4 ms·

From day one it's been silly to assume any outbreak of a virus is from a lab leak without evidence.

• z3ncyberpunk 5y ago
  There's been plenty, there's been exactly zero evidence though that it was from bats and wet markets. And if it were from bats or other animals, why did fouchi want to collect even more animals that are already being experimented on an increase the rate of already dangerous research?
• dkersten 5y ago
  There's no evidence for the counter argument either, but to believe that we have to accept the big coincidence that it happened to start in the one city where they were studying that exact virus. I'm not saying that this means it was definitely a lab leak. It absolutely doesn't, without further evidence, but discounting it completely, especially given how suspicious the CCP acted around it (why wait an entire year before letting the WHO investigate and then only for a few hours? why silence scientists and doctors?), is equally silly. There's no evidence it was a lab leak, there's no evidence that it wasn't either. There's some circumstantial data to suggest that the CCP isn't a trustworthy source. That's all we know. Yes its silly to assume that it was a lab leak. But its also silly to assume that it wasn't. We don't know what it was.