5 ms·

>I can say the vast majority of us are not qualified to answer the question either way though. It's also worth noting that even the leading experts can get the

>I can say the vast majority of us are not qualified to answer the question either way though. It's also worth noting that even the leading experts can get these things wrong, as was the case with the Sverdlovsk lab leak. Soviet authorities covered it up by blaming local meat markets, and leading US experts concurred with them, only to reverse their conclusion 6 years later. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sverdlovsk_anthrax_leak#Accident https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sverdlovsk_anthrax_leak#Acci...

AdamJacobMuller 6y ago
Never heard about Sverdlosk, interesting story. > Russian Prime Minister Yegor Gaidar issued a decree to begin demilitarization of Compound 19 in 1992. However, the facility continued its work. Not a single journalist has been allowed onto the premises since 1992. About 200 soldiers with Rottweiler dogs still patrol the complex.
eightysixfour 6y ago
Absolutely, without multiple trust-worthy first-person accounts backed by evidence, the likely best we can hope for is an eventually-consistent story that we are "pretty sure" about. Considering the size of the impact on the world, that will take a long time.
NineStarPoint 6y ago
It’s worth noting that in both the Sverdlov case and in this one, world scientists are only being given access to the situation in an extremely controlled fashion. A primary reason we can’t say more on what happened in this case is the CCP’s tight control over access that could help clarify the situation. Which will always look suspicious, whether it was actually a completely natural virus or not.
- lostinquebec 6y ago
  I don't understand how this works, so forgive my ignorance. Wouldn't the Wuhan lab be able to disprove this really easily? How often do they sequence viruses? Couldn't they show categorically that COVID-19 is not a descendant of a virus they were working with/on?
  - btilly 6y ago
    As long as they don't have an audited central database of all viruses that they sequenced, they have no way to demonstrate that they showed you all of their virus lines. And if they had such a central database, we'd have probably heard about it by now.
    - tripletao 6y ago
      I'm not sure about the "audited" part, but the WIV did have such a central database. It went offline in September 2019, they say due to repeated hacking attempts. It hasn't been back since, and access to that database has been a major point of contention between those who believe a forensic investigation (i.e., one that doesn't simply trust the WIV to report whether they were working with related viruses) is necessary, and those who do not. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349073738_An_investigation_into_the_WIV_databases_that_were_taken_offline https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349073738_An_invest...
  - seoaeu 6y ago
    How would you know they provided a complete list of viruses they were working on? Couldn't they just leave off anything incriminating?
    - refenestrator 6y ago
      What you're saying here is that more transparency cannot help them and can only hurt them.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - HPsquared 6y ago
    Only if they can prove a negative.
  - _tik_ 6y ago
    In politics controlling narative is more important than the truths. PRC govt paranoids US will control the narrative into another iraq's WMD. The PRC looks at this issue differently US.
- stefan_ 6y ago
  Then don't make conclusions from insufficient data and manufacture consent? I think historians in a million years will snort from laughter when reading "The WHO that denies the existence of Taiwan determined that COVID19 did not originate from the bioweapons lab in Wuhan researching that very virus, only in the city".
- BurningFrog 6y ago
  If it looks like a coverup, Occam says it is a coverup. The Chinese authorities are not stupid. They know how bad it looks to not allow investigation. Which means they think the result of a free investigation would look even worse.
  - khuey 6y ago
    I thought the lab leak hypothesis was pretty unlikely in early 2020 but having seen the how the Chinese state has acted since then it now seems entirely believable.
    - guram11 6y ago
      there were similar conspiracy way back in 2003 when SARS outbreak, except this time in 2019~, the social medias are way more viral than the virus and CCP apparently can't suppress these "contents/info/fakenews" even with the enormous help from WHO
  - Stevvo 6y ago
    I disagree. The CCP's modus operandi is self preservation through suppression of information. To those perpetrating the cover up what actually happened is irrelevant. The CCP is never transparent in matters that could make them look bad. From their perspective allowing an open international investigation would make them appear guilty regardless of the results because it would be unprecedented.
    - katbyte 6y ago
      ... so if an open investigation and free access would look better then a cover up then by your logic they would allow it leading to the conclusion reality looks worse?
      - zdkl 6y ago
        No, the point is there is almost no way the party would sanction an external investigation, regardless of the actual situation.

