5 ms·

if you called someone crazy at some point for suggesting this as a possibility, it is time to pause and reflect

WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
It is reasonable & responsible to downplay theories that get constructed in absence of sufficient and meaningfully qualified evidence.
- dabbledash 5y ago
  GP didn’t say “if you thought there was insufficient evidence before, you have some reflecting to do!”
  - WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
    I'm advocating a principle that applies well to the OP.
    - dabbledash 5y ago
      Then your comment would make more sense as a response to the OP. If anything it seems like you would agree that in the absence of evidence humility is appropriate. People who acted like only fringe conspiracy theorists would even consider lab origins should reflect on their overconfidence and arrogance. It’s not a slam dunk either way and probably never will be, if i had to guess.
- jtdev 5y ago
  Animal origin theory/wet market/etc. have zero "meaningfully qualified evidence", are you as skeptical about those theories?
- iammisc 5y ago
  Such as the theory, presented often without evidence, that Sars-Cov-2 came from an imaginary population of bats in Wuhan?
  - tshaddox 5y ago
    I mean, if it's a random comment on the Internet that makes a claim without presenting evidence, yet evidence does exist and is readily available, I don't have much of a problem with that. After all, you just made the claim that the theory is often present without evidence without actually presenting evidence of that claim. The real question is what evidence exists, not what evidence may or may not be presented with every online comment you may come across.
  - andyxor 5y ago
    there is a lab called "Wuhan Coronavirus Research Lab" in the epicenter of coronavirus pandemic ground zero, and there is evidence of lab members seeking (and getting) grants in the US for dangerous gain-of-function research in the last few years, doesn't it make you stop and think?
  - jayd16 5y ago
    Its fine to call someone crazy if they're posting about some coverup about bats without any evidence too, no?
    - iammisc 5y ago
      Except there was no bat coverup. The american media bought into that theory without any evidence while simultaneously castigating and ridiculing the lab leak one. The coverup of the lab leak theory in the press was thus in plain sight.
  - tootie 5y ago
    The evidence is that every other coronavirus ever studied was zoonotic. It's still the most reasonable explanation. This story doesn't really move the needle.
- 015a 5y ago
  Ok, but to play in this space for a second: toward the beginning of the pandemic when these theories were flying left and right, where exactly was the "sufficient and meaningfully qualified evidence" to assert that it had natural origins? Is the default to simply assert that, because it is biological, it naturally evolved? In the modern era we're in, I'm not convinced that is a sensible default. The most sensible default is to say we don't know, and all reasonable possibilities are being explored. That is not the same as saying that its reasonable and responsible to downplay a completely reasonable theory; for all that's holy, the virus was first discovered in the same city as China's only L4 biohazard lab studying human pathogens, literally that evidence alone is enough to say the lab-leak theory is "reasonable". Not a smoking gun! But REASONABLE and not worthy of downplay.
  - mr_toad 5y ago
    > Is the default to simply assert that, because it is biological, it naturally evolved? Unless you’re a creationist, then yes?
martythemaniak 5y ago
I've asked people to explain to me why I should care one way or another, beyond curiosity, and no one has been able to answer yet. That is to say, is there an actual person who is perfectly fine with all the terrible things the CCP plainly does, but finding out that they've been incompetently handling research will suddenly make them change their views?
- iammisc 5y ago
  Yes... Many people claim 'global warming' or 'globalization' make pandemics more frequent and more likely and want us to spend lots of money preparing for pandemics. However, if this pandemic turned out to be engineered or modified, then there is a political solution to this enhanced likelihood of pandemics from rogue nations.
- 015a 5y ago
  The reason why you need to care is because this isn't a CCP problem; its a global problem. Sure, maybe the CCP screwed up containment, and that mistake cost millions of lives. Every single major government around the planet has facilities like the one we're discussing. Every single one has made mistakes like the CCP possibly did. The CCP were just unlucky in that their mistake wasn't confined to one person or the welcome lobby. Knowing it was engineered in a lab would put a bigger spotlight on facilities like these. Unfortunately, its most likely to only result in sanctions against China, but if the people in charge could summon an ounce of sense, it could also mean more of these facilities being shut down, their research suspended, and the live cultures of humanity-destroying plagues in their vaults destroyed.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
    > it could also mean more of these facilities being shut down ... which is a critical thing to consider when reading virologists' opinions claiming that it couldn't be a lab leak. There is a very obvious conflict of interest here. I don't have a good answer how to deal with this conflict, since it is hard for non-virologist to judge the arguments, but ignoring the conflict of interest entirely is not the solution.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
speed_spread 5y ago
My problem with people saying "but it was engineered!" is that it the origin does not change what our reaction should be. The virus is here and now we have to face it. Whether it's a natural mutation, part of a big masterplan, or an accidental release is a matter of international politics, in which most of us have very little, if anything to contribute.
- angelzen 5y ago
  If we go back to business as usual, covid will be far from the last allegedly engineered virus to kill millions. The health sciences establishment is in dire need of a reality check, their actions have consequences reaching well beyond petty grant politicking.
  - Factorium 5y ago
    Its unlikely the virus was engineered expressly to kill millions - it seems increasingly likely that the virus was engineered to drive mRNA vaccine sales, as well as to disrupt the 2020 American election (by forcing an unprecedent switch to mail-in paper ballots and upending a vibrant US economy - at the same time as China was struggling under international tariffs). Just look at what an investment in BioNTech would have done if you bought in October 2019: https://www.google.com/finance/quote/BNTX:NASDAQ?window=5Y https://www.google.com/finance/quote/BNTX:NASDAQ?window=5Y You'd be 25x in less than 2 years. How convenient for the Gates Foundation to invest $55 million in September 2019! https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-details/biontech-announces-new-collaboration-develop-hiv-and https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-det... The chief innovation of mRNA vaccines is that instead of using expensive egg cultures, you can reproduce viral proteins inside the vaccinated patient themselves. This presumably means much cheaper manufacturing. Additionally, you can drive long-term vaccine sales, since antibodies based on a single protein (spike) are more likely to fail compared to immunity based on the complete protein structure. We're already seeing this now with the 'need' for booster shots in response to variants driven by these leaky vaccines.
    - tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
tshaddox 5y ago
"Suggesting this as a possibility" is a pretty weak statement. But it's actually good to criticize someone for claiming that it happened without having any evidence, even if there happens to later be evidence that it happened.
- Viliam1234 5y ago
  Depends on whether your criticism was "we don't know for sure whether it happened" or "it did not happen".
- bopbeepboop 5y ago
  You’re assuming that because you were unaware of that evidence, that others were as well. But we’ve known since the COVID outbreak that there was experiments making novel corona viruses infect humanized mice in Wuhan just before two of the WIV researchers got sick and a nearby military event also got sick. We’ve further known that COVID-19 has a DNA structure unlike natural viruses — matching a bat virus except for a single protein that appears to be from a pangolin virus. It was always clear the preponderance of evidence pointed towards a lab leak — and that claims of a natural virus were special pleading by interested parties or a political stunt by media parties. You were always irrational and acting based on propaganda to question a lab leak — it was the only reasonable and supported-by-evidence hypothesis the entire time.
- aww_dang 5y ago
  Let's not confuse the issue. Evidence is a method of confirmation. Motives, incentives and suspicious evasions can help us form hypotheses to evaluate. Dismissing a hypothesis as something unworthy of examination may fall under the 'suspicious evasion' subheading.
mhh__ 5y ago
There's a difference between outright rejection and calling BS on obviously conclusion-driven argument from people playing politics.

