5 ms·

> we can afford to wait and let experts do their jobs We can emphatically not expect the experts to do their job. Those cited as having the most expertise (vir

> we can afford to wait and let experts do their jobs We can emphatically not expect the experts to do their job. Those cited as having the most expertise (virologists who undertake gain-of-function research, symbolically under the auspices of HHS’ toothless P3CO regulation framework) have the most to lose from a finding that the pandemic’s source was a lab leak. They lose all the grants and public financial support, not to mention endure unending public scorn that will haunt the their careers for the duration. For evidence that the relevant, oft-cited scientists act precisely this way, one need no more than to look at @BlockedVirology’s retweets: https://twitter.com/blockedvirology https://twitter.com/blockedvirology Scientists are human - I would highly recommend disabusing oneself of the notion that they might act contrary to overwhelming human incentives in as weighty a context as investigating the origins of the greatest pandemic in a century. The only alternative in the face of this embedded conflict of interest in our (society’s) ability to credibly investigate the pandemic’s origins is for technically-minded individuals (who don’t run multimillion dollar virology labs) to avail themselves of the findings gathered to date on the origins (there’s lots! Just need to take a look, the contributors to the above feed are a good place to start), and advocate to their representatives for a credible & even-handed origins investigation. Failing that, expect no origin beyond all reasonable doubt to be credibly identified in our lifetimes.

eightysixfour 6y ago
Scientists are human, and they will make mistakes, the benefit is that there are many of them with different incentives. The "Blocked Virology" twitter account references a lot of previous lab escapes to say that lab escapes are possible, this is good evidence against your point - how do you think we know about the previous escapes? It wasn't a random group of technically-minded individuals, it was experts that tracked it down. The level of arrogance necessary to believe that any "technically minded" individual can find where the virus originated is mind blowing to me. Logic isn't the end-all-be-all, for many fields you must also have knowledge. We should not ignore the blindspots that deep knowledge can introduce but to just dismiss it is absurd.
- katbyte 6y ago
  There has never been a lab leak leading to a global pandemic and mass deaths, I don’t think you can compare now to anything other then maybe the Spanish flu
  - tripletao 6y ago
    The 1977 flu pandemic was very likely a lab escape. From the NEJM: > The reemergence was probably an accidental release from a laboratory source in the setting of waning population immunity to H1 and N1 antigens https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra0904322 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra0904322 About 700k people died worldwide. That's more than a typical flu season but not grossly so, and it's impossible to say with certainty what kind of flu season would have occurred naturally without the escape. https://nouvelles.umontreal.ca/en/article/2018/01/19/you-re-more-likely-to-die-from-the-h1n1-flu-if-you-were-born-in-1957/ https://nouvelles.umontreal.ca/en/article/2018/01/19/you-re-... SARS-CoV-2 is certainly worse. The 1977 flu pandemic is still a lot of deaths, though, and surprisingly little-known.
jeduehr 6y ago
Actually a lot of virologists are also critical of GOF. Just look at public health people, epidemiologists. Folks like Andrea Sant, Michael Osterholm, David Topham, etc. These folks criticize GOF all the time, and are a big part of the group that helps write regulations to make Virology research safe. But you know what these same virologists also don't believe? That SARS-COV-2 was cooked up in a lab. That should tell you something. Science is adversarial, and virology is no exception. That's why when consensus exists about something, you should respect it. There is quite a large consensus about this one.
- Banyonite 6y ago
  > That's why when consensus exists about something, you should respect it. There is quite a large consensus about this one. Respecting a consensus is reasonable. That having been said, I would be interested to hear what the virologists to whom you refer think about Ralph Baric's work. Ralph Baric is a very well-known virologist specializing in corona virology. His group synthesized quite a few SARS-CoV variants, a number of years before SARS-CoV-2 made its appearance. While there's no proof that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab, there are quite a few studies describing the synthesis of different SARS-CoV variants, some quite dangerous. From one of many papers on which he was a co-author (https://www.pnas.org/content/113/11/3048.full https://www.pnas.org/content/113/11/3048.full): "Using the SARS-CoV infectious clone as a template (7), we designed and synthesized a full-length infectious clone of WIV1-CoV consisting of six plasmids that could be enzymatically cut, ligated together, and electroporated into cells to rescue replication competent progeny virions (Fig. S1A). In addition to the full-length clone, we also produced WIV1-CoV chimeric virus that replaced the SARS spike with the WIV1 spike within the mouse-adapted backbone (WIV1-MA15, Fig. S1B)" EDIT: jeduehr, given your background in virology, I would be interested in any technical critique you may have regarding the Yuri Deigin article referenced in my post below.
  - jeduehr 6y ago
    It's important to understand the distinction between chimeric and mosaic viruses. Baric makes Chimeras. CoV-2 in comparison to the other closely related viruses in nature, is a mosaic. Lots of little changes all over the genome, not big copy and pastes. See here for more detail on that distinction: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/-/fqpbagf https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/-/fqpbagf

