7 ms·

Daszak should be compelled to reveal everything he knows and all relevant evidence --- all proposals, all emails, all files, any other documentation. I'm mysti

by roca 5y ago

Daszak should be compelled to reveal everything he knows and all relevant evidence --- all proposals, all emails, all files, any other documentation. I'm mystified why this hasn't already happened. I mean, his career depends on government largesse so it shouldn't even require coercion. Full cooperation or no cash.

pishpash 5y ago
You're assuming the government has a different interest than him.
someguydave 5y ago
what he knows might embarrass or reveal dishonesty from others in the government or those seeking positions in the government
- roca 5y ago
  The government is not a monolith. The US Congress could do this and individual Congresspeople don't have an obvious interest in covering this up. Edit: the problem looks like partisan politics to me. Republicans have been agitating to pressure Daszak, and therefore Democrats are against it.
  - someguydave 5y ago
    I agree I think it is partisan. My take is that Democrats and the media built up Fauci’s credibility during the 2020 election and don’t want to see it be demolished by what could obviously be a massive scandal. If Daszak goes down it would ruin the credibility of the entire government on the subject of pandemics.
hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
I've been extremely wary of how some of the evidence of Covid-19 origins have come about, particular because so much of it has been presented as "Well, we've never seen this before, so it must have lab origins." That said, I think the context around this is extremely damning for Daszak. I didn't realize this until reading the Wikipedia article on Daszak, but he was the one that organized the Feb 2020 letter in the Lancet condemning suggestions of a lab origin for Covid-19 as conspiracy theories. But how could he do this while conveniently leaving out that his own organization was involved in highly risky coronavirus research? Again, I don't think this news puts us much closer to uncovering the origins of Covid-19, but it does show how some of these folks leading the charge of "it had to be natural" were at the very least being duplicitous in their communications.
- roca 5y ago
  Yes, I have an open mind about natural vs lab origin, but either way, Daszak seems to have been engaging in a cover-up.
- lucb1e 5y ago
  > while conveniently leaving out that his own organization was involved in highly risky coronavirus research? Don't get me wrong, but in online discussions, all too often telling the whole truth makes people ignore your message. That's probably also why dishonest politicians can get populist votes from many people. Whenever you include the material to dig your grave with, people just take that by the horns and stop looking at the rest of your argument even if that disclosure is the reason why you are a qualified expert that should be weighing into the discussion on a given topic. I don't know the details about this Daszak guy, I only know what you wrote and the comments above yours. Perhaps this does not apply in this situation; that's not for me to say. But I can see why they might not have dug their own grave while trying to communicate a message with honest intentions. It is extremely easy to have subtly wrong wording or just bad luck and get people to ignore everything you said before or after "my lab worked on coronaviruses".
  - flavius29663 5y ago
    Umm, wouldn't "I worked on coronaviruses, hence I know a lot about them" make his argument stronger? Anyway, this was in Lancet, a scientific publisher, not a mass medium, disclosures of interest are mandatory. I know that in today's age it looks like science papers are just mass media because they're so easy to consume and distribute, but they are not. They're supposed to be rigurous, otherwise people would lose trust in them. Which is exactly what happened in this pandemic: it's a worldwide lack of trust in science, scientists, leaders, governments.
    - lucb1e 5y ago
      It ought to make the argument stronger, yes, but not everyone reads the full text. Especially if it will get third-party media coverage, you're dependent on what part the media will report or in which proportions because they always make a selection. With honest intentions the vast majority of the time I'm sure, but still a selection of what they think is the message their readers should be getting.
throwawaysea 5y ago
It’s not just Daszak. The NIH itself has refused to cooperate with members of Congress who’ve called for transparency. I’m not sure why the Biden administration is OK with agencies being secretive about something that like this that clearly deserves public scrutiny: https://www.newsweek.com/its-time-nih-transparency-wuhan-research-funding-opinion-1616157 https://www.newsweek.com/its-time-nih-transparency-wuhan-res...
- willupowers 5y ago
  Right now it looks like the U.S. might have been working with Wuhan on a vaccine. And Wuhan had an oopsies. We just have a confirmation statement from DARPA that they weren't working with WIV. I bet someone knows the rest of the details why we've been watching a circus act for a couple years now.
stablechaos 5y ago
Because all of the major players, the Chinese Communist Party, the US government (DARPA & the NIH), and several universities and their IRB boards (UNC-Chapel Hill, WIV, and others), all had a hand in this, and the second they give legitimacy to this theory--that the hubris and recklessness of scientists and bureaucrats led to the deaths and suffering of millions--then they'll never be able to put the cat back in the bag. They also know that if it was their fault, the CCP did a good enough job of scrubbing the evidence that we'll never meet the standard of evidence that would satisfy many of those who choose to take the authority at their word. We're seeing this first-hand in this thread.
- gfodor 5y ago
  Well, the good news is that either way we are still exposed to a lab leak of an airborne highly contagious coronavirus as much as we were before. Oh wait did I say good news?
  - hirako2000 5y ago
    Not either way. Investigations to find out whether this virus was in fact made in lab has tremendous utility. First it would seek reparation from all parties involved in creating this chaos. Second it will dissuade other lunatic research group or companies getting funny ideas in the future.
    - the-dude 5y ago
      How can any reparation be meaningful on this scale of damages?
      - hirako2000 5y ago
        We don't ask this question when it comes to murder. Why would we in this case?

