Live data from Hacker News

US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

reuters.com

631–640 of 664 posts

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#631

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The experience of changing from someone who believes all aspects of the “orthodoxy”, to someone who accepts that there are flaws in it, can be strikingly similar. A Chinese friend once described to me the week he discovered YouTube after going to study in America, when for the first time he saw videos of Chinese leaders (2000-era) behaving very rudely toward reporters. He found that shocking, and over the next few we…

The great firewall is deterrent to spreading fake news, disinformation, and lies among the masses(1.4B) who make take it for truth resulting in social divisiveness and potential violence of which is happening in the US w/only 1/4 of the population. That said, the firewall is easily bypassed with VPN by many with the means to do so. Chinese govt does not view this as contradiction with their policy as it is deemed tho…

How can someone come on hackerNews (of all places) and claim the great firewall is a useful way to prevent disinformation? It just ensures that the only kind of information is the kind friendly to the ruling that party.

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#632
post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course - if China knew more, earlier, wouldn’t you say knowing this should affect policy in future?

Yes that's what I said: > That China blocked the Who's efforts and the WHO disclosed this is more relevant to future health policy than where this particular outbreak started. (Obviously the WHO, like any part of the UN can do nothing but document anything a superpower refuses to do.) Now how does that build a case that the WHO is a problem instead of allowing superpowers to have super power is a problem? It seems to…

> allowing superpowers to have super power is a problem?

What has this got do to do with anything we are discussing here? Who is ‘allowing this’. What does it mean to not ‘allow’ it?

> It seems to me like people down voting my original comment are members of superpower states with hypocritical stances.

What state are you a member of? Does something make you think it has no hypocritical stances?

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#633

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>- China intentionally manufactured the virus and released it (Proven false, virus wasn't engineered) The most common lab leak hypothesis I've seen is that it was engineered during gain-of-function research and then accidentally leaked. The fallacy is just that the only reason someone would engineer a virus would be to weaponize it. Gain-of-function research is regularly done to study and combat viruses. So just beca…

But they have found the virus in bats... it’s not engineered. Yes there are lots of legitimate reasons to study viruses.

No, they haven't found the exact virus in bats in the wild, yet. They've found some relatives, but not the virus. There's still no strong empirical evidence one way or another for the zoonotic vs. lab leak hypothesis.

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#634

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>- China intentionally manufactured the virus and released it (Proven false, virus wasn't engineered) The most common lab leak hypothesis I've seen is that it was engineered during gain-of-function research and then accidentally leaked. The fallacy is just that the only reason someone would engineer a virus would be to weaponize it. Gain-of-function research is regularly done to study and combat viruses. So just beca…

But they have found the virus in bats... it’s not engineered. Yes there are lots of legitimate reasons to study viruses.

They haven't found the virus in bats. The closest known relative to SARS-CoV-2 found in the wild was a different virus found in bats, RaTG13. As you wrote above yourself, there's no known animal reservoir for SARS-CoV-2. Laboratory attempts to infect bat cells (e.g. [1]; but there have been many others) with SARS-CoV-2 have been unsuccessful.

This was the significance of the pangolins, which were initially proposed to be the proximal animal host. But while it initially seemed that multiple infected pangolins from different sources had been found, it later turned out multiple seemingly independent papers had been written based on the same pangolins[2]. This means it's much more likely that something else infected those pangolins, in the same way e.g. that some housecats have been infected by their owners.

Nature has added an editor's note[3] to one of the pangolin papers, and even Daszak and the Chinese have pretty much abandoned the pangolins. So for now, there's no known animal host for SARS-CoV-2, unlike for the original SARS-CoV (palm civets) or MERS-CoV-2 (camels). Perhaps the animal reservoir just hasn't been found yet; but it's also possible that animal reservoir doesn't exist, because SARS-CoV-2 originated from serial passaging in a WIV lab. That's just natural evolution under unusually fast selective pressure, so any arguments that SARS-CoV-2 shows no evidence of genetic engineering are inapplicable to that theory.

1. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/12/20-2308_article

2. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.07.07.184374v2

3. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2313-x

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#635
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure where in my post it postulates anything about "truth". The entire point of the post is to say, we don't know the truth, but in the balance of probabilities, I wouldn't trust the CCP's version. Did you even read what I wrote, or are you just knee jerking?

Your balance of probabilities relies entire on priors. It's kind of useless and particularly uninformative.

Priors matter here, as we have no good data to actually verify or refute the issue, because Chinese gov't won't release the early data for scientific community at large around the world to analyze. So you can only rely on:

- do I trust the WHO - do I trust the CCP

I don't really trust either - but this is just my opinion, based on my interpretation of historical events and evidence. We are all adults here, we can choose to agree or disagree - that's what makes forums and free speech really work.

Some of my reasons for my choice to not trust the CCP:

The Chinese government has numerous reports of it conducting human rights abuses against Uighurs and other populations (Falun Gong, etc). There is constant state denial, but in my eyes, the evidence is compelling. Let's not play the "oh but other countries do this too" - other countries are not relevant to the issue at hand, and my opinion on them is similarly irrelevant here.

