4 ms·

[flagged]

felixgallo 1y ago
The CDC did not 'brand the lab-leak hypothesis a conspiracy theory'. The CDC stated the scientific truth, which was that we didn't have enough to go on at the time to make a judgement one way or another. The initial lab-leak hypothesis was primarily created by Trump & the MAGA folks to try to deflect blame onto China. It could still be valid and correct, but it was definitely not motivated from facts at first, and to my understanding we still don't have enough facts to assert it confidently one way or the other.
- philipallstar 1y ago
  If the two options are a) coming from a wet market vs b) coming from a coronavirus gain of function laboratory in Wuhan that's funded by the CDC, you have to start thinking about this more than just MAGA conspiracy theories. It's the most bloody obvious explanation, and in a sane world where "MAGA" didn't just turn off everyone's brain cells and cause them to blindly repeat what they're told, any alternative would need some serious heft to be convincing.
  - mvdwoord 1y ago
    So much this. It was hard to watch.
  - felixgallo 1y ago
    'coronavirus gain of function laboratory in Wuhan that's funded by the CDC' is misleading. The particular lab (Wuhan Institute of Virology) is not a 'coronavirus gain of function laboratory', but an institute studying viruses, including the coronavirus, and including gain of function research. And, critically, "the viruses used in these experiments were not physically present but rather consisted of synthesized genetic sequences, meaning they were not complete, nor infectious viral particles capable of replication, and the pseudo-virus experiments conducted to test human cell entry lacked the ability to replicate." (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12040609/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12040609/). It's possible that WIV did screw up and create, intentionally or otherwise, the virus responsible for the pandemic. And, WIV has been linked with military research programs. But, it's not a slam dunk, and the best/widest scientific consensus is still, in 2025, that the origin was natural/biological and came as a result of human/wild-animal contact.
  - SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
    I don't know how you could read this story as anything other than complete vindication of the people who turn off their brains and refuse to listen to anything "MAGA" has to say. I wasn't in their camp, I thought Kennedy was going to be fine, and now he's working full time to make sure Americans get more diseases and fewer treatments.
  - aredox 1y ago
    The most bloody obvious explanation is a natural origin, exactly like the first SARS. Did you forget about that was also a coronavirus outbreak, a close cousin of the COVID-19 (whose real name is SARS-cov-2) that was more lethal (but less contagious, and contained thanks to the heroic efforts of Hong Kong and south Korea)?
    - aredox 1y ago
      The clique downvoting my post can suck it: SARS-CoV-1 as well as MERS are more lethal than SARS-CoV-2 (aka COVID-19), and nobody doubts they are perfectly natural - that is until RFK jr and the crazies around him on day begin to lie they are bioengineered, the same way they lie about Lyme disease, vaccines, autism, antidepressants and their FUD-du-jour.
  - UncleMeat 1y ago
    Given precisely that amount of information, sure. But people dig in further and it complicates things. We don't just go "ugh jeez isn't it obvious" and turn our brains off.
delichon 1y ago
It was Lancet that called it a conspiracy theory. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7159294/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7159294/
- tim333 1y ago
  Ironically the one major player to come out and say it probably was a lab leak was the head of the CDC at the time, Robert Redfield. It was Fauci's lot who tried to do a cover up. Redfield's telling of the tale is quite interesting if you are in to that sort of thing https://youtu.be/oMlhvnMpRU0?t=119 https://youtu.be/oMlhvnMpRU0?t=119
os2warpman 1y ago
Who, SPECIFICALLY PLEASE, at the CDC "branded the lab-leak hypothesis a conspiracy theory and quickly dismissed it"? Not the press, not some rando on twitter, not some anonymous and probably made up "source", not "people are saying"-- which actual CDC employee or appointee did this? I keep asking, and people keep making up bullshit.
- LegionMammal978 1y ago
