Live data from Hacker News

CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

nytimes.com

701–710 of 868 posts

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It means purposely engineering pandemic-caliber viruses This is not true. GoF includes any research that amplifies specific characteristics. Transmissibility or severity of infection are just two of those possible dimensions. For example, the research that enables us to produce insulin (and tons of other biologic medicines) with E. coli is GoF. I lean on the side of banning GoF that's designed to increase transmiss…

Fair enough that it has that meaning more generally in biology. My point is 100% of the policy discussions about it are referring to that particular subset—no one means producing insulin when they talk about the risks of GoF.

Yes but this is what causes confusion when scientists push back against proposed bans which seems like a legitimately insane and evil position to take.

We can sharpen the language and say "ban GoF research that increases transmissibility of infectious disease", for example.

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#702

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That depends on whether the research increases the risk of a pandemic by any appreciable amount, compared to all the other things humans do. It's kind of absurd that he have hundreds of millions of farmers and hunters interacting with infected animals every day, and nobody cares, but then we have a few researchers interacting with the same viruses under highly controlled conditions, and that's what we're worried abou…

I don't know how you can read about the half dozen or more documented cases of lab leaks in this thread - regardless of what you believe about covid - and call heightened restrictions for experimental work with human-infectious viruses security theatre. It's not sci-fi horror movies folks are worried about, it's people making mistakes the way all people do. The way you seem to be doing. We take the effort to air gap…

The examples of "lab leaks" being given in this thread are things like a large-scale human vaccine trial not using a properly inactivated virus. This is not a "lab leak" in anything like the sense of that is being alleged here.

> We take the effort to air gap infected or security critical IT systems, but can't be bothered to air gap humanity from existential threats.

My whole point is that we're not air-gapped in the first place. Millions of humans are interacting with infected animals every day, under conditions that are much less safe and controlled.

Imagine if all of your data had been leaked to the public internet, was mirrored across a dozen websites, and was being downloaded 1000 times a day, but then one security researcher had your data on an encrypted drive, and only read it on an air-gapped computer. Would you be more worried about the one security researcher, or the dozens of publicly accessible websites?

> If protecting all of humanity from the next pandemic is too much work for virologists, maybe it's best that they consider another career?

They are protecting you, and the thanks they get is that you scapegoat them, hound them online, and cheer when they get fired. You should be grateful that people like Shi Zhengli at the Wuhan Institute of Virology worked so hard on understanding coronaviruses for decades, and warned about the risks of a pandemic. Instead, without any knowledge of the subject, you're participating in a witch hunt against her and her colleagues.

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#703

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument is not "research accidents categorically do not happen" it was "are they the more common event and therefore the more probable explanation, absent anything else"

Depending how we count, there have been a dozen or so pandemics comparably novel or deadly to the 1977 flu in the last fifty years. Of those, at least one was research-origin. So are you really saying p ~ 1/12 is an "extraordinary claim"? Is a 6'1" American man "extraordinarily tall"? There's unfortunately no standard map between English phrases and numerical probabilities, but I think most people would understand a…

> Depending how we count, there have been a dozen or so pandemics comparably novel or deadly to the 1977 flu in the last fifty years. Of those, at least one was research-origin. So are you really saying p ~ 1/12 is an "extraordinary claim"?

Yes, I think it is extraordinary to extrapolate one event in 1977 to a "once every fifty years" rate

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#704

> The agency made its new assessment with “low confidence,” which means the intelligence behind it is fragmentary and incomplete. I do believe that's all one really needs to know about this shift in their thinking. In other words: it's really far from certain. --- One thing that is, however, quite certain: there are very real political reasons to favor one theory or another. For example, Sen. Tom Cotton is quoted as…

This is a strange take to me. Of course the search for truth is to some degree a search for accountability. It's not a gotcha to say "They just want to hold China accountable". Of course they do if it seems likely it came from poor procedure, it makes it their responsibility.

> It's not a gotcha to say "They just want to hold China accountable".

Sure, it’s not a gotcha if we divorce such a statement from all of its surrounding context.

But context in communication is incredibly important, and it’s unwise to analyze these kinds of statements in a context-free manner. I find it occurs on this site fairly often; it seems endemic to engineers. I try hard to avoid it myself, but frequently fail.

The relevant context here, of course, is the rabid anti-China sentiment expressed by folks like Sen. Cotton for years, dating back to well before the COVID pandemic. I take no position on whether or not his views are accurate or fair - but a context-informed analysis of the situation suggests that Sen. Cotton (and others) are not simply seeking truth and accountability: rather, they seek pretext to justify their views.

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#705
post #674

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The SARS outbreak was from many zoonosis events of slightly different strains, over the course of months. The standard zoonosis theory here predicts that multiple spillover events are likely, because there's a population of infected animals that is in close contact with humans.

Multiple zoonosis events from close strains over a couple months from a local animal population strikes high on the probability scale. Virtually simultaneous, in time and space, zoonosis events from different strains at the same place is still possible, but reaches much lower on the scale.

If both variants are spreading in the farmed animal population, it's not unlikely at all. It's what you'd expect.