It is reasonable & responsible to downplay theories that get constructed in absence of sufficient and meaningfully qualified evidence.

dabbledash 5y ago
GP didn’t say “if you thought there was insufficient evidence before, you have some reflecting to do!”
- WarOnPrivacy 5y ago
  I'm advocating a principle that applies well to the OP.
  - dabbledash 5y ago
    Then your comment would make more sense as a response to the OP. If anything it seems like you would agree that in the absence of evidence humility is appropriate. People who acted like only fringe conspiracy theorists would even consider lab origins should reflect on their overconfidence and arrogance. It’s not a slam dunk either way and probably never will be, if i had to guess.
jtdev 5y ago
Animal origin theory/wet market/etc. have zero "meaningfully qualified evidence", are you as skeptical about those theories?
iammisc 5y ago
Such as the theory, presented often without evidence, that Sars-Cov-2 came from an imaginary population of bats in Wuhan?
- tshaddox 5y ago
  I mean, if it's a random comment on the Internet that makes a claim without presenting evidence, yet evidence does exist and is readily available, I don't have much of a problem with that. After all, you just made the claim that the theory is often present without evidence without actually presenting evidence of that claim. The real question is what evidence exists, not what evidence may or may not be presented with every online comment you may come across.
- andyxor 5y ago
  there is a lab called "Wuhan Coronavirus Research Lab" in the epicenter of coronavirus pandemic ground zero, and there is evidence of lab members seeking (and getting) grants in the US for dangerous gain-of-function research in the last few years, doesn't it make you stop and think?
- jayd16 5y ago
  Its fine to call someone crazy if they're posting about some coverup about bats without any evidence too, no?
  - iammisc 5y ago
    Except there was no bat coverup. The american media bought into that theory without any evidence while simultaneously castigating and ridiculing the lab leak one. The coverup of the lab leak theory in the press was thus in plain sight.
- tootie 5y ago
  The evidence is that every other coronavirus ever studied was zoonotic. It's still the most reasonable explanation. This story doesn't really move the needle.
015a 5y ago
Ok, but to play in this space for a second: toward the beginning of the pandemic when these theories were flying left and right, where exactly was the "sufficient and meaningfully qualified evidence" to assert that it had natural origins? Is the default to simply assert that, because it is biological, it naturally evolved? In the modern era we're in, I'm not convinced that is a sensible default. The most sensible default is to say we don't know, and all reasonable possibilities are being explored. That is not the same as saying that its reasonable and responsible to downplay a completely reasonable theory; for all that's holy, the virus was first discovered in the same city as China's only L4 biohazard lab studying human pathogens, literally that evidence alone is enough to say the lab-leak theory is "reasonable". Not a smoking gun! But REASONABLE and not worthy of downplay.
- mr_toad 5y ago
  > Is the default to simply assert that, because it is biological, it naturally evolved? Unless you’re a creationist, then yes?

