7 ms·

>The "lab escape hypothesis" was disregarded by many (if not most) media outlets as a conspiracy theory early on. I have seen this claim made recently, but as

>The "lab escape hypothesis" was disregarded by many (if not most) media outlets as a conspiracy theory early on. I have seen this claim made recently, but as I remember the 'disregarded' conspiracy theory was actually that the virus was genetically engineered (ie codon sequence edited) in a lab. The virus' genetic code seems to discount engineering, but not serial passaging/hybridization.

zpeti 5y ago
No, this was the sleight of hand by the media. Almost all people dismissed as conspiracy theorists said most likely lab escape doesn’t mean genetically engineered. But straight away that’s how it was reported in the media. Basically twisting words and lying. Shameful.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  Tangentially related, I have another comment from a separate post observing some additional media (NYT specifically) sleight of hand WRT the Damore "memo": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27254877 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27254877 >> [Damore] argued that biological differences and not a lack of opportunity explained the shortage of women in upper-tier positions. > This is an unfortunate way of characterizing Damore’s argument. It’s technically true in that Damore IIRC was arguing that there was more variation among men than women (more men at the top and at the bottom but fewer in the middle, but Google hires from the top hence more men). So yeah, technically biological differences, but when the average person hears that they’re going to assume he was arguing that women in general are dumber than men in general or some such. That said, this also represents much more earnest coverage of Damore considering the initial coverage overtly lied on many accounts (calling it an anti diversity screed, claiming he sent it as a memo to the company, etc).
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  I doubt if there's little doubt if you go with the lab theory that this virus wasn't genetically modified to be more virulent to humans (or possibly some species similar to humans). I think the big one is whether it was a lab accident, which seems like the most likely scenario barring jumping species naturally which still seems to be the most likely scenario.
monoideism 5y ago
No, that's just not true. The media repeatedly mocked even a lab escape scenario and boosted a handful of experts were favored a wild reservoir for the disease. Our "intellectual elites" have a bad problem now with moral/intellectual fashions, which are constantly changing. Social media has considerably exacerbated this problem.
- jasonlaramburu 5y ago
  >The media repeatedly mocked even a lab escape scenario Do you have any links?
  - monoideism 5y ago
    How many do you want? If I post one link, you'll likely say it's not enough. Same with two links, etc. I'm hesitant to engage with this kind of request, but I did. In any case, I can tell you that there was a definite narrative in the media that the lab escape scenario was not only very unlikely, but "xenophobic" and "conspiratorial". Perhaps the most telling example of all my links below is this one, which is very open to the possibility of a lab escape. The latter half of the article is full of example of the efforts of the media and scientific establishment (for whatever reason, mostly political) to quash the lab escape hypothesis. One key quote: "Antonio Regalado, biomedicine editor of MIT Technology Review, put it more bluntly. If it turned out COVID-19 came from a lab, he tweeted, 'it would shatter the scientific edifice top to bottom.'" Article: https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2020/09/09/alina-chan-broad-institute-coronavirus/ https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2020/09/09/alina-chan-br... And here is a handful of links, of many: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/01/could-covid-19-be-manmade-what-we-know-about-origins-trump-chinese-lab-coronavirus https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/01/could-covid-19... https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/health/lab-leak-coronavirus-theory-comic-book-scn/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/health/lab-leak-coronavirus-t... https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/04/politics/coronavirus-intelligence/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/04/politics/coronavirus-intellig... https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/17/politics/mike-pompeo-coronavirus-wuhan-lab/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/17/politics/mike-pompeo-coronavi... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-much-more-likely-the-coronavirus-came-from-wildlife-not-a-lab1/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-much-more-lik...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
mensetmanusman 5y ago
I know this is confusing, but gain of function genome alterations is one class of genetic engineering. Other approaches involve literally trying to change the codon sequence in a supercomputer to see what happens in the folding and conformation changes, but it is very esoteric since bio is so complicated.
- jasonlaramburu 5y ago
  So my understanding is that GoF can involve genetic engineering (editing the codon sequence/geneotype) OR serial passaging (growing successive generations of microorganisms under various conditions to influence phenotype). The disregarded conspiracy theory, as I understood it, was that Chinese researchers were doing the former, NOT the latter. It is also my understanding that the virus' genetic code does not show any evidence of the former (editing codon sequence).
bart_spoon 5y ago
> I have seen this claim made recently, but as I remember the 'disregarded' conspiracy theory was actually that the virus was genetically engineered (ie codon sequence edited) in a lab. For the better part of a year now, the lab leak theory and the genetic engineering theory have been lumped in together by those trying to discredit them as conspiracies. The issue is that every time someone would point at circumstantial evidence of a potential lab leak, people would point at the scientists saying there was loads of evidence it wasn't genetically engineered, when those two things aren't remotely the same thing.

