4 ms·

> One of which was TWO BLOCKS from where the wet market from where the original Covid-19 virus which started the pandemic has been traced to TWO BLOCKS? Or a 4

by awb 5y ago

> One of which was TWO BLOCKS from where the wet market from where the original Covid-19 virus which started the pandemic has been traced to TWO BLOCKS? Or a 40min drive? This is why the lab leak theory feels conspiracy-adjacent. Too much exaggeration. https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/640/cpsprodpb/D961/production/_118694655_wuhan_map_640-2x-nc.png https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/640/cpsprodpb/D961/production/... > The institute is a 40-minute drive from the Huanan wet market where the first cluster of infections emerged in Wuhan. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57268111.amp https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57268111.amp There’s plenty of valid scientific inquiry to be had regarding the theory once you get past the misinformation. But the political showmanship and the attraction of conspiracy theorists doesn’t help.

AnthonyMouse 5y ago
This is a common problem with conspiracies when they actually happened. You still get "conspiracy theorists" showing up with theories contrary to evidence or fabrications or misrememberings of details. Which then discredits their own position -- even if the conspiracy actually happened -- because it didn't happen the way they claim it did. There is a conspiracy theory that this method is used by conspirators to effect a coverup by discrediting skeptics of the official narrative.
- donny2018 5y ago
  >There is a conspiracy theory that this method is used by conspirators to effect a coverup by discrediting skeptics of the official narrative. This is actual public disinformation practice, not a "conspiracy theory".
  - AnthonyMouse 5y ago
    Moon landing conspiracy theories are full of discredited nonsense. It is a conspiracy theory to claim that the source of the discredited nonsense is the people who faked the moon landing, because the moon landing wasn't faked so there were no such conspirators to do that. Distinguishing this from the other thing is the issue. They do it because it works.
    - donny2018 5y ago
      Ah, now I get it. I thought you were talking about cases when “conspiracy theorists” are actually right, but their positions get poisoned by attributing some ridiculous stuff to them, and/or by artificial influx of similar “conspiracy theories” that are easy to disprove, so that the original theory is dismissed by association. For example, in Russia they love to flood the information space with bullshit theories a lot to “dilute” the truth and to disorient the public so that you can’t distinguish between truth and conspiracy theories anymore.
barbacoa 5y ago
There are multiple labs in Wuhan. Wuhan institute of virology is the main on people like to talk about but there was indeed another lab a block or two away from the wet market. I don't know if both were doing virology experiments. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Center_For_Disease_Control_%26_Prevention https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Center_For_Disease_Con...
- awb 5y ago
  It’s a Level 2 facility, not studying bats or coronavirus. https://www.wsj.com/articles/head-of-who-team-investigating-origins-of-covid-19-calls-for-closer-look-at-china-lab-11628807623 https://www.wsj.com/articles/head-of-who-team-investigating-... > “They also reported no storage nor laboratory activities on CoVs [coronaviruses] or other bat viruses preceding the outbreak.” > The lab is classified BSL-2, a safety level at which air ventilation controls aren’t particularly strict, as they are in more secure labs. At that level, lab workers are usually dealing with pathogens that either cause mild disease in humans or which don’t typically spread through small particles that linger in the air. Researchers at that level don’t necessarily wear masks. > The Wuhan CDC lab tested all of its staff for Covid-19 antibodies, it told the WHO in February. All staff tested negative, except one who tested positive, it said. That person was infected “due to family cluster transmission,” the WHO-led team’s report’s annex says. > But Dr. Ben Embarek is the first to so explicitly question the team’s conclusion, published in a joint report with Chinese counterparts, that a lab accident was an “extremely unlikely” hypothesis. > That wording was only reached after a 48 hour period of intense negotiations with Chinese counterparts said Dr. Ben Embarek, who said he would have preferred to designate an accident inside a lab as merely “unlikely.” > The lab hadn’t published any work with bats since 2013, he said. > “As far as we understand, they work mostly with parasites, not as much with viruses, so they have worked on parasites from bats.” Yet, after fighting to label the lab leak theory “unlikely”, he throws a bone to the conspiracy theorists: > “It’s also possible that someone is trying to hide something,” he added. “Who knows?”
  - korantu 5y ago
    In 2016, some of the scientists including Shi and the EcoHealth director, Peter Daszak, used the NIH funding to conduct experiments in Wuhan on live coronaviruses in a biosafety level 2 lab, according to published details of the work from [0] They did do coronavirus experiments in level 2 facility. [0] https://archive.is/KwZKn https://archive.is/KwZKn? [edit] replaced link as FT makes it difficult to refer to them.

