3 ms·

“Wuhan lab leak” is a far more realistic & plausible story than “animal market is actual source that sits next to a gain of function lab doing unknown research

by 3327 5y ago

“Wuhan lab leak” is a far more realistic & plausible story than “animal market is actual source that sits next to a gain of function lab doing unknown research on corona virus” Many academics have been a proponent of the leak theory, whats shocking is not the press picking it up now, rather how quickly it was discarded before.

coding123 5y ago
> “Wuhan lab leak” is a far more realistic It absolutely is _now_ but try saying that between Mar 2020 and Mar 2021 you got downvoted into oblivion.
- Dah00n 5y ago
  Did your comments back then add anything interesting that everyone else didn't already know or did you just fling mud at the wall? I absolutely did and still do down vote posts that try to point fingers without proof, no matter if it is for or against.
  - dokem 5y ago
    You and I both know that certain ideas just could not be entertained in any way shape or form. It had little to do with proof. And what would this proof look like exactly? We are all reading the same internet bs for the last year. All anyone could do was speculate, and certain speculations were off the table for political reasons. Discussion was shut down and now it's already been shown to backfire. You are trying to retroactively justify your agreement to silence certain opinions, which is wrong, dangerous, and you should be ashamed.
    - Dah00n 5y ago
      I'm not ashamed to not take part in the conspiracy theories and racism that is a part of all of these lab leak discussions and behind many of the comments. I see the situation the direct opposite than you: I have added proof to discussions about the virus and every single time it has been heavily downvoted if it wasn't anti-china or pro lab-leak. Only when adding sources that prove I'm right do HN stop downvoting (but of course by then most have moved on which is why it ends up in one-use account discussions). The ideas that couldn't and still can't be discussed is truth that doesn't agree with what most Americans believe and that haven't changed at all. As it is now we have a huge majority in these discussions that believe that because we haven't found where the virus came from it must be from a lab for the simple reason that almost everyone "know" that we found the source in a few months last time (SARS-CoV) while in reality we have still not found the source after 15 years of hard work. On top of that these discussions are political in nature when it becomes anti-china or pro-US or whatever and by then should be downvoted.
- monkmartinez 5y ago
  It is obvious to anyone that is truly objective that _anything_ to make Trump look bad was going to be pushed hard by the media during that time. He, like it or not, brought the lab leak to the forefront of mind and was summarily dismissed because the media couldn't stand him.
Dah00n 5y ago
Please don't add fire to the FUD. The lab research is neither unknown nor secret. Not only are there published research papers from their work but the WHO have also been there and seen the work and research they do. It might or might not be the source -I won't comment on that- but unknown it is not.
- 3327 5y ago
  https://www.pnas.org/content/117/47/29246 https://www.pnas.org/content/117/47/29246
dangerbird2 5y ago
It's all up for debate now, but the wildlife hypothesis gains its plausibility from the similarity of SARS-CoV2's similarity to coronaviruses in pangolins sold in China's wildlife trade. The wild animal/bushmeat trade is considered responsible for the 2003 SARS outbreak as well as HIV, so it's certainly plausible it spread through wet markets (although probably not the specific Wuhan wet market it was initially discovered in). TBH, the lab leak hypothesis should seem less damaging to the Chinese government's reputation than the wet market hypothesis. On one hand, you have an isolated failure of lab safety protocols, on the other, you have decades of government support of wild animal trade despite mountains of evidence for its risk of zoonotic disease outbreak, not to mention environmental costs.

by 3327 5y ago

coding123 5y ago

> “Wuhan lab leak” is a far more realistic It absolutely is _now_ but try saying that between Mar 2020 and Mar 2021 you got downvoted into oblivion.

Dah00n 5y ago
Did your comments back then add anything interesting that everyone else didn't already know or did you just fling mud at the wall? I absolutely did and still do down vote posts that try to point fingers without proof, no matter if it is for or against.
- dokem 5y ago
  You and I both know that certain ideas just could not be entertained in any way shape or form. It had little to do with proof. And what would this proof look like exactly? We are all reading the same internet bs for the last year. All anyone could do was speculate, and certain speculations were off the table for political reasons. Discussion was shut down and now it's already been shown to backfire. You are trying to retroactively justify your agreement to silence certain opinions, which is wrong, dangerous, and you should be ashamed.
  - Dah00n 5y ago
    I'm not ashamed to not take part in the conspiracy theories and racism that is a part of all of these lab leak discussions and behind many of the comments. I see the situation the direct opposite than you: I have added proof to discussions about the virus and every single time it has been heavily downvoted if it wasn't anti-china or pro lab-leak. Only when adding sources that prove I'm right do HN stop downvoting (but of course by then most have moved on which is why it ends up in one-use account discussions). The ideas that couldn't and still can't be discussed is truth that doesn't agree with what most Americans believe and that haven't changed at all. As it is now we have a huge majority in these discussions that believe that because we haven't found where the virus came from it must be from a lab for the simple reason that almost everyone "know" that we found the source in a few months last time (SARS-CoV) while in reality we have still not found the source after 15 years of hard work. On top of that these discussions are political in nature when it becomes anti-china or pro-US or whatever and by then should be downvoted.
monkmartinez 5y ago
It is obvious to anyone that is truly objective that _anything_ to make Trump look bad was going to be pushed hard by the media during that time. He, like it or not, brought the lab leak to the forefront of mind and was summarily dismissed because the media couldn't stand him.

Dah00n 5y ago

Please don't add fire to the FUD. The lab research is neither unknown nor secret. Not only are there published research papers from their work but the WHO have also been there and seen the work and research they do. It might or might not be the source -I won't comment on that- but unknown it is not.

3327 5y ago
https://www.pnas.org/content/117/47/29246 https://www.pnas.org/content/117/47/29246

dangerbird2 5y ago

It's all up for debate now, but the wildlife hypothesis gains its plausibility from the similarity of SARS-CoV2's similarity to coronaviruses in pangolins sold in China's wildlife trade. The wild animal/bushmeat trade is considered responsible for the 2003 SARS outbreak as well as HIV, so it's certainly plausible it spread through wet markets (although probably not the specific Wuhan wet market it was initially discovered in). TBH, the lab leak hypothesis should seem less damaging to the Chinese government's reputation than the wet market hypothesis. On one hand, you have an isolated failure of lab safety protocols, on the other, you have decades of government support of wild animal trade despite mountains of evidence for its risk of zoonotic disease outbreak, not to mention environmental costs.