martythemaniak 5y ago

I've asked people to explain to me why I should care one way or another, beyond curiosity, and no one has been able to answer yet. That is to say, is there an actual person who is perfectly fine with all the terrible things the CCP plainly does, but finding out that they've been incompetently handling research will suddenly make them change their views?

iammisc 5y ago
Yes... Many people claim 'global warming' or 'globalization' make pandemics more frequent and more likely and want us to spend lots of money preparing for pandemics. However, if this pandemic turned out to be engineered or modified, then there is a political solution to this enhanced likelihood of pandemics from rogue nations.
015a 5y ago
The reason why you need to care is because this isn't a CCP problem; its a global problem. Sure, maybe the CCP screwed up containment, and that mistake cost millions of lives. Every single major government around the planet has facilities like the one we're discussing. Every single one has made mistakes like the CCP possibly did. The CCP were just unlucky in that their mistake wasn't confined to one person or the welcome lobby. Knowing it was engineered in a lab would put a bigger spotlight on facilities like these. Unfortunately, its most likely to only result in sanctions against China, but if the people in charge could summon an ounce of sense, it could also mean more of these facilities being shut down, their research suspended, and the live cultures of humanity-destroying plagues in their vaults destroyed.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago
  > it could also mean more of these facilities being shut down ... which is a critical thing to consider when reading virologists' opinions claiming that it couldn't be a lab leak. There is a very obvious conflict of interest here. I don't have a good answer how to deal with this conflict, since it is hard for non-virologist to judge the arguments, but ignoring the conflict of interest entirely is not the solution.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

speed_spread 5y ago

My problem with people saying "but it was engineered!" is that it the origin does not change what our reaction should be. The virus is here and now we have to face it. Whether it's a natural mutation, part of a big masterplan, or an accidental release is a matter of international politics, in which most of us have very little, if anything to contribute.

angelzen 5y ago
If we go back to business as usual, covid will be far from the last allegedly engineered virus to kill millions. The health sciences establishment is in dire need of a reality check, their actions have consequences reaching well beyond petty grant politicking.
- Factorium 5y ago
  Its unlikely the virus was engineered expressly to kill millions - it seems increasingly likely that the virus was engineered to drive mRNA vaccine sales, as well as to disrupt the 2020 American election (by forcing an unprecedent switch to mail-in paper ballots and upending a vibrant US economy - at the same time as China was struggling under international tariffs). Just look at what an investment in BioNTech would have done if you bought in October 2019: https://www.google.com/finance/quote/BNTX:NASDAQ?window=5Y https://www.google.com/finance/quote/BNTX:NASDAQ?window=5Y You'd be 25x in less than 2 years. How convenient for the Gates Foundation to invest $55 million in September 2019! https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-details/biontech-announces-new-collaboration-develop-hiv-and https://investors.biontech.de/news-releases/news-release-det... The chief innovation of mRNA vaccines is that instead of using expensive egg cultures, you can reproduce viral proteins inside the vaccinated patient themselves. This presumably means much cheaper manufacturing. Additionally, you can drive long-term vaccine sales, since antibodies based on a single protein (spike) are more likely to fail compared to immunity based on the complete protein structure. We're already seeing this now with the 'need' for booster shots in response to variants driven by these leaky vaccines.
  - tgsovlerkhgsel 5y ago

tshaddox 5y ago

"Suggesting this as a possibility" is a pretty weak statement. But it's actually good to criticize someone for claiming that it happened without having any evidence, even if there happens to later be evidence that it happened.

Viliam1234 5y ago
Depends on whether your criticism was "we don't know for sure whether it happened" or "it did not happen".
bopbeepboop 5y ago
You’re assuming that because you were unaware of that evidence, that others were as well. But we’ve known since the COVID outbreak that there was experiments making novel corona viruses infect humanized mice in Wuhan just before two of the WIV researchers got sick and a nearby military event also got sick. We’ve further known that COVID-19 has a DNA structure unlike natural viruses — matching a bat virus except for a single protein that appears to be from a pangolin virus. It was always clear the preponderance of evidence pointed towards a lab leak — and that claims of a natural virus were special pleading by interested parties or a political stunt by media parties. You were always irrational and acting based on propaganda to question a lab leak — it was the only reasonable and supported-by-evidence hypothesis the entire time.
aww_dang 5y ago
Let's not confuse the issue. Evidence is a method of confirmation. Motives, incentives and suspicious evasions can help us form hypotheses to evaluate. Dismissing a hypothesis as something unworthy of examination may fall under the 'suspicious evasion' subheading.

mhh__ 5y ago

There's a difference between outright rejection and calling BS on obviously conclusion-driven argument from people playing politics.