AdamJacobMuller 6y ago

Never heard about Sverdlosk, interesting story. > Russian Prime Minister Yegor Gaidar issued a decree to begin demilitarization of Compound 19 in 1992. However, the facility continued its work. Not a single journalist has been allowed onto the premises since 1992. About 200 soldiers with Rottweiler dogs still patrol the complex.

eightysixfour 6y ago

Absolutely, without multiple trust-worthy first-person accounts backed by evidence, the likely best we can hope for is an eventually-consistent story that we are "pretty sure" about. Considering the size of the impact on the world, that will take a long time.

NineStarPoint 6y ago

It’s worth noting that in both the Sverdlov case and in this one, world scientists are only being given access to the situation in an extremely controlled fashion. A primary reason we can’t say more on what happened in this case is the CCP’s tight control over access that could help clarify the situation. Which will always look suspicious, whether it was actually a completely natural virus or not.

lostinquebec 6y ago
I don't understand how this works, so forgive my ignorance. Wouldn't the Wuhan lab be able to disprove this really easily? How often do they sequence viruses? Couldn't they show categorically that COVID-19 is not a descendant of a virus they were working with/on?
- btilly 6y ago
  As long as they don't have an audited central database of all viruses that they sequenced, they have no way to demonstrate that they showed you all of their virus lines. And if they had such a central database, we'd have probably heard about it by now.
  - tripletao 6y ago
    I'm not sure about the "audited" part, but the WIV did have such a central database. It went offline in September 2019, they say due to repeated hacking attempts. It hasn't been back since, and access to that database has been a major point of contention between those who believe a forensic investigation (i.e., one that doesn't simply trust the WIV to report whether they were working with related viruses) is necessary, and those who do not. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349073738_An_investigation_into_the_WIV_databases_that_were_taken_offline https://www.researchgate.net/publication/349073738_An_invest...
- seoaeu 6y ago
  How would you know they provided a complete list of viruses they were working on? Couldn't they just leave off anything incriminating?
  - refenestrator 6y ago
    What you're saying here is that more transparency cannot help them and can only hurt them.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- HPsquared 6y ago
  Only if they can prove a negative.
- _tik_ 6y ago
  In politics controlling narative is more important than the truths. PRC govt paranoids US will control the narrative into another iraq's WMD. The PRC looks at this issue differently US.
stefan_ 6y ago
Then don't make conclusions from insufficient data and manufacture consent? I think historians in a million years will snort from laughter when reading "The WHO that denies the existence of Taiwan determined that COVID19 did not originate from the bioweapons lab in Wuhan researching that very virus, only in the city".
BurningFrog 6y ago
If it looks like a coverup, Occam says it is a coverup. The Chinese authorities are not stupid. They know how bad it looks to not allow investigation. Which means they think the result of a free investigation would look even worse.
- khuey 6y ago
  I thought the lab leak hypothesis was pretty unlikely in early 2020 but having seen the how the Chinese state has acted since then it now seems entirely believable.
  - guram11 6y ago
    there were similar conspiracy way back in 2003 when SARS outbreak, except this time in 2019~, the social medias are way more viral than the virus and CCP apparently can't suppress these "contents/info/fakenews" even with the enormous help from WHO
- Stevvo 6y ago
  I disagree. The CCP's modus operandi is self preservation through suppression of information. To those perpetrating the cover up what actually happened is irrelevant. The CCP is never transparent in matters that could make them look bad. From their perspective allowing an open international investigation would make them appear guilty regardless of the results because it would be unprecedented.
  - katbyte 6y ago
    ... so if an open investigation and free access would look better then a cover up then by your logic they would allow it leading to the conclusion reality looks worse?
    - zdkl 6y ago
      No, the point is there is almost no way the party would sanction an external investigation, regardless of the actual situation.