6 ms·

There's not much there in this piece, it's a very longwinded story that doesn't seem discuss any of the recent evidence, including recent reports that other res

by Natsu 5y ago

There's not much there in this piece, it's a very longwinded story that doesn't seem discuss any of the recent evidence, including recent reports that other research from prior to this that surveyed the Wuhan wet market and showed that neither bats nor pangolins were sold there after a comprehensive sampling of the market. There is a coherent theory of how this might've happened. It rests on the lab's own papers. That's not proof, but there's plenty of investigation going on here and so far we're not finding wild animal reservoirs. If that happened, it might change things.

hammock 5y ago
>recent reports that other research from prior to this that surveyed the Wuhan wet market and showed that neither bats nor pangolins were sold there after a comprehensive sampling of the market. That news came out early last year[1] but was mostly ignored by mainstream media (and the general public). China themselves disavowed the wet market theory rather quickly.[2] That disavowal was also mostly ignored. [1]March 2020 "But no one has yet found evidence that pangolins were at the Wuhan market, or even that venders there trafficked pangolin" https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/from-bats-to-human-lungs-the-evolution-of-a-coronavirus https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/from-bats-to-huma... [2]May 2020 "The coronavirus didn't really start at that Wuhan 'wet market'" https://www.livescience.com/covid-19-did-not-start-at-wuhan-wet-market.html https://www.livescience.com/covid-19-did-not-start-at-wuhan-...
- Natsu 5y ago
  I've been following this relatively closely and I wasn't aware of that one... which kinda underscores your point that a lot of this information wasn't really getting out.
  - hammock 5y ago
    Tip of the iceberg
masswerk 5y ago
However, there must be more evidence than three lab workers seeking medical help with symptoms of a cold (about what may be statistically expected for a complex of that size in the cold season) and no apparent trail of possible infections in that (social) vicinity. This is simply not a sufficient argument for a hypothesis of such gravity. Moreover, I have a hard time seeing how this could have happened, provided the requirement of some considerable exposure (viral load) over a considerable time. (A COVID-19 infection is not a matter of a short contact for a few seconds or even minutes.) Personally, I'd say, there is no coherent theory, just politics.
- hammock 5y ago
  >no apparent trail of possible infections in that (social) vicinity There is a trail, though. A cluster in a straight line along Wuhan subway Line 2 connecting the lab with the PLA hospital. Link: https://web.archive.org/web/20210605182232if_/https://zenodo.org/record/4119263#.YLvA7LfLeh8 https://web.archive.org/web/20210605182232if_/https://zenodo...
  - masswerk 5y ago
    I'd expect a discernible trail in the social vicinity of said personal. A geographical vicinity to their route of commute (alone) is rather an argument to the contrary. Disclaimer: I studied social research and related statistics.

by Natsu 5y ago

hammock 5y ago

>recent reports that other research from prior to this that surveyed the Wuhan wet market and showed that neither bats nor pangolins were sold there after a comprehensive sampling of the market. That news came out early last year[1] but was mostly ignored by mainstream media (and the general public). China themselves disavowed the wet market theory rather quickly.[2] That disavowal was also mostly ignored. [1]March 2020 "But no one has yet found evidence that pangolins were at the Wuhan market, or even that venders there trafficked pangolin" https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/from-bats-to-human-lungs-the-evolution-of-a-coronavirus https://www.newyorker.com/science/elements/from-bats-to-huma... [2]May 2020 "The coronavirus didn't really start at that Wuhan 'wet market'" https://www.livescience.com/covid-19-did-not-start-at-wuhan-wet-market.html https://www.livescience.com/covid-19-did-not-start-at-wuhan-...

Natsu 5y ago
I've been following this relatively closely and I wasn't aware of that one... which kinda underscores your point that a lot of this information wasn't really getting out.
- hammock 5y ago
  Tip of the iceberg

masswerk 5y ago

However, there must be more evidence than three lab workers seeking medical help with symptoms of a cold (about what may be statistically expected for a complex of that size in the cold season) and no apparent trail of possible infections in that (social) vicinity. This is simply not a sufficient argument for a hypothesis of such gravity. Moreover, I have a hard time seeing how this could have happened, provided the requirement of some considerable exposure (viral load) over a considerable time. (A COVID-19 infection is not a matter of a short contact for a few seconds or even minutes.) Personally, I'd say, there is no coherent theory, just politics.

hammock 5y ago
>no apparent trail of possible infections in that (social) vicinity There is a trail, though. A cluster in a straight line along Wuhan subway Line 2 connecting the lab with the PLA hospital. Link: https://web.archive.org/web/20210605182232if_/https://zenodo.org/record/4119263#.YLvA7LfLeh8 https://web.archive.org/web/20210605182232if_/https://zenodo...
- masswerk 5y ago
  I'd expect a discernible trail in the social vicinity of said personal. A geographical vicinity to their route of commute (alone) is rather an argument to the contrary. Disclaimer: I studied social research and related statistics.