3 ms·

She was researching bat Corona viruses? The outbreak started at a market on the doorstep of her lab? Her name is on several papers on bat Corona virus. Just po

by rpiguy 7y ago

She was researching bat Corona viruses? The outbreak started at a market on the doorstep of her lab? Her name is on several papers on bat Corona virus. Just pointing out that Wuhan was studying viruses exactly like the one tearing through the world right now, lol.

meowface 7y ago
>Just pointing out that Wuhan was studying viruses exactly like the one tearing through the world right now, lol. Yes, and this is important, but this is also already publicly known. It's not providing any new or interesting information. There're still a lot of other variables and factors to take into account here. Statistics aren't so simple. For example, Wuhan is a huge city, larger than NYC, and an important economic hub. The area has a very high number of people and is population-dense. Tons of scientific institutions are there, as one would generally expect of such a city. So by that alone, the prior for the lab being there could be pretty high. Also, maybe the lab was created there and bats were studied there in the first place because the general area was known to already have virus-carrying animals like bats? Perhaps even created there because they considered it very likely the particular bats in that particular area could potentially carry human-transferable viruses? And perhaps also because they knew lots of animals in the area, including bats, were regularly hunted and sold for food, further increasing the likelihood that human-infecting viruses may be found in that area? If that's true, one would expect outbreaks to be more likely to occur in that area whether or not the lab was involved. It'd be reversing cause and effect - maybe a lab is there because the area is a virus hotzone, rather than the area being a virus hotzone because a lab is there. I saw some other evidence saying coronavirus-carrying bats studied at the lab were taken from elsewhere in China, which could alter this assessment, so one would need to look at all of that more thoroughly, but the point is this isn't such a simple association to make. A lab escape is totally plausible and wouldn't be shocking, but it needs strong arguments, analysis, and evidence.
- TechBro8615 7y ago
  I see you making a lot of comments in this thread and I think you make some good points. I’m curious, could you think of an example of “strong evidence” that would support the theory that it was accidentally released from a lab?
  - Klinky 7y ago
    The lab needs to admit there was an accident, or an independent group of inspectors need to visit the lab to collect samples, review evidence, and make such a judgement. Neither of these are actually going to happen. The conspiracy nuts probably prefer it that way.
  - meowface 7y ago
    It's very hard to prove or disprove, and probably even harder with a totalitarian regime, so it's likely just going to be conspiracy theory fodder for years or decades. You might need a whistleblower, leaked/stolen/hacked documents, or a surreptitiously recorded conversation. Another commenter mentioned a third party inspecting the lab, though if the lab really were the source I think they'd probably be able to fully cover that up before any inspection took place. I mean, even if they didn't cover it up but are responsible, an inspection may still find no evidence of it (samples or animals containing a 100% or near-100% match of the virus could add some additional evidence, but also isn't proof by itself). Hell, maybe their leaders don't even know if their lab was responsible or not. If it did happen, maybe it was a fuckup they were totally unaware of and still have no way of tracing retroactively. In such a scenario, maybe an employee made a mistake, got infected, but became a permanently asymptomatic carrier. Then they could've spread it to someone while out on a walk, or in some other way that would be really hard to reliably go back and track. I will say, from everything I've seen, Chinese citizens are generally also quite concerned and angry about this whole situation. They've actually forced the government to apologize and backtrack on things quite a bit. If there's a highly convincing and credible leak that the virus escaped from the lab mistakenly, and they knew about it and covered it up, I think there would be outrage and possibly massive protests. Yes, I really think they'd be so outraged that huge numbers of them may do this even with an authoritarian regime that's infamous for killing protestors en masse. Chinese citizens are pretty much no different from anyone else. They would absolutely want to know if their government is covering up that one of their labs accidentally unleashed the pandemic of the century. They're not necessarily going to buy all the propaganda about it if there's serious, clear evidence that this happened. But as it is now, there's no evidence, so they, and us, have no reason to be outraged about this particular accusation. It's something that should be investigated, but even if "unfounded accusations like these are dangerous" sounds like the words of a worried Chinese government censor, it's also true in this case.
Klinky 7y ago
This kind of witch-hunt logic belongs in the dark ages. Persecuting potential experts on the situation based on vague assumptions and rumors. Awful.
- rpiguy 7y ago
  No one is being persecuted. It is correct to suspect. In a murder investigation the police start with those closest related to the victim. If money is missing from a bank vault you start your investigation looking at all those who had access. When a pandemic starts outside of a lab studying the same kind of virus tearing through the world you start with the lab. We will likely never know for sure, but it is absolutely reasonable to suspect.
  - runawaybottle 7y ago
    Too put it even more simply, if most most of the world is prepared to do contact tracing on an average person for having been anywhere near the virus, then the lab should not be above due diligence. The prevailing theory is more or less ‘someone touched a bat’. Like who? Staff at a lab messing with bats?
  - Klinky 7y ago
    You're accusing a specific person of involvement in a major pandemic with evidence you admit is flimsy at best, with little to no hope of ever confirming.
    - rpiguy 7y ago
      No I’m not accusing a specific person, I was pointing out that the US actually funded this research here domestically and the doctor went to Wuhan to continue her research when we closed the program as proof bat Corona virus was being studied there. We will never be allowed by totalitarian China to collect evidence, so all we have is suspicion. Very justified suspicion.

