3 ms·

Suppressing the lab leak theory certainly seemed political to me

scott_w 2y ago
The length of the Wikipedia article on this nonsensical conspiracy theory runs counter to your argument that it was "suppressed." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lab_leak_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lab_leak_theory
- pixxel 2y ago
  [flagged]
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- throwaway98527 2y ago
  According to Wikipedia itself, the WHO seems to find it a likely theory... >The report added weight to calls for a broader probe into the theory that the COVID-19 virus could have escaped from a laboratory.[6][7] However, a WHO report states "introduction through a laboratory incident was considered to be an extremely unlikely pathway".[3] Since then, the head of the WHO COVID-19 origins investigative team, Peter Ben Embarek, has stated that the Chinese authorities exerted pressure on the WHO report conclusions, and that he in fact considers an infection via a researcher's field samples to be a "likely" scenario.[8]* * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_in_2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pande...
- mypastself 2y ago
  Are you disagreeing with the “chilling effect” section of the article, or are you implying the effect could not have been real due to the current length of the article?
- tim333 2y ago
  There were certainly attempts to suppress it such as the Proximal Origins paper. And the public "We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories" letter where privately the were saying it was "so friggin likely". The reasons do seem kind of political, though more to cover up establishment cock ups and not upset the Chinese than a left right thing. Even today Wikipedia says "explanations, such as speculations that SARS-CoV-2 was accidentally released from a laboratory have been proposed, such explanations are not supported by evidence." But if you look at the actual evidence it was almost certainly a lab leak.

The length of the Wikipedia article on this nonsensical conspiracy theory runs counter to your argument that it was "suppressed." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lab_leak_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COVID-19_lab_leak_theory

pixxel 2y ago
[flagged]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
throwaway98527 2y ago
According to Wikipedia itself, the WHO seems to find it a likely theory... >The report added weight to calls for a broader probe into the theory that the COVID-19 virus could have escaped from a laboratory.[6][7] However, a WHO report states "introduction through a laboratory incident was considered to be an extremely unlikely pathway".[3] Since then, the head of the WHO COVID-19 origins investigative team, Peter Ben Embarek, has stated that the Chinese authorities exerted pressure on the WHO report conclusions, and that he in fact considers an infection via a researcher's field samples to be a "likely" scenario.[8]* * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_in_2019 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pande...
mypastself 2y ago
Are you disagreeing with the “chilling effect” section of the article, or are you implying the effect could not have been real due to the current length of the article?
tim333 2y ago
There were certainly attempts to suppress it such as the Proximal Origins paper. And the public "We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories" letter where privately the were saying it was "so friggin likely". The reasons do seem kind of political, though more to cover up establishment cock ups and not upset the Chinese than a left right thing. Even today Wikipedia says "explanations, such as speculations that SARS-CoV-2 was accidentally released from a laboratory have been proposed, such explanations are not supported by evidence." But if you look at the actual evidence it was almost certainly a lab leak.