  Fauci was relatively quick to dismiss the idea of the virus being human-modified, in a press briefing on April 17, 2020 [0]: > Q Mr. President, I wanted to ask Dr. Fauci: Could you address these suggestions or concerns that this virus was somehow manmade, possibly came out of a laboratory in China? > THE PRESIDENT: Want to go? > Q You studied this virus. What are the prospects of that? > DR. FAUCI: There was a study recently that we can make available to you, where a group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists looked at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as they evolve. And the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human. (The study he refers to is "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2" [1], published March 17.) It seems that much was made of this particular remark. It doesn't rule out the idea of an unmodified virus leaked from the lab, but the widespread theories have always been aimed at the gain-of-function research occuring there. [0] https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-briefing-april-17-2020/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/re... [1] https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9
  - os2warpman 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - dang 1y ago
      Please don't attack other users like this, no matter how wrong anyone is or you feel they are. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
budgywonk 1y ago
[dead]
aredox 1y ago
A) The lab leak hypothesis is still unproven. There is no hard scientific data to support it, and many supposed proofs ("Chinese scientists fell ill first") are circular references without proof. B) Pseudoscientific grifters such as RFJ jr are far far less credible than the CDC, and yet here we are. He specifically said COVID-19 was a genetically engineered bioweapon that targets Black and white people but spared Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people. C) Do your own research and look at "The relativity of Wrong" recently submitted on this website.
- dehrmann 1y ago
  The lab leak theory is plausible. That's enough to not label it a conspiracy theory. It also meant there was never broader discourse on if gain of function research is a good idea.
  - mindslight 1y ago
    The problem was that it mostly started being brought up for the purpose of political propaganda. Trump's only use for the pandemic was as fuel to rail against China in support of his predetermined agenda. So "lab leak" was used to focus attention on the external enemy to fight, instead of taking care of our own country or asking why Trump was so dead set against that. The whole time, it was obviously wrong to reject the lab leak theory out of hand. Yet people are stupid herd animals, and instead of tri-state "it is irrelevant in the current context" they argued that the theory was definitely wrong. That same fallibility applies to people working for institutions (see also the early CDC lie implying that masks weren't effective, based on wanting to keep the supply for the healthcare industry). Then after the dust settles, people stay dug in and the politically-colored battle lines never go away. I'd say this kind of establishment-clearly-wrong but dissent-with-nothing-productive underlies most of the energy fueling the destructionists.
  - aredox 1y ago
    >there was never broader discourse on if gain of function research is a good idea. There has always been tons of discussions if GoF is a good idea, for years. You don't know anything about the topic you are commenting about, do you?
triceratops 1y ago
> Remember how they branded the lab-leak hypothesis a conspiracy Who gives a shit if they did? (and from looking at the comments below it seems like they actually didn't) Does knowing it came from a lab help you not get Covid? It's called the Centers for Disease Control, not the Pandemic Origin Investigation Bureau.
- aredox 1y ago
  With these rabid haters, COVID-19 is at the same time "just a flu that doesn't hurt kids nor adults and can be cured with a cheap widely available medicine" and “a genetically engineered bioweapon that targets Black and white people but spared Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people” (as explained by RFK jr, now in charge of the CDC).
- dh2022 1y ago
  These actions helped diminish the trust people had in CDC. So it made it a lot easier to fire these CDC executives.
  - triceratops 1y ago
    Again, the other comments indicate they didn't do anything of the sort. People have their own agenda for diminishing trust in the CDC.