eightysixfour 6y ago

Scientists are human, and they will make mistakes, the benefit is that there are many of them with different incentives. The "Blocked Virology" twitter account references a lot of previous lab escapes to say that lab escapes are possible, this is good evidence against your point - how do you think we know about the previous escapes? It wasn't a random group of technically-minded individuals, it was experts that tracked it down. The level of arrogance necessary to believe that any "technically minded" individual can find where the virus originated is mind blowing to me. Logic isn't the end-all-be-all, for many fields you must also have knowledge. We should not ignore the blindspots that deep knowledge can introduce but to just dismiss it is absurd.

katbyte 6y ago
There has never been a lab leak leading to a global pandemic and mass deaths, I don’t think you can compare now to anything other then maybe the Spanish flu
- tripletao 6y ago
  The 1977 flu pandemic was very likely a lab escape. From the NEJM: > The reemergence was probably an accidental release from a laboratory source in the setting of waning population immunity to H1 and N1 antigens https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra0904322 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra0904322 About 700k people died worldwide. That's more than a typical flu season but not grossly so, and it's impossible to say with certainty what kind of flu season would have occurred naturally without the escape. https://nouvelles.umontreal.ca/en/article/2018/01/19/you-re-more-likely-to-die-from-the-h1n1-flu-if-you-were-born-in-1957/ https://nouvelles.umontreal.ca/en/article/2018/01/19/you-re-... SARS-CoV-2 is certainly worse. The 1977 flu pandemic is still a lot of deaths, though, and surprisingly little-known.

jeduehr 6y ago

Actually a lot of virologists are also critical of GOF. Just look at public health people, epidemiologists. Folks like Andrea Sant, Michael Osterholm, David Topham, etc. These folks criticize GOF all the time, and are a big part of the group that helps write regulations to make Virology research safe. But you know what these same virologists also don't believe? That SARS-COV-2 was cooked up in a lab. That should tell you something. Science is adversarial, and virology is no exception. That's why when consensus exists about something, you should respect it. There is quite a large consensus about this one.

Banyonite 6y ago
> That's why when consensus exists about something, you should respect it. There is quite a large consensus about this one. Respecting a consensus is reasonable. That having been said, I would be interested to hear what the virologists to whom you refer think about Ralph Baric's work. Ralph Baric is a very well-known virologist specializing in corona virology. His group synthesized quite a few SARS-CoV variants, a number of years before SARS-CoV-2 made its appearance. While there's no proof that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab, there are quite a few studies describing the synthesis of different SARS-CoV variants, some quite dangerous. From one of many papers on which he was a co-author (https://www.pnas.org/content/113/11/3048.full https://www.pnas.org/content/113/11/3048.full): "Using the SARS-CoV infectious clone as a template (7), we designed and synthesized a full-length infectious clone of WIV1-CoV consisting of six plasmids that could be enzymatically cut, ligated together, and electroporated into cells to rescue replication competent progeny virions (Fig. S1A). In addition to the full-length clone, we also produced WIV1-CoV chimeric virus that replaced the SARS spike with the WIV1 spike within the mouse-adapted backbone (WIV1-MA15, Fig. S1B)" EDIT: jeduehr, given your background in virology, I would be interested in any technical critique you may have regarding the Yuri Deigin article referenced in my post below.
- jeduehr 6y ago
  It's important to understand the distinction between chimeric and mosaic viruses. Baric makes Chimeras. CoV-2 in comparison to the other closely related viruses in nature, is a mosaic. Lots of little changes all over the genome, not big copy and pastes. See here for more detail on that distinction: https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/-/fqpbagf https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/gk6y95/-/fqpbagf