If you want to be absolutely pedantic, sure, we have no evidence to conclusively say anything - we also can't say evolution is correct, but it's the most likely theory given prior evidence. Note that my original post says that we have no smoking gun evidence (and again, I'd really want to stress, my original post was OPINION. It was meant in passing, but somehow it got the attention of people on both sides who clearly have a bone to pick).

But, in the "balance of probabilities", my priors suggest to me that I wouldn't trust the CCP. I'm not saying I'm right. I'm not saying you need to believe me. I am simply exercising my right to say my opinion, based on what I think are fairly reasonable priors given CCP track record.

CCP isn't an evil regime, which I feel like is what some of the stauncher replies in this thread feel that any criticism of the party secretly says. They've done great things for the country and its people. Healthcare, stability, infrastructure, and tried to right the wrongs of Mao and the GLF. But that doesn't mean you have to trust everything a government says. Your parents provide you with food and shelter, it doesn't mean you need to blindly believe that they are incapable of doing dishonest things.

This is also not an attack on the Chinese people, contrary to some silly posts I've seen saying "demonizing the CCP means demonizing thr Chinese people". I totally understand why Chinese people tolerate the government. When you emerged from a generation that suffered incredible rural poverty, like my own family, a government that promises you a stable paycheck, food, and housing seems reasonable to support and stay loyal to. I am fortunate enough that my father was talented and lucky enough to be able to leave for a country where we could obtain those things without needing to profess that loyalty unflinchingly.

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#636
post #564

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Only to be defeated by a rubber gasket eating mutation. Anyway Murphy's law is always applicable and we need the capability to fight fires even more.

> It is also much easier to stop bad software than bad biology. Software is much simpler than the human body. As an RE geek, and a biologist, the Movies were so f'ing awful... I'm playing the new reboot of the Outbreak series, my favorite of all, RE: Resistance and its pretty awesome and still does way more with genre of survival horror in what was simply an add-on DLC cash-in to sell an updated RE3 then all the horr…

I may be wrong, but I think that by saying rubber gasket the parent commenter had "Andromeda strain" in mind.

I meant RE though

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't call that evidence. "He's shot a gun before" isn't evidence, and coronaviruses are a pretty broad group as I understand it (not an expert). This is a densely-populated, agriculture-heavy third-world part of the world that had bird flu and sars in the previous 15 years... random-ass diseases materialize there. Occam's razor says it's another one of those.

I don't think you're being very good faith right now. Clearly a lab studying coronaviruses is interesting. Clearly its possible that the lab could have had a leak. Clearly it's possible a farmer could have wandered into a cave, or run into a bat in the wild. Clearly it's possible that it didn't originate in China. There is certainly enough evidence to investigate the lab being a possibility. It definitively being res…

I'd stack the probabilities as following:

1) Bat->Livestock->Human transmission

2) Direct bat->human transmission (your example fits here as a tiny subset, I don't think specifically employees of that one lab are the only people who could have had contact with a bat)

3) Lab leak

I'm rating the probabilities as I see them. Your scenario is possible! It's just not the most probable, and even if it were, there are a lot of possibilities.

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#638
post #555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a real possibility that a gain-of-function experiment created SARS-CoV-2: "Lipsitch’s activists (calling themselves the Cambridge Working Group) sent around a strong statement on the perils of research with “Potential Pandemic Pathogens,” signed by more than a hundred scientists. The work might “trigger outbreaks that would be difficult or impossible to control,” the signers said. Fauci reconsidered, and the…

there should be a global ban on gain-of-function experiments on deadly viruses and bacteria. Would you make the same argument for software vulnerability research? I think the arguments against both are the same, and with the same result: white-hat researchers will halt their work, leaving more of the field available to black-hat researcers.

Maybe so but i would assume the barrier to entry for creating a synthetic pathogen is likely to be much higher than somebody tinkering with a Kali Linux VM. I dont know much about gain of function experiments and limited working infosec knowledge so take that with a grain of salt.

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#639
post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Meanwhile the circumstantial evidence in favour of that hypothesis (including China’s behaviour) continues to pile up. What circumstantial evidence?

Alina Chan's WSJ article is a decent popular summary, https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-world-needs-a-real-investig... https://archive.is/R6kwN There's also been a string of academic preprints and articles, like https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/2102/2102.03910.pdf The authors tend to be kind of fringe, not surprisingly given the reputational cost (and given that if a lab origin is ever confirmed, many of the techniq…

Baric knows the truth. After all, it's his coronavirus research that ended up in Wuhan.

Ralph Baric and 'batwoman' Shi Zhengli worked together on several coronavirus research projects spanning more than a decade.

It's like asking the fox if he knows where the hen went.

Re: US raises ‘deep concerns’ over WHO report on Covid’s Wuhan origins

#640
post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is an absolutely braindead thing for a nuclear power to do - bio/chem weapon R&D. The reason why the US abandoned that course so long ago had nothing to do with morality - somebody in the DoD simply realized that they were furthering the state of the art in dirt cheap WMDs. If you already have nukes, you want to keep the cost of doomsday devices as high as possible - limiting the number of potential rivals.

"the US abandoned that course so long ago " How do you know this?

The very public shuttering of facilities, the absence of military doctrine, etc. Yes, there could be secret congressional funding for a secret research lab serving a secret component of the military that secretly maintains readiness to do something that is strategically counterproductive and categorically denied. Do I really need to go on with how silly that line of thought is?
Post reply on HN