5 ms·

I Honestly thought it was common belief that corona come from that lab in china. But now after reading this, I searched a bit and read up on it and I guess it

I Honestly thought it was common belief that corona come from that lab in china. But now after reading this, I searched a bit and read up on it and I guess it is still a somewhat honest debate on the topic. Even if it was lab made, it would be sort of stupid to dig in to it, due to the political nature of the matter. What happened happened, most likely the release would have been accidental, so why play blame games.

navhc 4y ago
I don't think it's all about blame, knowing it came from a lab would also pull into question the practice of engineering viruses and the safety and security standards required.
- callesgg 4y ago
  True, it would be helpful in that kind of way. The risks does seam to outweigh the benefits. That said, the blame game would still be there, and people would pull that card...
- sneak 4y ago
  If it is possible that viruses of this type could be engineered, then lab safety needs to be upgraded anyway (or GoF research banned, or both) regardless of the origin of this specific virus. It’s all about blame. Blame is a useful geopolitical tool.
danbtl 4y ago
> why play blame games Because of the question of liability: If it was lab made and accidentally released, was it due to recklessness or criminal negligence? Is someone guilty of involuntary mass-manslaughter? Or if this was state-sponsored research, could they be found liable for the damage caused?
- pencilguin 4y ago
  What court would usefully find this? What authority would enforce it?
  - cybertronic 4y ago
    US court?
    - pencilguin 4y ago
      Against China?
  - landswipe 4y ago
    I think you'll find the wheels are already in motion (if the hypothesis is true).
ISL 4y ago
If it was released from a lab, no matter whether or not it was accidental, Covid would be the mother of all torts. The entire planet can show harm and will be very interested in recovering their losses from the entity that mis-handled a lethal virus.
- rlpb 4y ago
  It'd be much like trying to recover money stolen by a drug addict though. Instant bankruptcy and proportionally nothing recovered, to the point that it's not even really worth it.
  - ISL 4y ago
    A drug addict with a $14T GDP. With ~7M deaths and a ~$1-10M value of human life [1], that's $7-70T in losses in lives alone, before lost productivity and economic value. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life#:~:text=In%20Western%20countries%20and%20other,US%247.5%20million%20in%202020 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life#:~:text=In%20Wes....
    - rlpb 4y ago
      Only if liability transfers to the state. Even if state-owned, plenty of state-owned enterprises have limited liability.
      - emsign 4y ago
        Even if that state has nukes?
- abledon 4y ago
  i wonder what % of damage it caused to economy, compared to WW2 reparations.
- tzs 4y ago
  The poor handling of the pandemic in many countries likely greatly increased the losses in those countries and also made it harder for other countries to get it under control. The tortfeasor would likely only be responsible for the losses that would have likely occurred if the pandemic had been handled competently. A lot of countries would probably really not want to have the kind of public in-depth examination of their pandemic responses that would be necessary to figure damages.
adamredwoods 4y ago
Even the big paper publishers say "No conclusive evidence for either theory." https://www.science.org/content/article/do-three-new-studies-add-proof-covid-19-s-origin-wuhan-animal-market https://www.science.org/content/article/do-three-new-studies... >> Still, Worobey and his co-authors concede, even that evidence might not be enough to end this polarizing debate. “With the way that people have been able to just push aside any and all evidence that points away from a lab leak, I do fear that even if there were evidence from one of these samples that was full of red fox DNA and SARS-CoV-2 that people might say, ‘We still think it actually came from the handler of that red fox,’” Worobey says.
- xyzzy123 4y ago
  > Even the big paper publishers say "No conclusive evidence for either theory." They initially claimed their evidence was "dispositive" but their peer reviewers (correctly, IMHO) made them take it out. https://ayjchan.medium.com/evidence-for-a-natural-origin-of-covid-19-no-longer-dispositive-after-scientific-peer-review-af95b52499e1 https://ayjchan.medium.com/evidence-for-a-natural-origin-of-...
steve76 4y ago
jhanschoo 4y ago
I originally didn't think that it came from a lab. Primarily because flu epidemics have happened before and they were of natural origin and there hadn't been good evidence that it came from a lab. But my opinion changed as more good evidence started to turn up that suggested engineering.
- mikeyouse 4y ago
  There's literally no evidence suggesting engineering. This is a deeply flawed paper (several cornaviruses of natural origin "rate" higher as artificial using their methodology) and essentially every other paper claiming to find some signal of engineering has been disproven or retracted.

