4 ms·

This is sort of my reaction. It's a little like being astonished that a microbe could be identified so quickly in Boston or Atlanta.

by Fomite 7y ago

chrisco255 7y ago
My reaction is that the lab should be suspected. They've been doing research on SARS-like viruses from bats for years now. What are the odds that it would break out in the same city, of all the cities in the world? Is the seafood market a scapegoat?
- Fomite 7y ago
  Tons of people have been doing work on SARS-like viruses from bats for years now. That's what happens when you go from "No one gets infected by cornaviruses" to...SARS. Accidental releases almost always involve people with direct links to the lab in question first. That's a really obvious epidemiological link. "A coronavirus emerged in China and got detected quickly because of solid medical infrastructure" is a way more parsimonious explanation than "Accidental release from a BSL-4 lab."
  - ColanR 7y ago
    > solid medical infrastructure From what I've read, "solid medical infrastructure" doesn't exist in Wuhan.
    - Fomite 7y ago
      Where "solid" = not Liberia or the Congo. For emerging infectious diseases, Wuhan is perfectly functional, and the Chinese have the necessary resources. Motorbikes with samples aren't getting stuck as roads turn into mud during the rainy season.
      - 1_over_n 7y ago
        How many people commenting on here have actually worked in a lab doing this kind of research? or any lab for that matter? From experience, i will say that researchers are humans too and make mistakes. Things get dropped, spilled, mislablled all the time. Mistakes may be compounded by people collaborating - i.e. researcher A makes mistake at earlier stage in the protocol and researcher B does everything correct but is building on top of that error. Also, people share work spaces where some people are more careful than others.
        Fomite 7y ago
        My first advisor in graduate school was someone working on SARS. I'm currently an Assistant Professor of Computational Epidemiology, and my research is on healthcare-associated infections and emerging pathogens.
        1_over_n 7y ago
        My comment was not a personal attack or even directed at you per se (sorry if it appeared that way). I do still feel that your level of exertise is in the minority of people browsing HN and it is also a valued contribution. I have experience working in labs like this too. I would also say from experience sometimes peoples professors never step a foot in the lab and only direct people from afar and are disconnected from what the troops on the ground are doing. Like any organisation leadership can be disconnected from the day to day or even encourage peverse incentives.
- neiman 7y ago
  >My reaction is that the lab should be suspected.... What are the odds that it would break out in the same city, of all the cities in the world? I dunno what are the odds, but do you know what are the odds? If you don't, then you have no base for suspicious.
  - mensetmanusman 7y ago
    If patient zero really came from Wuhan, the law of large numbers would put you at odds around 6/100 (60 million people in Wuhan in the 1 billion people region)
    - onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
      That seems higher than the odds of it being a lab outbreak. Doesn't every major city the world have some lab testing some kind of virus nearby?
      - mensetmanusman 7y ago
        There is only one of these level-4 labs in China and it is in Wuhan...
        Fomite 7y ago
        You also don't need a level 4 lab to work on coronaviruses.
        onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
        And the outbreak could have, hypothetically, been anything.
  - 7952 7y ago
    In this kind of argument odds are just a way of making intuition sound objective. Based on one person's experience it may be obvious that accidental release from labs can happen. To another person this will seem more far fetched. So which side of the argument should provide evidence? Why is the parents suspicion any less valid than your lack of suspicion? These kind of questions are particularly difficult when secretive government institutions are involved.
lobster45 7y ago
Atlanta has the US center for disease control. But your point of just about every other city in the US is accurate
- Fomite 7y ago
  That was the point of picking Atlanta - there's a very high concentration of infectious disease experts with close connections to the major public health agency. Both Atlanta and Boston have BSL-4 labs.
- wjn0 7y ago
  That's exactly the point.

This is sort of my reaction. It's a little like being astonished that a microbe could be identified so quickly in Boston or Atlanta.

by Fomite 7y ago

This is sort of my reaction. It's a little like being astonished that a microbe could be identified so quickly in Boston or Atlanta.

chrisco255 7y ago

My reaction is that the lab should be suspected. They've been doing research on SARS-like viruses from bats for years now. What are the odds that it would break out in the same city, of all the cities in the world? Is the seafood market a scapegoat?

Fomite 7y ago
Tons of people have been doing work on SARS-like viruses from bats for years now. That's what happens when you go from "No one gets infected by cornaviruses" to...SARS. Accidental releases almost always involve people with direct links to the lab in question first. That's a really obvious epidemiological link. "A coronavirus emerged in China and got detected quickly because of solid medical infrastructure" is a way more parsimonious explanation than "Accidental release from a BSL-4 lab."
- ColanR 7y ago
  > solid medical infrastructure From what I've read, "solid medical infrastructure" doesn't exist in Wuhan.
  - Fomite 7y ago
    Where "solid" = not Liberia or the Congo. For emerging infectious diseases, Wuhan is perfectly functional, and the Chinese have the necessary resources. Motorbikes with samples aren't getting stuck as roads turn into mud during the rainy season.
    - 1_over_n 7y ago
      How many people commenting on here have actually worked in a lab doing this kind of research? or any lab for that matter? From experience, i will say that researchers are humans too and make mistakes. Things get dropped, spilled, mislablled all the time. Mistakes may be compounded by people collaborating - i.e. researcher A makes mistake at earlier stage in the protocol and researcher B does everything correct but is building on top of that error. Also, people share work spaces where some people are more careful than others.
      - Fomite 7y ago
        My first advisor in graduate school was someone working on SARS. I'm currently an Assistant Professor of Computational Epidemiology, and my research is on healthcare-associated infections and emerging pathogens.
        1_over_n 7y ago
        My comment was not a personal attack or even directed at you per se (sorry if it appeared that way). I do still feel that your level of exertise is in the minority of people browsing HN and it is also a valued contribution. I have experience working in labs like this too. I would also say from experience sometimes peoples professors never step a foot in the lab and only direct people from afar and are disconnected from what the troops on the ground are doing. Like any organisation leadership can be disconnected from the day to day or even encourage peverse incentives.
neiman 7y ago
>My reaction is that the lab should be suspected.... What are the odds that it would break out in the same city, of all the cities in the world? I dunno what are the odds, but do you know what are the odds? If you don't, then you have no base for suspicious.
- mensetmanusman 7y ago
  If patient zero really came from Wuhan, the law of large numbers would put you at odds around 6/100 (60 million people in Wuhan in the 1 billion people region)
  - onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
    That seems higher than the odds of it being a lab outbreak. Doesn't every major city the world have some lab testing some kind of virus nearby?
    - mensetmanusman 7y ago
      There is only one of these level-4 labs in China and it is in Wuhan...
      - Fomite 7y ago
        You also don't need a level 4 lab to work on coronaviruses.
        onlyrealcuzzo 7y ago
        And the outbreak could have, hypothetically, been anything.
- 7952 7y ago
  In this kind of argument odds are just a way of making intuition sound objective. Based on one person's experience it may be obvious that accidental release from labs can happen. To another person this will seem more far fetched. So which side of the argument should provide evidence? Why is the parents suspicion any less valid than your lack of suspicion? These kind of questions are particularly difficult when secretive government institutions are involved.

lobster45 7y ago

Atlanta has the US center for disease control. But your point of just about every other city in the US is accurate

Fomite 7y ago
That was the point of picking Atlanta - there's a very high concentration of infectious disease experts with close connections to the major public health agency. Both Atlanta and Boston have BSL-4 labs.
wjn0 7y ago
That's exactly the point.