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#706
post #464
post #456

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on point 4? Your comment is interesting but I don't entirely follow.

Basically, things like "It started in Wuhan near the WIV" implies that we actually have found the first case, etc., when this is notoriously difficult to do, especially with a disease that can have mild or asymptomatic presentation.

I believe these agencies may have other kinds of intelligence data such as satellite photos of the (empty?) Wuhan Institute of Virology carpark, spikes in mobile phone activity in the area etc. So assessments are made on more than just biological principles.

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#707
post #658

> The agency made its new assessment with “low confidence,” which means the intelligence behind it is fragmentary and incomplete. I do believe that's all one really needs to know about this shift in their thinking. In other words: it's really far from certain. --- One thing that is, however, quite certain: there are very real political reasons to favor one theory or another. For example, Sen. Tom Cotton is quoted as…

Sigh again this is where we were ending up. > So... I'm not certain this is a development worth trusting. Maybe it really did originate from a lab! But the real goal of the constant back-and-forth over where it came from is not about finding the truth; that much seems quite obvious to me. 0. COVID-19 was mostly harmless. Even more so than Douglas Adam's books. 1. China reacted asif they'd accidentally released a biow…

You have some interesting thoughts. But:

> 0. COVID-19 was mostly harmless. Even more so than Douglas Adam's books.

At the beginning of the pandemic, I found out that my father and his partner had COVID. He lived, at the time, about 12 hours drive from me. Where he lived, his support network was thin (to say the least) - the little family he had nearby needed to keep away because they were responsible for caring for my cousin with a severely weakened immune system. His friends, sadly, also contracted COVID around the same time.

I called him twice a day, and each call he was worse than the last. I decided to rent an AirBnB nearby. My partner and I packed up the dog and everything we needed and drove overnight to get there.

We masked up, and got supplies at Walmart. We brought them to my Dad’s house and left them on the patio - retreated a safe distance - and my Dad came to retrieve them. He was in an awful condition, and his partner was worse.

For the next week I came to their porch every few hours, and called my dad, and we spoke with what little breath he had. He dictated his last will and testament to me. I delivered pedialyte, meal replacement shakes, pulse oximeters, anything to help them make it through. I forced them to get up and move around a little from time to time, and took notes on their condition. They wouldn’t let me in the house.

One day, before I arrived with supplies, my Dad told me they had called an ambulance for his partner. They took his partner to the local hospital… and the hospital turned him away because they had no beds. They essentially sent my Dad’s partner home to die.

By some miraculous turn of events, they survived. They have issues walking and breathing to this day, but they survived.

It’s one of the more agonizing, awful things I’ve ever had to watch. COVID-19 wasn’t harmless; it killed millions. I saw it up close. Especially early on, it was virulent and deadly, and very nearly took my parents from me. It did end up taking a lot of people in my extended social network. They died agonizing deaths.

How dare you paint it as “mostly harmless.”

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#708

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the academic papers that were published strongly pointed to the origin being the market and from wild animals, not lab animals.

You are being downvoted, but you are right. Evidence suggest that patient zero was someone in the Wuhan market, around november 2019, and the SARS-CoV-2 genetic "signatures" where all found in wild animals for sale in that market. Even if it leaked from the lab, the first affected people (mainly sellers) were from the market, which is weird. Occam's razor points to what you said. I guess everyone loves a good conspir…

I have pretty much given up on trying to discuss this rationally on any Internet forum. The only people who seem to engage have very strong priors that are impervious to new data. But it's been a year so I guess I needed a reminder to myself in the futility of the endeavor

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#709

I think it’s important to note that there are really two “lab leak” theories: One in which the virus developed naturally, was collected in a remote location, and was being studied in a lab when it leaked from the lab into nearby human society. One in which it was not a dangerous virus originally, and it became dangerous in the lab through human agency, either maliciously (e.g. bioweapons research) or accidentally (e.…

>These two theories get mixed up constantly, either by accident or on purpose, who knows. You literally just reduced 3 theories to 2: lab leak natural virus, lab leak medical GoF, and lab leak bioweapon. These theories get collapsed because there's no practical way to distinguish between them. A 4th theory, intentional release, is often used as a weakman for all lab leak theories, but isn't actually a leak at all. >S…

You've made great points throughout this entire post. This is yet another that I've just upvoted (from having been downvoted). But in each you've been needlessly aggressive and hostile. Everyone here knows how frustrating COVID-19 can be to discuss—as is the case with most topics worth discussing. But it's less frustrating when we all implicitly agree to stick to our thoughtful great points.

Re: CIA now favors lab leak theory to explain Covid's origins

#710
post #693

Americans had a role to play here as well: In 2014, Obama administration halted the so called "gain of function" research because of laboratory accidents. In 2017, Trump administration restarted the research. See links below. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/18/us/white-house-to-cut-fun... https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/19/health/lethal-viruses-nih... The U.S. government, through the National Institutes of Health (NI…

This was published 17 Jan 2017 - https://www.science.org/content/article/after-criticism-fede... - before Trump's inauguration. The process to reconsider the ban started under Obama.

Date on the article you linked is 24 Jan 2020.
Post reply on HN