8 ms·

If anyone is tempted to associate 'lab leak' with xenophobia or anti-Chinese sentiment, please remember the WIV lab was in partnership with the U.S. NIH (Nation

If anyone is tempted to associate 'lab leak' with xenophobia or anti-Chinese sentiment, please remember the WIV lab was in partnership with the U.S. NIH (National Institutes of Health). https://www.biospace.com/article/1nih-awards-ecohealth-alliance-7-5-million-grant-despite-political-furor/ https://www.biospace.com/article/1nih-awards-ecohealth-allia...

loveistheanswer 6y ago
Also noteworthy is Dr. Fauci has been a long time proponent and sponsor of gain of function experiments as head of the NIAID, the infectious diseases arm of the NIH.[1] After a few different US lab leaks involving anthrax, smallpox, and avian flu in 2014 the Obama administration put a ban on the fuding of gain of function research.[2] The ban was eventually overturned in 2018.[3] [1]https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-flu-virus-risk-worth-taking/2011/12/30/gIQAM9sNRP_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-flu-virus-risk-wor... [2]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-anthrax-labs-analysis/how-to-fix-u-s-biosecurity-leaks-close-some-labs-idUSKBN0FJ0BC20140714 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-anthrax-labs-analysis... [3]https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(18)30006-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...
- justnotworthit 6y ago
  I don't get why supporters of GoF experiments with CoV in Wuhan aren't shouting from the rooftops that (1) They were right to predict the danger of a CoV originating from that area of the world and that (2) their research, years in the making, is thankfully (despite opposition's cries of danger) here to protect us. Instead, I can't find anything about the latest years of their research.
  - mgamache 6y ago
    good point. the silence is deafening. They should be lobbying for more money...
  - loveistheanswer 6y ago
    >Instead, I can't find anything about the latest years of their research. So, in other words, there is no evidence that GoF research is "here to protect us"?
- shireboy 6y ago
  I'm assuming justification for GoF research wasn't "we want to make a bioweapon". What are the arguments in favor of this type of research?
  - cameldrv 6y ago
    The specific thing that they said they were trying to do was predict emerging pathogens and develop treatments and potentially vaccines for them in advance of them actually making a zoonotic jump. They were creating chimeric Coronaviruses to simulate natural recombination events, then infecting humanized mice with them to assess their potential for human emergence.
    - mgamache 6y ago
      Right, playing with fire, by creating an environment that would hyper-evolve virus better than random natural species interactions.
      - cameldrv 6y ago
        SARS-CoV-2 is a really contagious virus, but as long as the biosecurity is perfect, there is no risk.
        mgamache 6y ago
        As long as biosecurity evolves humans it will not be perfect.
        loveistheanswer 6y ago
        >long as the biosecurity is perfect There is no such thing as 100% security.
    - jbritton 6y ago
      Does any of this research actually matter with the technology we now have? We can sequence a virus. We were able to build a vaccine in one day based upon the sequence. One thing I don’t understand is how the spike protein was identified as the important piece. Was this done by diffing sequences against other coronaviruses? I’m bothered by the fact that GOF research was banned in the USA, and then the NIH setup funding for it in Wuhan. I think the need and safety of this research should come under serious scrutiny.
orblivion 6y ago
Another fun wrench in the gears of easy categorization of factors is that the research was halted under Obama and restarted under Trump: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-nih-gain-of-function-research-decision-wasnt-partisan/ https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-nih-gain-of-functi... Likely enough not in any meaningful way attached to either president, though.
rsync 6y ago
"If anyone is tempted to associate 'lab leak' with xenophobia or anti-Chinese sentiment, please remember the WIV lab was in partnership with the U.S. NIH ..." Thank you. I'm curious ... how many virology labs, like this one, are extant in the world and how many study coronaviruses as they did ? Is it tens of thousands of virology labs like this one and hundreds that study coronaviruses ? Or is it hundreds of virology labs like this one and a handful study coronaviruses ?
onethought 6y ago
I think there are a couple of conflations in the 'lab leak' meme. - China intentionally manufactured the virus and released it (Proven false, virus wasn't engineered) - China accidentally released the virus while collecting it (Possible, but unlikely given the virus has early evidence away from both collection point and Wuhan Lab) - China has too many wet markets that allowed the virus to mutate enough for human jump (Current consensus working theory, but also unproven as intermediary animal has not been identified) But all of these list China as the responsible party, so if you want to call it out as not Xenophobia or Anti-China sentiment then you'd have to show evidence the reporting showed "Joint Sino-American research lab causes..." kind of headlines. Otherwise, you point strengthens that this has at least an under current of anti-china sentiment, as the reporting has not mentioned US involvement at all. WHO of course have a lot to answer for with regards to ignoring Taiwan because if BS geopolitics when they had the most reliable/believable/compelling evidence of the nature of SARS-Cov2
- meowface 6y ago
  >- 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 because it was engineered doesn't imply it was intentionally released.
  - onethought 6y ago
    But they have found the virus in bats... it’s not engineered. Yes there are lots of legitimate reasons to study viruses.
    - meowface 6y ago
      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.

