11 ms·
White House replaces covid.gov website with 'lab leak' theory
- ReptileMan 1y agoIsn't the lab leak all but confirmed at this point?
- viraptor 1y agoNobody has really confirmed it yet. It's a good theory and a likely one. But that's no proof and there may never be.
- ReptileMan 1y agoIt is the most plausible so far. Or ever for that matter.
- simmerup 1y agoConfirmed or not, that US government website does not give me any confidence in its content. It looks so unlike a western government page to me.
- chvid 1y agoMy guess is that they will use this as an excuse to confiscate Chinese held treasury bonds at one point.
- chvid 1y agoIn a terms of US politics - yes. But not in any meaningful scientific sense - I believe the mainstream science view is (still?) that it was likely a spillover event similar to the original SARS epidemic.
- JohnFen 1y agoNo
- dzdt 1y agoThe most recent peer-reviewd survey I can find on the topic is [1], which is the 2nd followup by the same author doing survey reviews of the scientific literature on origins of Covid-19. His summary conclusion: "There is much greater scientific support for the [zoonotic hypothesis]. Conclusion: The main gap in the zoonotic hypothesis is the lack of a detected intermediate host, which has not been found yet. In turn, although the hypothesis of a laboratory leak has not been supported by sufficient scientific evidence, it cannot be definitively discarded." The weight of scientific evidence is AGAINST the lab leak hypothesis, but the waters are so muddy from politicization of the topic that consensus or proof will likely never be achieved. This is the same conclusion at [2]: "The consensus among scientists is that, although a lab leak origin is possible, the scientific evidence points to a natural, zoonotic origin from wild animals." [1] JPMCHR 2024 https://doi.org/10.38207/JCMPHR/2024/JAN05020519 https://doi.org/10.38207/JCMPHR/2024/JAN05020519 https://www.acquaintpublications.com/article/four-years-later-is-it-already-known-the-origin-of-sars-cov-2 https://www.acquaintpublications.com/article/four-years-late... [2] BMJ 2024; 386 doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q1578 https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.q1578 (Published 09 September 2024) https://www.bmj.com/content/386/bmj.q1578 https://www.bmj.com/content/386/bmj.q1578
- ReptileMan 1y agoThis subtly evades the question whether the virus spent time in the lab and some moron dropped a vial on the floor
- dzdt 1y agoI'm not an expert, but to my understanding that is exactly the version of "lab leak" that is not able to be conclusively ruled out by the publicly available evidence.
- simmerup 1y agoJesus, reading this in the footer of that webpage blows me away: Public health officials often mislead the American people through conflicting messaging, knee-jerk reactions, and a lack of transparency. Most egregiously, the federal government demonized alternative treatments and disfavored narratives, such as the lab leak theory, in a shameful effort to coerce and control the American people’s health decisions. When those efforts failed, the Biden Administration resorted to “outright censorship—coercing and colluding with the world’s largest social media companies to censor all COVID-19-related dissent.” Unnerving how constant their efforts are to undermine American trust in American institutions. From the President! Unnerving.
- TinkersW 1y agoI mean they did engage in gaslighting about the lab leak being impossible, thou Trump was president during much of that, so I guess he is blaming himself?
- therealpygon 1y agoJust another reminder that even the CIA didn’t believe this lie, giving the likelihood its lowest possible rating (since it is nearly impossible to prove something didn’t happen and a lack of any verifiable sources).