by roca 5y ago

pishpash 5y ago

You're assuming the government has a different interest than him.

someguydave 5y ago

what he knows might embarrass or reveal dishonesty from others in the government or those seeking positions in the government

roca 5y ago
The government is not a monolith. The US Congress could do this and individual Congresspeople don't have an obvious interest in covering this up. Edit: the problem looks like partisan politics to me. Republicans have been agitating to pressure Daszak, and therefore Democrats are against it.
- someguydave 5y ago
  I agree I think it is partisan. My take is that Democrats and the media built up Fauci’s credibility during the 2020 election and don’t want to see it be demolished by what could obviously be a massive scandal. If Daszak goes down it would ruin the credibility of the entire government on the subject of pandemics.

hn_throwaway_99 5y ago

I've been extremely wary of how some of the evidence of Covid-19 origins have come about, particular because so much of it has been presented as "Well, we've never seen this before, so it must have lab origins." That said, I think the context around this is extremely damning for Daszak. I didn't realize this until reading the Wikipedia article on Daszak, but he was the one that organized the Feb 2020 letter in the Lancet condemning suggestions of a lab origin for Covid-19 as conspiracy theories. But how could he do this while conveniently leaving out that his own organization was involved in highly risky coronavirus research? Again, I don't think this news puts us much closer to uncovering the origins of Covid-19, but it does show how some of these folks leading the charge of "it had to be natural" were at the very least being duplicitous in their communications.

roca 5y ago
Yes, I have an open mind about natural vs lab origin, but either way, Daszak seems to have been engaging in a cover-up.
lucb1e 5y ago
> while conveniently leaving out that his own organization was involved in highly risky coronavirus research? Don't get me wrong, but in online discussions, all too often telling the whole truth makes people ignore your message. That's probably also why dishonest politicians can get populist votes from many people. Whenever you include the material to dig your grave with, people just take that by the horns and stop looking at the rest of your argument even if that disclosure is the reason why you are a qualified expert that should be weighing into the discussion on a given topic. I don't know the details about this Daszak guy, I only know what you wrote and the comments above yours. Perhaps this does not apply in this situation; that's not for me to say. But I can see why they might not have dug their own grave while trying to communicate a message with honest intentions. It is extremely easy to have subtly wrong wording or just bad luck and get people to ignore everything you said before or after "my lab worked on coronaviruses".
- flavius29663 5y ago
  Umm, wouldn't "I worked on coronaviruses, hence I know a lot about them" make his argument stronger? Anyway, this was in Lancet, a scientific publisher, not a mass medium, disclosures of interest are mandatory. I know that in today's age it looks like science papers are just mass media because they're so easy to consume and distribute, but they are not. They're supposed to be rigurous, otherwise people would lose trust in them. Which is exactly what happened in this pandemic: it's a worldwide lack of trust in science, scientists, leaders, governments.
  - lucb1e 5y ago
    It ought to make the argument stronger, yes, but not everyone reads the full text. Especially if it will get third-party media coverage, you're dependent on what part the media will report or in which proportions because they always make a selection. With honest intentions the vast majority of the time I'm sure, but still a selection of what they think is the message their readers should be getting.

throwawaysea 5y ago

It’s not just Daszak. The NIH itself has refused to cooperate with members of Congress who’ve called for transparency. I’m not sure why the Biden administration is OK with agencies being secretive about something that like this that clearly deserves public scrutiny: https://www.newsweek.com/its-time-nih-transparency-wuhan-research-funding-opinion-1616157 https://www.newsweek.com/its-time-nih-transparency-wuhan-res...

willupowers 5y ago
Right now it looks like the U.S. might have been working with Wuhan on a vaccine. And Wuhan had an oopsies. We just have a confirmation statement from DARPA that they weren't working with WIV. I bet someone knows the rest of the details why we've been watching a circus act for a couple years now.

stablechaos 5y ago

Because all of the major players, the Chinese Communist Party, the US government (DARPA & the NIH), and several universities and their IRB boards (UNC-Chapel Hill, WIV, and others), all had a hand in this, and the second they give legitimacy to this theory--that the hubris and recklessness of scientists and bureaucrats led to the deaths and suffering of millions--then they'll never be able to put the cat back in the bag. They also know that if it was their fault, the CCP did a good enough job of scrubbing the evidence that we'll never meet the standard of evidence that would satisfy many of those who choose to take the authority at their word. We're seeing this first-hand in this thread.

gfodor 5y ago
Well, the good news is that either way we are still exposed to a lab leak of an airborne highly contagious coronavirus as much as we were before. Oh wait did I say good news?
- hirako2000 5y ago
  Not either way. Investigations to find out whether this virus was in fact made in lab has tremendous utility. First it would seek reparation from all parties involved in creating this chaos. Second it will dissuade other lunatic research group or companies getting funny ideas in the future.
  - the-dude 5y ago
    How can any reparation be meaningful on this scale of damages?
    - hirako2000 5y ago
      We don't ask this question when it comes to murder. Why would we in this case?