by rpiguy 7y ago

meowface 7y ago

>Just pointing out that Wuhan was studying viruses exactly like the one tearing through the world right now, lol. Yes, and this is important, but this is also already publicly known. It's not providing any new or interesting information. There're still a lot of other variables and factors to take into account here. Statistics aren't so simple. For example, Wuhan is a huge city, larger than NYC, and an important economic hub. The area has a very high number of people and is population-dense. Tons of scientific institutions are there, as one would generally expect of such a city. So by that alone, the prior for the lab being there could be pretty high. Also, maybe the lab was created there and bats were studied there in the first place because the general area was known to already have virus-carrying animals like bats? Perhaps even created there because they considered it very likely the particular bats in that particular area could potentially carry human-transferable viruses? And perhaps also because they knew lots of animals in the area, including bats, were regularly hunted and sold for food, further increasing the likelihood that human-infecting viruses may be found in that area? If that's true, one would expect outbreaks to be more likely to occur in that area whether or not the lab was involved. It'd be reversing cause and effect - maybe a lab is there because the area is a virus hotzone, rather than the area being a virus hotzone because a lab is there. I saw some other evidence saying coronavirus-carrying bats studied at the lab were taken from elsewhere in China, which could alter this assessment, so one would need to look at all of that more thoroughly, but the point is this isn't such a simple association to make. A lab escape is totally plausible and wouldn't be shocking, but it needs strong arguments, analysis, and evidence.

TechBro8615 7y ago
I see you making a lot of comments in this thread and I think you make some good points. I’m curious, could you think of an example of “strong evidence” that would support the theory that it was accidentally released from a lab?
- Klinky 7y ago
  The lab needs to admit there was an accident, or an independent group of inspectors need to visit the lab to collect samples, review evidence, and make such a judgement. Neither of these are actually going to happen. The conspiracy nuts probably prefer it that way.
- meowface 7y ago
  It's very hard to prove or disprove, and probably even harder with a totalitarian regime, so it's likely just going to be conspiracy theory fodder for years or decades. You might need a whistleblower, leaked/stolen/hacked documents, or a surreptitiously recorded conversation. Another commenter mentioned a third party inspecting the lab, though if the lab really were the source I think they'd probably be able to fully cover that up before any inspection took place. I mean, even if they didn't cover it up but are responsible, an inspection may still find no evidence of it (samples or animals containing a 100% or near-100% match of the virus could add some additional evidence, but also isn't proof by itself). Hell, maybe their leaders don't even know if their lab was responsible or not. If it did happen, maybe it was a fuckup they were totally unaware of and still have no way of tracing retroactively. In such a scenario, maybe an employee made a mistake, got infected, but became a permanently asymptomatic carrier. Then they could've spread it to someone while out on a walk, or in some other way that would be really hard to reliably go back and track. I will say, from everything I've seen, Chinese citizens are generally also quite concerned and angry about this whole situation. They've actually forced the government to apologize and backtrack on things quite a bit. If there's a highly convincing and credible leak that the virus escaped from the lab mistakenly, and they knew about it and covered it up, I think there would be outrage and possibly massive protests. Yes, I really think they'd be so outraged that huge numbers of them may do this even with an authoritarian regime that's infamous for killing protestors en masse. Chinese citizens are pretty much no different from anyone else. They would absolutely want to know if their government is covering up that one of their labs accidentally unleashed the pandemic of the century. They're not necessarily going to buy all the propaganda about it if there's serious, clear evidence that this happened. But as it is now, there's no evidence, so they, and us, have no reason to be outraged about this particular accusation. It's something that should be investigated, but even if "unfounded accusations like these are dangerous" sounds like the words of a worried Chinese government censor, it's also true in this case.

Klinky 7y ago

This kind of witch-hunt logic belongs in the dark ages. Persecuting potential experts on the situation based on vague assumptions and rumors. Awful.

rpiguy 7y ago
No one is being persecuted. It is correct to suspect. In a murder investigation the police start with those closest related to the victim. If money is missing from a bank vault you start your investigation looking at all those who had access. When a pandemic starts outside of a lab studying the same kind of virus tearing through the world you start with the lab. We will likely never know for sure, but it is absolutely reasonable to suspect.
- runawaybottle 7y ago
  Too put it even more simply, if most most of the world is prepared to do contact tracing on an average person for having been anywhere near the virus, then the lab should not be above due diligence. The prevailing theory is more or less ‘someone touched a bat’. Like who? Staff at a lab messing with bats?
- Klinky 7y ago
  You're accusing a specific person of involvement in a major pandemic with evidence you admit is flimsy at best, with little to no hope of ever confirming.
  - rpiguy 7y ago
    No I’m not accusing a specific person, I was pointing out that the US actually funded this research here domestically and the doctor went to Wuhan to continue her research when we closed the program as proof bat Corona virus was being studied there. We will never be allowed by totalitarian China to collect evidence, so all we have is suspicion. Very justified suspicion.