What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis? • Hacker News Board

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#541

Post by trhway » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:09 AM UTC

jpeloquin wrote: post #308

trhway wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be clear - during 2014-2019 NIH actually paid $3.6M to EcoHealth Alliance under the grants clearly specifying the coronavirus GoF experiments in Wuhan with the "Human subjects included" checked. EcoHealth naturally kept about 75% of it as "commission/management fee/whatever" because conducting those experiments at BSL2 in Wuhan was much cheaper than the original experiments in US at BSL3+ (in those original experi…

> during 2014-2019 NIH actually paid $3.6M to EcoHealth Alliance under the grants clearly specifying the coronavirus GoF experiments in Wuhan with the "Human subjects included" checked. Is this is the grant you're referring to? https://reporter.nih.gov/search/me9X23pZWEigATS-4XTBfA/proje... From your comment it was unclear to me what the human subjects component was. It appears to have been population surveillance us…

I don't have the link right now to that 2014 EcoHealth grant. That link though describes it pretty good:

https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-...

" Baric had developed a way around that problem—a technique for “reverse genetics” in coronaviruses. Not only did it allow him to bring an actual virus to life from its genetic code, but he could mix and match parts of multiple viruses. He wanted to take the “spike” gene from SHC014 and move it into a genetic copy of the SARS virus he already had in his lab. The spike molecule is what lets a coronavirus open a cell and get inside it. The resulting chimera would demonstrate whether the spike of SHC014 would attach to human cells.

...

In 2014, the NIH awarded a five-year, $3.75 million grant to EcoHealth Alliance to study the risk that more bat-borne coronaviruses would emerge in China, using the same kind of techniques Baric had pioneered. Some of that work was to be subcontracted to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

...

In 2017, Daszak and Shi followed with another study, also at BSL-2, that one-upped Baric’s work in North Carolina. The WIV had continued to unearth dozens of new SARS-like coronaviruses in bat caves, and it reported making chimeras with eight of them by fusing the spikes of the new viruses to the chassis of WIV1. Two of them replicated well in human cells. They were, for all intents and purposes, brand-new pathogens.

"

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#542

Post by Maursault » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:21 AM UTC

notriddle wrote: post #512

scarmig wrote: post #426

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That doesn't eliminate the possibility that it was a natural virus which had been collected and subsequently escaped due to bad lab technique but the former is too attractive a conspiracy theory to let go.. For some reason most discussions claiming that the lab leak hypothesis is a conspiracy theory focus 90% of their effort arguing against being a bioengineered weapon and little time arguing against the actual str…

A zoonotic jump that happened to occur inside of a wildlife research facility due to bad lab technique is not that scary. If it's proven true, it's pretty likely that the lab operators will fix it. Could you imagine being the guy who caused the COVID-19 pandemic by forgetting to sanitize some tool? I bet whoever did it would be the single most careful and clean research scientist in the entire world after that kind o…

> The bioweapon theory, however, is politically useful. If you want to start a war, or at least trade sanctions, a villain is a good place to start.

This is precisely Nature's gambit. She carefully engineered SARS-CoV-2 in a matter of weeks (to conceal the evidence, which was eaten), all naturally of course, but carefully, subtly made it appear like it might have been designed by mere mortals... and for this very purpose. Armageddon. When there's an imbalance, Nature corrects. And no one would deny there is an imbalance in the Earth regarding our species alone totally messing it up for all living things.

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#543

Post by martythemaniak » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:24 AM UTC

bell-cot wrote: post #262

martythemaniak wrote: post #58

Two years and I have yet to read an explanation of what this hypothesis is. Were they careless with a natural virus? Did they modify viruses? Did they release a nature virus on purpose? Did they accidentally release a modified virus? What's modified even mean here, studying random mutation? Engineering things? It's Schrodinger's Argument. It's all of them and none of them and it always shifts depending on who you're…

The article tries to define it: > an accident in a laboratory or during a research field trip Which, yes, is incredibly vague. I give them credit for at least ruling out the "Evil Chinese Scientists intentionally create and release deadly virus!" bullsh*t. One plausible "lab" scenario: A baggage-hauling laborer caught the proto-COVID-19 virus in a bat-filled cave during a routine "collect samples of germs from bats"…

Thing is, isn't "during a field trip" actually the zoonotic theory? Ie, if there's a super contagious virus circulating around in bats, and a researcher was in a cave, then went to the market... that's the same as a tourist visiting a cave (as I have done) or a worker harvesting Bird's Next from cave, then selling at the market.

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#544

Post by forum_ghost » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:26 AM UTC

lupire wrote: post #525

briandear wrote: post #486

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps we could hold those responsible accountable? Especially if it came from research Fauci said wasn’t happening but actually was? Specifically gain of function. Look at how BP got hammered for an oil spill. Why wouldn’t China proportional penalties given that if it were a lab leak it lead to a global economic and health disaster. That it was coincidence that the virus happening near a research facility where the…

It wasn't "Chinese" research. It was Chinese-American research. Same as how the toxic trash USA sent to China for fake recycling was USA trash, and same as how the outsourced manufacturing of "American" products to American specs is Chinese-American manufacturing.

