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

The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

technologyreview.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 267 posts

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#171

Post by _tik_ »

erostrate wrote: post #168
raphlinus wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I second your recommendation of Alina Chan, as she has the scientific credentials, is careful with the science, and as you say is balanced in that she doesn't dismiss the natural origins hypothesis either. If people want to be informed about multiple perspectives of this debate, she is a must-follow. That said, let me temper that with some skepticism. First, having got a book deal[1] she is now in the position of dir…

Thanks for pointing that out. I agree with your first point about the book deal. On your second point, she has stated repeatedly and explicitly that her position is that she doesn't know what the origin of the virus is, natural origin is not ruled out either, and that all she is asking for is that both theories are credibly investigated, for example here [1]. Of course she talks a lot more about the lab leak, but tha…

I just read Alina Chan profile news on local news. It is mention that her background is in genetic therapy. How seriously I should take her statement on covid based on her background?

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#172

Post by imiric »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #164
imiric wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 2) The sequence of COVID-19 does not yet resemble any of the sequences associated with the lab research that was being conducted. This doesn't discount the possibility of a lab leak if you take into account that some sequences appear to have been deleted[1]. We shouldn't make assumptions based on lack of evidence if that evidence was tampered with. And given China's history of deliberately concealing facts to save…

> some sequences appear to have been deleted That is a completely unrelated issue. The sequences you're talking about are sequences from patients (obtained in February 2020, I believe). They are not bat coronavirus sequences, which is what the poster above you is referring to. The Wuhan Institute of Virology publishes the sequences it discovers. RaTG13, the closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2, was published in 2016,…

I'm not familiar with genetics, so speaking as a layperson here, but if there was manipulation of patient data why should we consider WIV publications to be truthful and exhaustive? If the patient data had links to unpublished bat sequences the lab was working on, it would certainly be motivation to get rid of both.

Unfortunately any claims pointing in the direction of a zoonotic transfer or lab leak is speculation at this point until serious research is done. And even then the extent of data manipulation might be so deep that drawing any conclusions might be impossible. It's an absolute disgrace that science has become so entrenched with politics that more than a year later we're still not clear on the origins of a world disrupting pandemic.

> they still published the most important information in a paper

Could you link to this please?

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#173

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

raphlinus wrote: post #78
jdavis703 wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sort of work should absolutely get more difficult for western scientists too. We’ve had several lab leaks that through luck didn’t turn in to pandemics. Certainly the costs of auditing and complying with lab safety is far cheaper than a global pandemic.

Prominent, respected virologists have been questioning gain of function research for a while. Here's a cite[1] from 2018 from Marc Lipsitch, who would be on most people's top ten list of trusted virologists on Covid. He's also one of the signatories of the letter calling for investigation[2]. I think it's possible to split out the question of bioresearch risks from Covid origins. If it was a lab leak, obviously we sh…

Lipsitch is an epidemiologist, not a virologist.

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#174

Post by Closi »

jpeloquin wrote: post #149

The quest to come up with a narrative for why Covid happened reminds me of the reporting when Katrina hit New Orleans. The city's vulnerability was known beforehand [0] but the inevitable disaster was greeted with shock, confusion, and a search for peripheral explanations. In the case of the pandemic, our vulnerability to zoonotic viruses and other diseases was also well-known; e.g. [1] was published in 1995. But aga…

I think part of the quest is about deciding if gain-of-function research is safe and should be allowed in the future.

If it happens to be the root cause, no doubt there will be a huge change in how it is carried out, if not outright banned.

If it is proven to not be the cause, it will be easier to argue that it can be safe.

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#175

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

bhk wrote: post #82
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stephen Quay is a "well known scientist" in a field completely unrelated to virology. He's a medical doctor who also does oncology research. Despite admitting to having no experience with Bayesian inference, he produced a "Bayesian analysis" of the origins of SARS-CoV-2. Another person who testified at that hearing, David Asher (also not a virologist, or even a scientist, but rather a former State Department bureaucr…

In response to the claim "YouTube it still taking down videos claiming X", you reply "This video featured someone not credible." Are you claiming that YouTube's policy is to take down all videos with non-credible speakers? Or that YouTube judged that the arguments made in this particular video did not meet their standards?

I replied in response to

> Two well known scientists testified before congress on GoF testing and the Corona Virus characteristics.

I'm not commenting on YouTube's policy. I'm commenting on the fact that the people giving testimony are not at all credible. It says a lot that Congress invites obvious cranks to testify, rather than scientists with relevant expertise.

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#176

Post by swiftcoder »

dehrmann wrote: post #155

I really hope biologists had much bigger debates about virus modification than the tech community has about ethical AI. It's great that we talk about ethical AI, but the fact that a mistake can't cause a pandemic also puts it in perspective.

Arguably, Skynet might count as a pandemic.

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#177

Post by pas »

toomim wrote: post #136
Leary wrote: post #58

"The Last And Only Foreign Scientist in the Wuhan Lab Speaks Out" [1] [1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-06-27/did-covid...

She was at the BSL4 lab. This is different than the BSL2 lab that was speculated to have leaked covid.

Aren't they included in each other like a matrioshka doll?

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#178

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

CMay wrote: post #122
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are actual virologists who support the lab leak theory Very few. I don't know of any major virologist who actually says it's more likely, and the overwhelming majority say it's highly unlikely. Right now, everything points to the outbreak being associated with animal markets, just like SARS.

Using quantity like this to prop up your reasoning and discounting the contributions of someone outside of a field both weaken the strength of your conclusions, unfortunately.

When people who know what they're talking about say one thing, and people who don't know what they're talking about say the opposite, who are you going to listen to?

There are very good reasons why virologists think SARS-CoV-2 spilled over naturally. I've discussed some of the reasons elsewhere in this discussion (there's absolutely no evidence the WIV had this virus before the outbreak, and there's pretty good evidence they didn't, dangerous human-animal interactions outside labs are vastly more common than in labs, the first outbreak was centered on a market that housed live animals).

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#179

Post by akvadrako »

rdedev wrote: post #114

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/25/opinion/coronavirus-lab.h... This is a pretty well reasoned take kn the lab leak hypothesis. We might not know for certain if covid came from the lab in Wuhan but there are enough lapses that took place in that lab that a future pandemic can start from that place

This is the most important point in this discussion. If we find out for certain this virus came from a lab leak or not, it wouldn't much change the probability it could have.

I'd estimate most people can agree the probability of a lab leak of a dangerous virus in any given decade is between 1-20%. Is this acceptable or can we greatly reduce it with policy?

Re: The risky bat-virus engineering that links America to Wuhan

#180

Post by petre »

tynpeddler wrote: post #63

This article has a number of issues that jump out to me from just a cursory read. The author admits that the NIH has a specific definition of "gain of function research" and then seems to go forward with the article using their own definition, without calling out that they're doing this. Why are they using their own definition instead of the NIH's? The Chinese research this author cites claims that there are large re…

I've made up my mind to discount the lab escape hypotesis as it's likely to generate more yellow journalism and controversy fueling the "news cycle", conspiracy theories and finger pointing. I guess we'll find the truth in another five or more years.
Post reply on HN