navhc 4y ago

I don't think it's all about blame, knowing it came from a lab would also pull into question the practice of engineering viruses and the safety and security standards required.

callesgg 4y ago
True, it would be helpful in that kind of way. The risks does seam to outweigh the benefits. That said, the blame game would still be there, and people would pull that card...
sneak 4y ago
If it is possible that viruses of this type could be engineered, then lab safety needs to be upgraded anyway (or GoF research banned, or both) regardless of the origin of this specific virus. It’s all about blame. Blame is a useful geopolitical tool.

danbtl 4y ago

> why play blame games Because of the question of liability: If it was lab made and accidentally released, was it due to recklessness or criminal negligence? Is someone guilty of involuntary mass-manslaughter? Or if this was state-sponsored research, could they be found liable for the damage caused?

pencilguin 4y ago
What court would usefully find this? What authority would enforce it?
- cybertronic 4y ago
  US court?
  - pencilguin 4y ago
    Against China?
- landswipe 4y ago
  I think you'll find the wheels are already in motion (if the hypothesis is true).

ISL 4y ago

If it was released from a lab, no matter whether or not it was accidental, Covid would be the mother of all torts. The entire planet can show harm and will be very interested in recovering their losses from the entity that mis-handled a lethal virus.

rlpb 4y ago
It'd be much like trying to recover money stolen by a drug addict though. Instant bankruptcy and proportionally nothing recovered, to the point that it's not even really worth it.
- ISL 4y ago
  A drug addict with a $14T GDP. With ~7M deaths and a ~$1-10M value of human life [1], that's $7-70T in losses in lives alone, before lost productivity and economic value. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life#:~:text=In%20Western%20countries%20and%20other,US%247.5%20million%20in%202020 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_life#:~:text=In%20Wes....
  - rlpb 4y ago
    Only if liability transfers to the state. Even if state-owned, plenty of state-owned enterprises have limited liability.
    - emsign 4y ago
      Even if that state has nukes?
abledon 4y ago
i wonder what % of damage it caused to economy, compared to WW2 reparations.
tzs 4y ago
The poor handling of the pandemic in many countries likely greatly increased the losses in those countries and also made it harder for other countries to get it under control. The tortfeasor would likely only be responsible for the losses that would have likely occurred if the pandemic had been handled competently. A lot of countries would probably really not want to have the kind of public in-depth examination of their pandemic responses that would be necessary to figure damages.

adamredwoods 4y ago

Even the big paper publishers say "No conclusive evidence for either theory." https://www.science.org/content/article/do-three-new-studies-add-proof-covid-19-s-origin-wuhan-animal-market https://www.science.org/content/article/do-three-new-studies... >> Still, Worobey and his co-authors concede, even that evidence might not be enough to end this polarizing debate. “With the way that people have been able to just push aside any and all evidence that points away from a lab leak, I do fear that even if there were evidence from one of these samples that was full of red fox DNA and SARS-CoV-2 that people might say, ‘We still think it actually came from the handler of that red fox,’” Worobey says.

xyzzy123 4y ago
> Even the big paper publishers say "No conclusive evidence for either theory." They initially claimed their evidence was "dispositive" but their peer reviewers (correctly, IMHO) made them take it out. https://ayjchan.medium.com/evidence-for-a-natural-origin-of-covid-19-no-longer-dispositive-after-scientific-peer-review-af95b52499e1 https://ayjchan.medium.com/evidence-for-a-natural-origin-of-...

steve76 4y ago

jhanschoo 4y ago

I originally didn't think that it came from a lab. Primarily because flu epidemics have happened before and they were of natural origin and there hadn't been good evidence that it came from a lab. But my opinion changed as more good evidence started to turn up that suggested engineering.

mikeyouse 4y ago
There's literally no evidence suggesting engineering. This is a deeply flawed paper (several cornaviruses of natural origin "rate" higher as artificial using their methodology) and essentially every other paper claiming to find some signal of engineering has been disproven or retracted.