4 ms·

It's certainly possible it came from a lab. The problem here is political interest. Some on the left are downplaying the lab aspect in favor of a natural origin

It's certainly possible it came from a lab. The problem here is political interest. Some on the left are downplaying the lab aspect in favor of a natural origin because some on the right are using the Chinese origin as a basis for racism. If it came from a lab in China, that doesn't make it a "Chinese" virus. Don't we have labs studying dangerous diseases in the US? People make mistakes. It's better to find the true cause and learn from it, human or not.

gumby 6y ago
> It's certainly possible it came from a lab. Quite a few significant geneticists consider it extremely unlikely: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 Sure, it’s possible, but that probability appears to be extremely small. Edit: I just realized you might have meant “natural origins but escaped from the lab rather than being introduced directly from wild animals”. If that’s what you meant apologies that my reply is irrelevant. If you meant “deliberately engineered in a lab” then my reply stands. I don’t see science as a “left/right” issue.
- cameldrv 6y ago
  What is the argument in that paper?
  - runawaybottle 6y ago
    Perhaps this bit: While the analyses above suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may bind human ACE2 with high affinity, computational analyses predict that the interaction is not ideal7 and that the RBD sequence is different from those shown in SARS-CoV to be optimal for receptor binding7,11. Thus, the high-affinity binding of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to human ACE2 is most likely the result of natural selection on a human or human-like ACE2 that permits another optimal binding solution to arise. This is strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of purposeful manipulation. But again, the poster clarified this only addresses the engineering of the virus, not the the other theories that center around lax precautions at the lab. So, these threads do devolve into a predictable pattern, but I’m compelled to bring up instances where viruses escaped from Chinese labs before: https://www.the-scientist.com/news-analysis/sars-escaped-beijing-lab-twice-50137/amp https://www.the-scientist.com/news-analysis/sars-escaped-bei... I believe there were a few more instances too (not mentioned in the article).
    - pacala 6y ago
      Humans have engaged in genetic manipulation through application of selective pressures since the dawn of time. In its positive form is called 'domestication', and 99% of the food of your table, vegetable or animal, is the byproduct of such genetic manipulation. Nothing in the article you cite addresses whether SARS-CoV-2 is a result of applying selective pressures or not. And the grant in question is funding exactly that: scientists looking to enhance the ability of coronavirus to infect various species, including humans. Not hard to presume they used the tried and true method of applying selective pressures, at least as a baseline. https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741 https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan...
    - cameldrv 6y ago
      The leading theory is that it’s the result of a serial passage experiment.
  - gumby 6y ago
    The genetic “architecture” doesn’t look human-made. Here’s a popular science summary for people who don’t have the training to read the paper (which is most people, for any science paper as they are written for domain experts and nobody is a domain expert in every field): https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/03/200317175442.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/03/200317175442.h...
- BearOso 6y ago
  I did mean escaped. There’s plenty of labs that were studying SARS, so it’s not impossible. I agree that we should look at only the facts, but political groups on all sides are twisting them for own convenience, so you have to be skeptical of motivations right now.
DangitBobby 6y ago
I think people on the left are downplaying it primarily because 1) there's literally no evidence that it happened that way and 2) the mere speculation is being treated as "truth" by some liars to spread fear and hate, and to confuse, distract, and deflect.
- Exmoor 6y ago
  > 1) there's literally no evidence that it happened that way There's no smoking gun evidence that is accessible, and there likely never will be. There is some circumstantial evidence that seems compelling. We know that scientists in Wuhan were working on this exact type of virus and were also working to make it transmissible in humans. We also know that there were issues reported in safety protocols at this/these labs. Finally, we know that the virus outbreak happened in the same city (and possibly within a very short distance) of these labs. Presumably (I have no data on this and would love some from anyone who knows more), there are not many labs doing this sort of research, so the fact that the virus appeared in the immediate vicinity of one of the few labs where they were doing this research seems like a heck of a coincidence. It's not a smoking gun, but I'm a little concerned to see people in the scientific community writing it off as a near-impossibility. What's wrong with saying, "We think that this is unlikely given xyz, but the circumstantial evidence is concerning and we should reevaluate all research of this type."
  - runawaybottle 6y ago
    And to add to your points, we also know if the hypothesis is true, it would be a type of blow to China’s image that the CCP just can’t have. We’ll never know because no one will be allowed to investigate it: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1197516 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1197516 The WHO is probably on the same list as organizations waiting to get a chance to investigate the Uyghur camps. Wild stuff.
  - DangitBobby 6y ago
    What's wrong with saying that is that the research itself is probably less dangerous than the alternative, which would be to stop trying to understand the nature of the evolution of these diseases. The point of the research is to be better informed about such infectious diseases so we can formulate an effective response, or maybe even come up with a permanent solution to neutralize the threat. The perceived short term dangers do not outweigh the long term benefits. I feel like a compelling parallel to nuclear power could be drawn here.
ghufran_syed 6y ago
does “anti-chinese government” = “anti-chinese” = racism? If so, would that mean that “anti-american government” views by many people the world = “anti-american” = racism?
- ctchocula 6y ago
  You and I can appreciate the subtle distinction that "anti-chinese government" != "anti-chinese", but tribalist thinking that equates "anti-chinese government" with "anti-chinese actions" exploits subconscious pathways of the human brain, so that it feels "natural" or "easy" to think that way. That is why during COVID-19, even one month ago we have already seen over 600 anti-Chinese and anti-Asian racism in the US [1], and a racially-motivated stabbing in Montreal [2]. Even in the Silicon Valley which is considered a liberal bastion, we have seen racist attacks against Asian-Americans [3]. All of these examples show that even though you and I can draw a difference between a government and its people and therefore do not do racist attacks against random people of a certain nationality, I hope you can see that calling it the "China virus" can compel others do racist attacks. Using reason to fight 600 million years of evolution is hard. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/asian-americans-report-nearly-500-racist-acts-over-last-week-n1169821 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/asian-americans-r... [2] https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/covid-19-korean-consulate-issues-warning-after-violent-attack-in-montreal-1.4856453 https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/covid-19-korean-consulate-issues... [3] https://nextshark.com/silicon-valley-supermarket-xenophobic-remark/ https://nextshark.com/silicon-valley-supermarket-xenophobic-...