That would depend on the facts, and who made what decisions, and who had what control when.

at this point, all of that has been scrubbed for good, and nothing factual will ever come out.

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#545

Post by europabound » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:27 AM UTC

Lot of discussion here on the 'dispositive proof' by Worobey et al. and the lack of intermediate lineage between lineage A & B (after intermediate genomes were ruled out without having access to the raw data to properly QC). A recent paper casts some doubts on at least extent of animal zoonosis (it any occurred at all) - indicating at least several of the early market cases were due to human to human transmission.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S001393512...

What seems to get lost on people is that no animals in the market tested positive for a SARS-2-related virus.

https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-1370392/v1

Whatsmore the early lineage A virus was only found in one environmental sample, all other env samples were B and all human infections were B.

Both points cast serious doubt as to whether the market was really the origin - or just a superspreader location.

Using a different method than Pekar et al., Caraballo-Ortiz et al. estimate a lat Sept/E Oct ancestral virus emergence in Wuhan. If correct, we can probably discount the Hunan seafood market as the origin, and need to look esewhere in Wuhan

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34931186/

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#546

Post by riyadparvez » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:29 AM UTC

trashtester wrote: post #478

mikeyouse wrote: post #84

For those with a bit more background in the sciences, there's an increasingly massive amount of evidence to support Zoonotic origin. Philipp Markolin has a good rundown: https://protagonistfuture.substack.com/p/natures-neglected-g... Most of the "evidence" for lab leak is just weird insinuation -- it's increasingly hard to pin down what the advocates for that position are even arguing (e.g. whether it's a natural vir…

Here is a hypothesis that fits the data perfectly (but that could have a somewhat low prior): - A poor studen has discovered that there is a demand in the wet market for bats. - The student works at a lab that either has an in-house breeding area for presumably healthy bats, or that buy such bats from an external vendor. - The student sees the opportunity for some extra income by selling some of those bats to the loc…

I've heard it from someone who was in China after the pandemic emerged. Apparently some Chinese people believe exactly that. Some of the lab animals were sold to the wet market. And that's how the virus jumped from animal to host. Although evidence is scant. Then again it's China.

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#547

Post by johndfsgdgdfg » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:35 AM UTC

stetrain wrote: post #12

I think understanding the origin is important, but I also understand why it wasn't a media fixation during the pandemic itself. 1) Understanding the origin doesn't change the consequences or response to the pandemic 2) Unlike the nuclear analogy in the article, pandemic virus outbreaks happen naturally, and fairly frequently. Combined with the huge increase in global travel, when one does happen it can be around the…

Thank you for posting this. We know that COVID couldn't have come from China. It came to China through frozen meat packages. WHO-China report already stated that fact. Dr. Fauci also believes that.

The only reason we can't find evidence because other countries wouldn't collaborate, for obvious reasons. Racists are trying to blame China because of lack of competence of their leaders.

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#548

Post by europabound » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:35 AM UTC

mikeyouse wrote: post #84

For those with a bit more background in the sciences, there's an increasingly massive amount of evidence to support Zoonotic origin. Philipp Markolin has a good rundown: https://protagonistfuture.substack.com/p/natures-neglected-g... Most of the "evidence" for lab leak is just weird insinuation -- it's increasingly hard to pin down what the advocates for that position are even arguing (e.g. whether it's a natural vir…

Two reviews of Markolins work are worth reading before you take it seriously:

https://twitter.com/EmaNymton90/status/1540235304854032385?s...

https://twitter.com/gdemaneuf/status/1507092599945166849?s=2...

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#549

Post by onetimeusename » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:40 AM UTC

ayjchan wrote: post #531

This is Alina Chan, one of the co-authors of Viral: The Search for the Origin of Covid-19. I’m going to answer some of the questions that have come up in the comments. 1. Are Chan and Ridley selling a book? Yes, the updated paperback comes out in the US next week: https://www.harpercollins.com/products/viral-matt-ridleyalin... The updated epilogue now discusses three significant new developments since the publication…

Is there any evidence of a link between sars-cov-2 to other previously known viruses that the Wuhan lab might have had in its possession? Could there be a plausible candidate virus that might have escaped from the lab? Was any of this data public prior to the pandemic?

Re: What happened to the lab-leak hypothesis?

#550

Post by _aavaa_ » Sat, Jun 25, 2022, 2:40 AM UTC

shadowgovt wrote: post #530

_aavaa_ wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A) I guess I interpreted "consequences" more generally to also include the consequences beyond the disease itself. B) I still believe that it would have been important. If it escaped from a lab, then those working in the lab could potentially have important information to share with the world about it. E.g. is it airborne, how much does it mutate, etc. They would have been studying it for a reason.

The fact that information never saw the light of day should be obvious evidence it didn't come out of a lab.

Based on what implicit assumption? That a government would allow that information to be published? Look at how cagey and not forthcoming the Chinese government was under the current conditions.

Try to extrapolate to what they would act like if it did leak from a lab.