by awb 5y ago

AnthonyMouse 5y ago

This is a common problem with conspiracies when they actually happened. You still get "conspiracy theorists" showing up with theories contrary to evidence or fabrications or misrememberings of details. Which then discredits their own position -- even if the conspiracy actually happened -- because it didn't happen the way they claim it did. There is a conspiracy theory that this method is used by conspirators to effect a coverup by discrediting skeptics of the official narrative.

donny2018 5y ago
>There is a conspiracy theory that this method is used by conspirators to effect a coverup by discrediting skeptics of the official narrative. This is actual public disinformation practice, not a "conspiracy theory".
- AnthonyMouse 5y ago
  Moon landing conspiracy theories are full of discredited nonsense. It is a conspiracy theory to claim that the source of the discredited nonsense is the people who faked the moon landing, because the moon landing wasn't faked so there were no such conspirators to do that. Distinguishing this from the other thing is the issue. They do it because it works.
  - donny2018 5y ago
    Ah, now I get it. I thought you were talking about cases when “conspiracy theorists” are actually right, but their positions get poisoned by attributing some ridiculous stuff to them, and/or by artificial influx of similar “conspiracy theories” that are easy to disprove, so that the original theory is dismissed by association. For example, in Russia they love to flood the information space with bullshit theories a lot to “dilute” the truth and to disorient the public so that you can’t distinguish between truth and conspiracy theories anymore.

barbacoa 5y ago

There are multiple labs in Wuhan. Wuhan institute of virology is the main on people like to talk about but there was indeed another lab a block or two away from the wet market. I don't know if both were doing virology experiments. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Center_For_Disease_Control_%26_Prevention https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Center_For_Disease_Con...

awb 5y ago
It’s a Level 2 facility, not studying bats or coronavirus. https://www.wsj.com/articles/head-of-who-team-investigating-origins-of-covid-19-calls-for-closer-look-at-china-lab-11628807623 https://www.wsj.com/articles/head-of-who-team-investigating-... > “They also reported no storage nor laboratory activities on CoVs [coronaviruses] or other bat viruses preceding the outbreak.” > The lab is classified BSL-2, a safety level at which air ventilation controls aren’t particularly strict, as they are in more secure labs. At that level, lab workers are usually dealing with pathogens that either cause mild disease in humans or which don’t typically spread through small particles that linger in the air. Researchers at that level don’t necessarily wear masks. > The Wuhan CDC lab tested all of its staff for Covid-19 antibodies, it told the WHO in February. All staff tested negative, except one who tested positive, it said. That person was infected “due to family cluster transmission,” the WHO-led team’s report’s annex says. > But Dr. Ben Embarek is the first to so explicitly question the team’s conclusion, published in a joint report with Chinese counterparts, that a lab accident was an “extremely unlikely” hypothesis. > That wording was only reached after a 48 hour period of intense negotiations with Chinese counterparts said Dr. Ben Embarek, who said he would have preferred to designate an accident inside a lab as merely “unlikely.” > The lab hadn’t published any work with bats since 2013, he said. > “As far as we understand, they work mostly with parasites, not as much with viruses, so they have worked on parasites from bats.” Yet, after fighting to label the lab leak theory “unlikely”, he throws a bone to the conspiracy theorists: > “It’s also possible that someone is trying to hide something,” he added. “Who knows?”
- korantu 5y ago
  In 2016, some of the scientists including Shi and the EcoHealth director, Peter Daszak, used the NIH funding to conduct experiments in Wuhan on live coronaviruses in a biosafety level 2 lab, according to published details of the work from [0] They did do coronavirus experiments in level 2 facility. [0] https://archive.is/KwZKn https://archive.is/KwZKn? [edit] replaced link as FT makes it difficult to refer to them.