3 ms·

If this virus indeed came from a lab, then: a.) It was covered up, b.) The people responsible hid crucial information which could have helped contain the spre

If this virus indeed came from a lab, then: a.) It was covered up, b.) The people responsible hid crucial information which could have helped contain the spread in the early days and find treatments, c.) The people assuring us that lab creation was an impossible "conspiracy theory" at the very least have egg on their face, and at worst have no credibility or were engaged in a campaign of mis/disinformation. And that's without getting into questions of whether the "leak" story is being used to cover for "intentional release."

marcosdumay 5y ago
Ok, those are 3 very different points, so: > It was covered up This is not actionable. > The people responsible hid crucial information which could have helped contain the spread in the early days and find treatments You imply in punishing those people? In the case it was a leak, the people interested in punishing them don't have that power, the people with that power were the same suppressing the information, so no, that won't happen. > The people assuring us that lab creation was an impossible "conspiracy theory" at the very least have egg on their face, and at worst have no credibility or were engaged in a campaign of mis/disinformation You should already remove any credibility from anybody claiming it was impossible, as well as from anybody claiming any other kind of certainty. What actually happened won't change that. What we should do is take a good new look at the containment procedures of those labs, reevaluate them, verify if they are followed and fix what is not. We should also press uncooperative countries, like China, to open those up for inspection. Again, whether this one virus came from a lab leak or not is not relevant, we know that best practices are still leaky, and we have seen how problematic a leak would be. All this politics game of "did | did not" is very counterproductive.
- AndrewBissell 5y ago
  > What we should do is take a good new look at the containment procedures of those labs, reevaluate them, verify if they are followed and fix what is not. Who should do that, exactly? The same people you seem to think we should not to attempt to investigate or hold accountable in any way? > We should also press uncooperative countries, like China, to open those up for inspection. If China was demanding to have a bunch of their inspectors let into Fort Detrick to poke around, we wouldn't be any more welcoming than they have been. It's silly to allow imperial powers to engage in bioweapons research and then expect them to show each other all their cards.
  - marcosdumay 5y ago
    Why are you assuming this is bioweapons research? There is more to virus research than bioweapons. It is much easier to get China to complain with "we developed those standards for virus research, and would like you to comply too, like any other serious country" than "we believe you made an incredibly large fuck-up and want your help to prove it".

marcosdumay 5y ago

Ok, those are 3 very different points, so: > It was covered up This is not actionable. > The people responsible hid crucial information which could have helped contain the spread in the early days and find treatments You imply in punishing those people? In the case it was a leak, the people interested in punishing them don't have that power, the people with that power were the same suppressing the information, so no, that won't happen. > The people assuring us that lab creation was an impossible "conspiracy theory" at the very least have egg on their face, and at worst have no credibility or were engaged in a campaign of mis/disinformation You should already remove any credibility from anybody claiming it was impossible, as well as from anybody claiming any other kind of certainty. What actually happened won't change that. What we should do is take a good new look at the containment procedures of those labs, reevaluate them, verify if they are followed and fix what is not. We should also press uncooperative countries, like China, to open those up for inspection. Again, whether this one virus came from a lab leak or not is not relevant, we know that best practices are still leaky, and we have seen how problematic a leak would be. All this politics game of "did | did not" is very counterproductive.

AndrewBissell 5y ago
> What we should do is take a good new look at the containment procedures of those labs, reevaluate them, verify if they are followed and fix what is not. Who should do that, exactly? The same people you seem to think we should not to attempt to investigate or hold accountable in any way? > We should also press uncooperative countries, like China, to open those up for inspection. If China was demanding to have a bunch of their inspectors let into Fort Detrick to poke around, we wouldn't be any more welcoming than they have been. It's silly to allow imperial powers to engage in bioweapons research and then expect them to show each other all their cards.
- marcosdumay 5y ago
  Why are you assuming this is bioweapons research? There is more to virus research than bioweapons. It is much easier to get China to complain with "we developed those standards for virus research, and would like you to comply too, like any other serious country" than "we believe you made an incredibly large fuck-up and want your help to prove it".