gumby 6y ago

> It's certainly possible it came from a lab. Quite a few significant geneticists consider it extremely unlikely: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9 Sure, it’s possible, but that probability appears to be extremely small. Edit: I just realized you might have meant “natural origins but escaped from the lab rather than being introduced directly from wild animals”. If that’s what you meant apologies that my reply is irrelevant. If you meant “deliberately engineered in a lab” then my reply stands. I don’t see science as a “left/right” issue.

cameldrv 6y ago
What is the argument in that paper?
- runawaybottle 6y ago
  Perhaps this bit: While the analyses above suggest that SARS-CoV-2 may bind human ACE2 with high affinity, computational analyses predict that the interaction is not ideal7 and that the RBD sequence is different from those shown in SARS-CoV to be optimal for receptor binding7,11. Thus, the high-affinity binding of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein to human ACE2 is most likely the result of natural selection on a human or human-like ACE2 that permits another optimal binding solution to arise. This is strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of purposeful manipulation. But again, the poster clarified this only addresses the engineering of the virus, not the the other theories that center around lax precautions at the lab. So, these threads do devolve into a predictable pattern, but I’m compelled to bring up instances where viruses escaped from Chinese labs before: https://www.the-scientist.com/news-analysis/sars-escaped-beijing-lab-twice-50137/amp https://www.the-scientist.com/news-analysis/sars-escaped-bei... I believe there were a few more instances too (not mentioned in the article).
  - pacala 6y ago
    Humans have engaged in genetic manipulation through application of selective pressures since the dawn of time. In its positive form is called 'domestication', and 99% of the food of your table, vegetable or animal, is the byproduct of such genetic manipulation. Nothing in the article you cite addresses whether SARS-CoV-2 is a result of applying selective pressures or not. And the grant in question is funding exactly that: scientists looking to enhance the ability of coronavirus to infect various species, including humans. Not hard to presume they used the tried and true method of applying selective pressures, at least as a baseline. https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan-lab-millions-us-dollars-risky-coronavirus-research-1500741 https://www.newsweek.com/dr-fauci-backed-controversial-wuhan...
  - cameldrv 6y ago
    The leading theory is that it’s the result of a serial passage experiment.
- gumby 6y ago
  The genetic “architecture” doesn’t look human-made. Here’s a popular science summary for people who don’t have the training to read the paper (which is most people, for any science paper as they are written for domain experts and nobody is a domain expert in every field): https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/03/200317175442.htm https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/03/200317175442.h...
BearOso 6y ago
I did mean escaped. There’s plenty of labs that were studying SARS, so it’s not impossible. I agree that we should look at only the facts, but political groups on all sides are twisting them for own convenience, so you have to be skeptical of motivations right now.