zpeti 5y ago

No, this was the sleight of hand by the media. Almost all people dismissed as conspiracy theorists said most likely lab escape doesn’t mean genetically engineered. But straight away that’s how it was reported in the media. Basically twisting words and lying. Shameful.

throwaway894345 5y ago
Tangentially related, I have another comment from a separate post observing some additional media (NYT specifically) sleight of hand WRT the Damore "memo": https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27254877 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27254877 >> [Damore] argued that biological differences and not a lack of opportunity explained the shortage of women in upper-tier positions. > This is an unfortunate way of characterizing Damore’s argument. It’s technically true in that Damore IIRC was arguing that there was more variation among men than women (more men at the top and at the bottom but fewer in the middle, but Google hires from the top hence more men). So yeah, technically biological differences, but when the average person hears that they’re going to assume he was arguing that women in general are dumber than men in general or some such. That said, this also represents much more earnest coverage of Damore considering the initial coverage overtly lied on many accounts (calling it an anti diversity screed, claiming he sent it as a memo to the company, etc).
stjohnswarts 5y ago
I doubt if there's little doubt if you go with the lab theory that this virus wasn't genetically modified to be more virulent to humans (or possibly some species similar to humans). I think the big one is whether it was a lab accident, which seems like the most likely scenario barring jumping species naturally which still seems to be the most likely scenario.

monoideism 5y ago

No, that's just not true. The media repeatedly mocked even a lab escape scenario and boosted a handful of experts were favored a wild reservoir for the disease. Our "intellectual elites" have a bad problem now with moral/intellectual fashions, which are constantly changing. Social media has considerably exacerbated this problem.

jasonlaramburu 5y ago
>The media repeatedly mocked even a lab escape scenario Do you have any links?
- monoideism 5y ago
  How many do you want? If I post one link, you'll likely say it's not enough. Same with two links, etc. I'm hesitant to engage with this kind of request, but I did. In any case, I can tell you that there was a definite narrative in the media that the lab escape scenario was not only very unlikely, but "xenophobic" and "conspiratorial". Perhaps the most telling example of all my links below is this one, which is very open to the possibility of a lab escape. The latter half of the article is full of example of the efforts of the media and scientific establishment (for whatever reason, mostly political) to quash the lab escape hypothesis. One key quote: "Antonio Regalado, biomedicine editor of MIT Technology Review, put it more bluntly. If it turned out COVID-19 came from a lab, he tweeted, 'it would shatter the scientific edifice top to bottom.'" Article: https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2020/09/09/alina-chan-broad-institute-coronavirus/ https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2020/09/09/alina-chan-br... And here is a handful of links, of many: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/01/could-covid-19-be-manmade-what-we-know-about-origins-trump-chinese-lab-coronavirus https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/01/could-covid-19... https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/health/lab-leak-coronavirus-theory-comic-book-scn/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/31/health/lab-leak-coronavirus-t... https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/04/politics/coronavirus-intelligence/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/04/politics/coronavirus-intellig... https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/17/politics/mike-pompeo-coronavirus-wuhan-lab/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/17/politics/mike-pompeo-coronavi... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-much-more-likely-the-coronavirus-came-from-wildlife-not-a-lab1/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/its-much-more-lik...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

mensetmanusman 5y ago

I know this is confusing, but gain of function genome alterations is one class of genetic engineering. Other approaches involve literally trying to change the codon sequence in a supercomputer to see what happens in the folding and conformation changes, but it is very esoteric since bio is so complicated.

jasonlaramburu 5y ago
So my understanding is that GoF can involve genetic engineering (editing the codon sequence/geneotype) OR serial passaging (growing successive generations of microorganisms under various conditions to influence phenotype). The disregarded conspiracy theory, as I understood it, was that Chinese researchers were doing the former, NOT the latter. It is also my understanding that the virus' genetic code does not show any evidence of the former (editing codon sequence).

bart_spoon 5y ago

> I have seen this claim made recently, but as I remember the 'disregarded' conspiracy theory was actually that the virus was genetically engineered (ie codon sequence edited) in a lab. For the better part of a year now, the lab leak theory and the genetic engineering theory have been lumped in together by those trying to discredit them as conspiracies. The issue is that every time someone would point at circumstantial evidence of a potential lab leak, people would point at the scientists saying there was loads of evidence it wasn't genetically engineered, when those two things aren't remotely the same thing.