ads, that points to gain of function research.

But that will be "conspiracy theory" for another year, before mainstream catches up...

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#14

Post by berberous »

daenz wrote: post #6

>Bear in mind researchers in Wuhan were combining snippets from strains of bat coronaviruses to increase virulence, injecting viruses into “humanised” mice, testing how diseases can jump the species barrier and creating chimeric diseases using cloning techniques that show no sign of human manipulation. Can someone explain to me in layperson's terms what the purpose of this is, and why the risk of a global pandemic wi…

1. There have been and will continue to be many pandemics in the course of human history. If we can understand viruses better, perhaps we can stop those pandemics for good one day, and the risk of one outbreak is worth the benefit of potentially stopping or slowing many more (which may also be more lethal).

2. Hindsight is 20/20. While there were prior lab leaks and those who thought this would happen, I think the fact that Covid happened and the severity of its effects will cause those believe point 1 above to reconsider the degree of risk and whether it’s really worth the potential benefits.

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#15

Post by jjazwiecki »

daenz wrote: post #6

>Bear in mind researchers in Wuhan were combining snippets from strains of bat coronaviruses to increase virulence, injecting viruses into “humanised” mice, testing how diseases can jump the species barrier and creating chimeric diseases using cloning techniques that show no sign of human manipulation. Can someone explain to me in layperson's terms what the purpose of this is, and why the risk of a global pandemic wi…

This is as far as my lay understanding goes: the idea was that you could better handle potential outbreaks by creating potential outbreaks in a lab, and studying them there. If you have bad priors ("we have perfect protocols, because we've never caused a global pandemic") I could see how you'd get to this being a net positive: there will be another pandemic, probably involving one of these, so let's study it before it's a pandemic.

I've thought of the intent as a little like using a fuzzer in security research, although that might not by a great analogy.

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#16

Post by bayesian_horse »

There is not one "lab leak theory", there are quite a few distinct possibilities. The problem is that the nutcases ran with the one that said China was working on weaponizing this exact virus and then it leaked.

But there are other explanations for lab workers getting sick. They could have been working on samples of this virus without knowing it, and not taken enough precautions. They could have infected themselves outside the lab and then each other.

The question about what a "Wuhan lab leak" means is a lot too early, because nothing is known about what exactly happened and probably there will never be enough information, given the general CCP policy.

And still, any deliberate attempt to weaponize a Corona virus would be unlikely and require much more evidence. Certain other pathogens, maybe, but not something that has pandemic potential. It just doesn't make sense.

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#17

Post by runawaybottle »

jjazwiecki wrote: post #15
daenz wrote: post #6

>Bear in mind researchers in Wuhan were combining snippets from strains of bat coronaviruses to increase virulence, injecting viruses into “humanised” mice, testing how diseases can jump the species barrier and creating chimeric diseases using cloning techniques that show no sign of human manipulation. Can someone explain to me in layperson's terms what the purpose of this is, and why the risk of a global pandemic wi…

This is as far as my lay understanding goes: the idea was that you could better handle potential outbreaks by creating potential outbreaks in a lab, and studying them there. If you have bad priors ("we have perfect protocols, because we've never caused a global pandemic") I could see how you'd get to this being a net positive: there will be another pandemic, probably involving one of these, so let's study it before i…

We need to do this research on the Moon/Mars/Underwater/Arctic/Desert. Not in a city with millions of people.

You know, now that I just typed that out, I’m becoming more and more convinced common sense was lacking when it comes to that Wuhan Lab. Something simple most likely happened because the common sense just wasn’t there.

Edit:

Here are the articles related to lab leaks before 2015 (these articles were posted before 2015, before the conspiracy or any kind of anti-China agenda):

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/304/5671/659

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC416634/

https://nationalpost.com/news/a-brief-terrifying-history-of-...

I simply googled ‘before:2015-01-01 china lab leak’ to get this confirmation bias.

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#18

Post by read_if_gay_ »

daenz wrote: post #6

>Bear in mind researchers in Wuhan were combining snippets from strains of bat coronaviruses to increase virulence, injecting viruses into “humanised” mice, testing how diseases can jump the species barrier and creating chimeric diseases using cloning techniques that show no sign of human manipulation. Can someone explain to me in layperson's terms what the purpose of this is, and why the risk of a global pandemic wi…

Maybe they just misjudged the risk, so much that taking it was a nobrainer.

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#19

Post by dec0dedab0de »

I think this is the natural outcome of putting too much emphasis into "accountability.". People will cover things up. Even if it wasn't their fault they'll lie to make sure there is no evidence pointing at them.

Obviously with much smaller stakes, this is why I try to take blame for every problem on my team. Even if it clearly wasn't my fault, I say something like "oh I've done that before, I should have warned you". It's more important to focus on how to fix things than it is to cast blame.

Back to the story, If it was a covered up lab leak, that means they likely had more data available that they could have shared sooner. They didn't because they were afraid of the consequences. The whole idea of CYA/saving face needs to just go away.

Re: What a Wuhan lab leak would mean

#20

Post by bryanrasmussen »

>It would shake science to its foundations for carrying out risky research despite clear warnings of the dangers, and then collaborating in an epic whitewash.

This is a ridiculous assertion.

First off 'science' has done lots of risky research and created things that were frightening or dangerous, atomic weapons spring to mind, and I don't think science was shaken to its core. If anything every dangerous thing science creates leads to more trust in science - at least in the centers of power, the common perception of scientists of course takes a hit whenever this happens.

second of all science as a whole did not do a coverup or anything, and since the article mentions brave scientists fighting against the perception that it was not possible it seems the article does not even believe its own hype.

third of all science is even less of a person that a corporation is; science will not be shaken to its core, science will not stop going out in public, preferring instead to stay home and get drunk in the dark of their living room. Science won't get up in the morning and, while shaving and looking in the mirror, contemplate suicide. Science won't think, it would be so easy, and what does it all mean anyway. Science will not go on a trip around the world, develop a drug habit, and engage in lurid sexual escapades with Dance and Medicine (which, some will argue, amounts to incest) before settling down in a long term committed relationship with Carpentry. Science will not be shaken to its core, although perhaps some scientists will.

on edit: removed rude comment regarding the intelligence of the writer, even though that quote is so infuriating I might edit it back in later.

Post reply on HN