DangitBobby 6y ago

I think people on the left are downplaying it primarily because 1) there's literally no evidence that it happened that way and 2) the mere speculation is being treated as "truth" by some liars to spread fear and hate, and to confuse, distract, and deflect.

Exmoor 6y ago
> 1) there's literally no evidence that it happened that way There's no smoking gun evidence that is accessible, and there likely never will be. There is some circumstantial evidence that seems compelling. We know that scientists in Wuhan were working on this exact type of virus and were also working to make it transmissible in humans. We also know that there were issues reported in safety protocols at this/these labs. Finally, we know that the virus outbreak happened in the same city (and possibly within a very short distance) of these labs. Presumably (I have no data on this and would love some from anyone who knows more), there are not many labs doing this sort of research, so the fact that the virus appeared in the immediate vicinity of one of the few labs where they were doing this research seems like a heck of a coincidence. It's not a smoking gun, but I'm a little concerned to see people in the scientific community writing it off as a near-impossibility. What's wrong with saying, "We think that this is unlikely given xyz, but the circumstantial evidence is concerning and we should reevaluate all research of this type."
- runawaybottle 6y ago
  And to add to your points, we also know if the hypothesis is true, it would be a type of blow to China’s image that the CCP just can’t have. We’ll never know because no one will be allowed to investigate it: https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1197516 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1197516 The WHO is probably on the same list as organizations waiting to get a chance to investigate the Uyghur camps. Wild stuff.
- DangitBobby 6y ago
  What's wrong with saying that is that the research itself is probably less dangerous than the alternative, which would be to stop trying to understand the nature of the evolution of these diseases. The point of the research is to be better informed about such infectious diseases so we can formulate an effective response, or maybe even come up with a permanent solution to neutralize the threat. The perceived short term dangers do not outweigh the long term benefits. I feel like a compelling parallel to nuclear power could be drawn here.

ghufran_syed 6y ago

does “anti-chinese government” = “anti-chinese” = racism? If so, would that mean that “anti-american government” views by many people the world = “anti-american” = racism?

ctchocula 6y ago
You and I can appreciate the subtle distinction that "anti-chinese government" != "anti-chinese", but tribalist thinking that equates "anti-chinese government" with "anti-chinese actions" exploits subconscious pathways of the human brain, so that it feels "natural" or "easy" to think that way. That is why during COVID-19, even one month ago we have already seen over 600 anti-Chinese and anti-Asian racism in the US [1], and a racially-motivated stabbing in Montreal [2]. Even in the Silicon Valley which is considered a liberal bastion, we have seen racist attacks against Asian-Americans [3]. All of these examples show that even though you and I can draw a difference between a government and its people and therefore do not do racist attacks against random people of a certain nationality, I hope you can see that calling it the "China virus" can compel others do racist attacks. Using reason to fight 600 million years of evolution is hard. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/asian-americans-report-nearly-500-racist-acts-over-last-week-n1169821 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-america/asian-americans-r... [2] https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/covid-19-korean-consulate-issues-warning-after-violent-attack-in-montreal-1.4856453 https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/covid-19-korean-consulate-issues... [3] https://nextshark.com/silicon-valley-supermarket-xenophobic-remark/ https://nextshark.com/silicon-valley-supermarket-xenophobic-...