4 ms·

Remember when posting the lab leak hypothesis on Facebook would get you banned and now it's, as best as we can figure, the most plausible theory? There is no h

Remember when posting the lab leak hypothesis on Facebook would get you banned and now it's, as best as we can figure, the most plausible theory? There is no human run group fit to decide what is or is not "disinformation".

slightwinder 5y ago
To be fair, the bans usually were about china fabricating the virus on purpose and releasing it with intention, accompanied by racism against Asians. This is pretty different from the accidental leak of a research-object, which is now the accepted theory.
- vorpalhex 5y ago
  The media did themselves and the public a disservice by gluing the two theories together and blending them. Several friends - college educated, intelligent professionals - were confused enough to approach and ask me about the lab leak/release theories. The intentional lab release theory is the stuff of nonsense conspiracy theories. The accidental leak theory has always had some support but is now more widely accepted (but will likely never have hard proof). For a time, both were bannable offenses on Facebook, Youtube and others. Likely because the media glued them together and assigned them both as "disinformation".
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - slightwinder 5y ago
    It wasn't really the media doing that. It was more a combination between nut heads, meme heads with their umbrella-connection and the first panic. The media just amplified it and rode the wave, as usual. And after the message was out, it was hard to turn it around. And I guess the platforms were just unable to distinguish between them, as also had more interest to wait till the nutty wave died down.
    - vorpalhex 5y ago
      > It wasn't really the media doing that. [1] - https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2021/06/covid-lab-leak-theory-rare-genetic-sequence-doesnt-mean-the-virus-was-engineered/ https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2021/06/covid-la... [2] - https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/21/politics/coronavirus-lab-theory-yan-bannon-invs/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/21/politics/coronavirus-lab-theo... [3] - https://www.politifact.com/li-meng-yan-fact-check/ https://www.politifact.com/li-meng-yan-fact-check/
      - slightwinder 5y ago
        Not sure what you mean. These articles are all from 6+ months after the first panic. At that point, the theories were already long merged and spreading wild. They were already present from the first days in January 2020, when China's situation became epidemic. And this didn't really change till spring 2021 when everyone cooled down a bit and sanity returned a bit.
  - shadowgovt 5y ago
    On YouTube and Facebook, "the media" is just "stuff people are saying in videos they post." So this point reduces to "both were bannable offenses because people were posting videos that glued them together," which... Yes, that's why.
- bart_spoon 5y ago
  > To be fair, the bans usually were about china fabricating the virus on purpose and releasing it with intention, accompanied by racism against Asians. This is pretty different from the accidental leak of a research-object, which is now the accepted theory. No, both versions were lumped into the same bucket.
commandlinefan 5y ago
In fact, most of the "people are dying because they're injecting themselves with horse dewormer" story can be traced back to a rolling stone article that quoted a doctor who said so. The only problem was, they actually quoted the doctor's name as well as an actual hospital he supposedly worked at - and the hospital issued a statement that that doctor neither worked there nor had they treated any Ivermectin overdoses (https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/rolling-stone-s-ivermectin-fiction-shows-why-republicans-don-t-trust-media/ar-AAO7RuQ https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/rolling-stone-s-ive...). In other words, "people overdosing on horse dewormer" is actual misinformation... which isn't being censored.
- smallbizdev420 5y ago
  Relying on one source for information is wrong, the hearsay article which reported what the doc in Oklahoma said without verifying the claims about ivermectin overdoses was wrong. What is not wrong is this: According to the National Poison Data System (NPDS), which collects information from the nation's 55 poison control centers, there was a 245% jump in reported exposure cases from July to August — from 133 to 459. Source: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/09/04/1034217306/ivermectin-overdose-exposure-cases-poison-control-centers https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/0... On the one hand, it's nice to know this number is low, on the other hand the numbers are likely under-reporting. Low toxicity doses and symptoms are likely unrecorded. Self medication with prescription drugs is a bad idea.
- etchalon 5y ago
  No. The Rolling Stone debacle literally just happened. The idea "most of the story" is traced backed to one bad article, from two days ago, when it's been a story for over a month is ridiculous nut-picking.
  - jessaustin 5y ago
    Ahem, I believe that's "nitpicking". b^)
    - 5y ago
refenestrator 5y ago
It became 'plausible' based on fashion -- the evidence didn't change at all. Which is even crazier.
devwastaken 5y ago
"most plausible theory" according to whom? It's not a theory, it's a hypothesis with little tangible but evidence due to the nature of chinas control. It could have happened, it may not have. The problem with lab leak discussion on YouTube/Facebook is it was heavily associated with politics, and incredible unsubstantiated claims. "Experts" from nowhere, hired degrees talking about a lab they know nothing about, anonymous and convenient unheard of "researchers" supposedly "exposing the lab leak". The disinformation was incredible. Even if lab leak did happen - very few had the actual proof or good arguments to back it.