loveistheanswer 6y ago

Also noteworthy is Dr. Fauci has been a long time proponent and sponsor of gain of function experiments as head of the NIAID, the infectious diseases arm of the NIH.[1] After a few different US lab leaks involving anthrax, smallpox, and avian flu in 2014 the Obama administration put a ban on the fuding of gain of function research.[2] The ban was eventually overturned in 2018.[3] [1]https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-flu-virus-risk-worth-taking/2011/12/30/gIQAM9sNRP_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-flu-virus-risk-wor... [2]https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-anthrax-labs-analysis/how-to-fix-u-s-biosecurity-leaks-close-some-labs-idUSKBN0FJ0BC20140714 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-anthrax-labs-analysis... [3]https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(18)30006-9/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...

justnotworthit 6y ago
I don't get why supporters of GoF experiments with CoV in Wuhan aren't shouting from the rooftops that (1) They were right to predict the danger of a CoV originating from that area of the world and that (2) their research, years in the making, is thankfully (despite opposition's cries of danger) here to protect us. Instead, I can't find anything about the latest years of their research.
- mgamache 6y ago
  good point. the silence is deafening. They should be lobbying for more money...
- loveistheanswer 6y ago
  >Instead, I can't find anything about the latest years of their research. So, in other words, there is no evidence that GoF research is "here to protect us"?
shireboy 6y ago
I'm assuming justification for GoF research wasn't "we want to make a bioweapon". What are the arguments in favor of this type of research?
- cameldrv 6y ago
  The specific thing that they said they were trying to do was predict emerging pathogens and develop treatments and potentially vaccines for them in advance of them actually making a zoonotic jump. They were creating chimeric Coronaviruses to simulate natural recombination events, then infecting humanized mice with them to assess their potential for human emergence.
  - mgamache 6y ago
    Right, playing with fire, by creating an environment that would hyper-evolve virus better than random natural species interactions.
    - cameldrv 6y ago
      SARS-CoV-2 is a really contagious virus, but as long as the biosecurity is perfect, there is no risk.
      - mgamache 6y ago
        As long as biosecurity evolves humans it will not be perfect.
      - loveistheanswer 6y ago
        >long as the biosecurity is perfect There is no such thing as 100% security.
  - jbritton 6y ago
    Does any of this research actually matter with the technology we now have? We can sequence a virus. We were able to build a vaccine in one day based upon the sequence. One thing I don’t understand is how the spike protein was identified as the important piece. Was this done by diffing sequences against other coronaviruses? I’m bothered by the fact that GOF research was banned in the USA, and then the NIH setup funding for it in Wuhan. I think the need and safety of this research should come under serious scrutiny.

orblivion 6y ago

Another fun wrench in the gears of easy categorization of factors is that the research was halted under Obama and restarted under Trump: https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-nih-gain-of-function-research-decision-wasnt-partisan/ https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-nih-gain-of-functi... Likely enough not in any meaningful way attached to either president, though.

rsync 6y ago

"If anyone is tempted to associate 'lab leak' with xenophobia or anti-Chinese sentiment, please remember the WIV lab was in partnership with the U.S. NIH ..." Thank you. I'm curious ... how many virology labs, like this one, are extant in the world and how many study coronaviruses as they did ? Is it tens of thousands of virology labs like this one and hundreds that study coronaviruses ? Or is it hundreds of virology labs like this one and a handful study coronaviruses ?

onethought 6y ago

I think there are a couple of conflations in the 'lab leak' meme. - China intentionally manufactured the virus and released it (Proven false, virus wasn't engineered) - China accidentally released the virus while collecting it (Possible, but unlikely given the virus has early evidence away from both collection point and Wuhan Lab) - China has too many wet markets that allowed the virus to mutate enough for human jump (Current consensus working theory, but also unproven as intermediary animal has not been identified) But all of these list China as the responsible party, so if you want to call it out as not Xenophobia or Anti-China sentiment then you'd have to show evidence the reporting showed "Joint Sino-American research lab causes..." kind of headlines. Otherwise, you point strengthens that this has at least an under current of anti-china sentiment, as the reporting has not mentioned US involvement at all. WHO of course have a lot to answer for with regards to ignoring Taiwan because if BS geopolitics when they had the most reliable/believable/compelling evidence of the nature of SARS-Cov2

meowface 6y ago
>- 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 because it was engineered doesn't imply it was intentionally released.
- onethought 6y ago
  But they have found the virus in bats... it’s not engineered. Yes there are lots of legitimate reasons to study viruses.
  - meowface 6y ago
    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.