4 ms·

Recombination virus is commonly made everywhere, including US or China. Researchers made it mostly for getting genes for later use, antibody/antigen analysis i

by xjlin0 5y ago

Recombination virus is commonly made everywhere, including US or China. Researchers made it mostly for getting genes for later use, antibody/antigen analysis in this case. Using virus/BAC is a very common lab technique and is very different from "intentionally making virus as a weapon to kill human". You can reconfirm with any of your wet-lab biotech majored friends. Please run an sequence analysis between rWIV1-SHC014S and the current COVID-19 virus before drawing misleading conclusion. One analogy for developers: Bad persons are using git to develop ransomware, and company X is also using git, therefore company X is developing ransomware.

flavius29663 5y ago
you are right, except sars-cov-2 happened to appear 500 meters away from said lab...
- searine 5y ago
  Maybe the reason the lab exists there is because wild coronaviruses appear in that region. Which ever way you frame it, it is correlation, not causation. Poor evidence at best.
  - flavius29663 5y ago
    SARS1 appeared in China, 2 provinces over, so quite far. And I was not talking necessarily about the Hubei region, but about the proximity of the first case to the lab: half a mile. City of Wuhan has a population of 11 million. The Hubei province has a population of 58 million. Out of all the wet markets that serve that much population, the coronavirus just happened to appear at the market nearest to the lab studying coronaviruses. To have such a coincidence is like winning the lottery. It's not evidence, sure, it's correlation at best. But this alone should make you investigate that lab much much better, it should be the first possible cause you research. But looking at the lab first might be hard if you have a severe conflict of interest https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4119101 https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4119101 I am not saying this to "make China pay". After all, the US itself was sponsoring coronavirus research at that lab. But we should establish a worldwide safety standard in dealing with such research, and establish periodical inspections. Just like we do with Nuclear power plants, only better.
  - Too 5y ago
    Circumstantial evidence is a better term. Judging the article the number of such pointing to the lab are piling up and should be hard to ignore, while those pointing in other directions are still very few.
briandear 5y ago
When Company X has an active program of producing and researching offensive ransomware, and a long track record of suppression, then it’s plausible that they are producing ransomware. Not proof, but still plausibility. To disregard the potential that they are producing ransomware is foolish. Going out of your way to assert that they would never do such a thing makes you a shill for Company X and destroys credibility.

by xjlin0 5y ago

flavius29663 5y ago

you are right, except sars-cov-2 happened to appear 500 meters away from said lab...

searine 5y ago
Maybe the reason the lab exists there is because wild coronaviruses appear in that region. Which ever way you frame it, it is correlation, not causation. Poor evidence at best.
- flavius29663 5y ago
  SARS1 appeared in China, 2 provinces over, so quite far. And I was not talking necessarily about the Hubei region, but about the proximity of the first case to the lab: half a mile. City of Wuhan has a population of 11 million. The Hubei province has a population of 58 million. Out of all the wet markets that serve that much population, the coronavirus just happened to appear at the market nearest to the lab studying coronaviruses. To have such a coincidence is like winning the lottery. It's not evidence, sure, it's correlation at best. But this alone should make you investigate that lab much much better, it should be the first possible cause you research. But looking at the lab first might be hard if you have a severe conflict of interest https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4119101 https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/4119101 I am not saying this to "make China pay". After all, the US itself was sponsoring coronavirus research at that lab. But we should establish a worldwide safety standard in dealing with such research, and establish periodical inspections. Just like we do with Nuclear power plants, only better.
- Too 5y ago
  Circumstantial evidence is a better term. Judging the article the number of such pointing to the lab are piling up and should be hard to ignore, while those pointing in other directions are still very few.

briandear 5y ago

When Company X has an active program of producing and researching offensive ransomware, and a long track record of suppression, then it’s plausible that they are producing ransomware. Not proof, but still plausibility. To disregard the potential that they are producing ransomware is foolish. Going out of your way to assert that they would never do such a thing makes you a shill for Company X and destroys credibility.