slightwinder 5y ago

To be fair, the bans usually were about china fabricating the virus on purpose and releasing it with intention, accompanied by racism against Asians. This is pretty different from the accidental leak of a research-object, which is now the accepted theory.

vorpalhex 5y ago
The media did themselves and the public a disservice by gluing the two theories together and blending them. Several friends - college educated, intelligent professionals - were confused enough to approach and ask me about the lab leak/release theories. The intentional lab release theory is the stuff of nonsense conspiracy theories. The accidental leak theory has always had some support but is now more widely accepted (but will likely never have hard proof). For a time, both were bannable offenses on Facebook, Youtube and others. Likely because the media glued them together and assigned them both as "disinformation".
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- slightwinder 5y ago
  It wasn't really the media doing that. It was more a combination between nut heads, meme heads with their umbrella-connection and the first panic. The media just amplified it and rode the wave, as usual. And after the message was out, it was hard to turn it around. And I guess the platforms were just unable to distinguish between them, as also had more interest to wait till the nutty wave died down.
  - vorpalhex 5y ago
    > It wasn't really the media doing that. [1] - https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2021/06/covid-lab-leak-theory-rare-genetic-sequence-doesnt-mean-the-virus-was-engineered/ https://allianceforscience.cornell.edu/blog/2021/06/covid-la... [2] - https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/21/politics/coronavirus-lab-theory-yan-bannon-invs/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/21/politics/coronavirus-lab-theo... [3] - https://www.politifact.com/li-meng-yan-fact-check/ https://www.politifact.com/li-meng-yan-fact-check/
    - slightwinder 5y ago
      Not sure what you mean. These articles are all from 6+ months after the first panic. At that point, the theories were already long merged and spreading wild. They were already present from the first days in January 2020, when China's situation became epidemic. And this didn't really change till spring 2021 when everyone cooled down a bit and sanity returned a bit.
- shadowgovt 5y ago
  On YouTube and Facebook, "the media" is just "stuff people are saying in videos they post." So this point reduces to "both were bannable offenses because people were posting videos that glued them together," which... Yes, that's why.
bart_spoon 5y ago
> To be fair, the bans usually were about china fabricating the virus on purpose and releasing it with intention, accompanied by racism against Asians. This is pretty different from the accidental leak of a research-object, which is now the accepted theory. No, both versions were lumped into the same bucket.

commandlinefan 5y ago

In fact, most of the "people are dying because they're injecting themselves with horse dewormer" story can be traced back to a rolling stone article that quoted a doctor who said so. The only problem was, they actually quoted the doctor's name as well as an actual hospital he supposedly worked at - and the hospital issued a statement that that doctor neither worked there nor had they treated any Ivermectin overdoses (https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/rolling-stone-s-ivermectin-fiction-shows-why-republicans-don-t-trust-media/ar-AAO7RuQ https://www.msn.com/en-us/health/medical/rolling-stone-s-ive...). In other words, "people overdosing on horse dewormer" is actual misinformation... which isn't being censored.

smallbizdev420 5y ago
Relying on one source for information is wrong, the hearsay article which reported what the doc in Oklahoma said without verifying the claims about ivermectin overdoses was wrong. What is not wrong is this: According to the National Poison Data System (NPDS), which collects information from the nation's 55 poison control centers, there was a 245% jump in reported exposure cases from July to August — from 133 to 459. Source: https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/09/04/1034217306/ivermectin-overdose-exposure-cases-poison-control-centers https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/0... On the one hand, it's nice to know this number is low, on the other hand the numbers are likely under-reporting. Low toxicity doses and symptoms are likely unrecorded. Self medication with prescription drugs is a bad idea.
etchalon 5y ago
No. The Rolling Stone debacle literally just happened. The idea "most of the story" is traced backed to one bad article, from two days ago, when it's been a story for over a month is ridiculous nut-picking.
- jessaustin 5y ago
  Ahem, I believe that's "nitpicking". b^)
  - 5y ago

refenestrator 5y ago

It became 'plausible' based on fashion -- the evidence didn't change at all. Which is even crazier.

devwastaken 5y ago

"most plausible theory" according to whom? It's not a theory, it's a hypothesis with little tangible but evidence due to the nature of chinas control. It could have happened, it may not have. The problem with lab leak discussion on YouTube/Facebook is it was heavily associated with politics, and incredible unsubstantiated claims. "Experts" from nowhere, hired degrees talking about a lab they know nothing about, anonymous and convenient unheard of "researchers" supposedly "exposing the lab leak". The disinformation was incredible. Even if lab leak did happen - very few had the actual proof or good arguments to back it.