[flagged]

The CDC did not 'brand the lab-leak hypothesis a conspiracy theory'. The CDC stated the scientific truth, which was that we didn't have enough to go on at the time to make a judgement one way or another. The initial lab-leak hypothesis was primarily created by Trump & the MAGA folks to try to deflect blame onto China. It could still be valid and correct, but it was definitely not motivated from facts at first, and to my understanding we still don't have enough facts to assert it confidently one way or the other.

philipallstar 1y ago
If the two options are a) coming from a wet market vs b) coming from a coronavirus gain of function laboratory in Wuhan that's funded by the CDC, you have to start thinking about this more than just MAGA conspiracy theories. It's the most bloody obvious explanation, and in a sane world where "MAGA" didn't just turn off everyone's brain cells and cause them to blindly repeat what they're told, any alternative would need some serious heft to be convincing.
- mvdwoord 1y ago
  So much this. It was hard to watch.
- felixgallo 1y ago
  'coronavirus gain of function laboratory in Wuhan that's funded by the CDC' is misleading. The particular lab (Wuhan Institute of Virology) is not a 'coronavirus gain of function laboratory', but an institute studying viruses, including the coronavirus, and including gain of function research. And, critically, "the viruses used in these experiments were not physically present but rather consisted of synthesized genetic sequences, meaning they were not complete, nor infectious viral particles capable of replication, and the pseudo-virus experiments conducted to test human cell entry lacked the ability to replicate." (https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12040609/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12040609/). It's possible that WIV did screw up and create, intentionally or otherwise, the virus responsible for the pandemic. And, WIV has been linked with military research programs. But, it's not a slam dunk, and the best/widest scientific consensus is still, in 2025, that the origin was natural/biological and came as a result of human/wild-animal contact.
- SpicyLemonZest 1y ago
  I don't know how you could read this story as anything other than complete vindication of the people who turn off their brains and refuse to listen to anything "MAGA" has to say. I wasn't in their camp, I thought Kennedy was going to be fine, and now he's working full time to make sure Americans get more diseases and fewer treatments.
- aredox 1y ago
  The most bloody obvious explanation is a natural origin, exactly like the first SARS. Did you forget about that was also a coronavirus outbreak, a close cousin of the COVID-19 (whose real name is SARS-cov-2) that was more lethal (but less contagious, and contained thanks to the heroic efforts of Hong Kong and south Korea)?
  - aredox 1y ago
    The clique downvoting my post can suck it: SARS-CoV-1 as well as MERS are more lethal than SARS-CoV-2 (aka COVID-19), and nobody doubts they are perfectly natural - that is until RFK jr and the crazies around him on day begin to lie they are bioengineered, the same way they lie about Lyme disease, vaccines, autism, antidepressants and their FUD-du-jour.
- UncleMeat 1y ago
  Given precisely that amount of information, sure. But people dig in further and it complicates things. We don't just go "ugh jeez isn't it obvious" and turn our brains off.

delichon 1y ago

It was Lancet that called it a conspiracy theory. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7159294/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7159294/

tim333 1y ago
Ironically the one major player to come out and say it probably was a lab leak was the head of the CDC at the time, Robert Redfield. It was Fauci's lot who tried to do a cover up. Redfield's telling of the tale is quite interesting if you are in to that sort of thing https://youtu.be/oMlhvnMpRU0?t=119 https://youtu.be/oMlhvnMpRU0?t=119

os2warpman 1y ago

Who, SPECIFICALLY PLEASE, at the CDC "branded the lab-leak hypothesis a conspiracy theory and quickly dismissed it"? Not the press, not some rando on twitter, not some anonymous and probably made up "source", not "people are saying"-- which actual CDC employee or appointee did this? I keep asking, and people keep making up bullshit.

LegionMammal978 1y ago
Fauci was relatively quick to dismiss the idea of the virus being human-modified, in a press briefing on April 17, 2020 [0]: > Q Mr. President, I wanted to ask Dr. Fauci: Could you address these suggestions or concerns that this virus was somehow manmade, possibly came out of a laboratory in China? > THE PRESIDENT: Want to go? > Q You studied this virus. What are the prospects of that? > DR. FAUCI: There was a study recently that we can make available to you, where a group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists looked at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as they evolve. And the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human. (The study he refers to is "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2" [1], published March 17.) It seems that much was made of this particular remark. It doesn't rule out the idea of an unmodified virus leaked from the lab, but the widespread theories have always been aimed at the gain-of-function research occuring there. [0] https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-vice-president-pence-members-coronavirus-task-force-press-briefing-april-17-2020/ https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/re... [1] https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9
- os2warpman 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - dang 1y ago
    Please don't attack other users like this, no matter how wrong anyone is or you feel they are. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for. This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

budgywonk 1y ago

[dead]

aredox 1y ago

A) The lab leak hypothesis is still unproven. There is no hard scientific data to support it, and many supposed proofs ("Chinese scientists fell ill first") are circular references without proof. B) Pseudoscientific grifters such as RFJ jr are far far less credible than the CDC, and yet here we are. He specifically said COVID-19 was a genetically engineered bioweapon that targets Black and white people but spared Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people. C) Do your own research and look at "The relativity of Wrong" recently submitted on this website.

dehrmann 1y ago
The lab leak theory is plausible. That's enough to not label it a conspiracy theory. It also meant there was never broader discourse on if gain of function research is a good idea.
- mindslight 1y ago
  The problem was that it mostly started being brought up for the purpose of political propaganda. Trump's only use for the pandemic was as fuel to rail against China in support of his predetermined agenda. So "lab leak" was used to focus attention on the external enemy to fight, instead of taking care of our own country or asking why Trump was so dead set against that. The whole time, it was obviously wrong to reject the lab leak theory out of hand. Yet people are stupid herd animals, and instead of tri-state "it is irrelevant in the current context" they argued that the theory was definitely wrong. That same fallibility applies to people working for institutions (see also the early CDC lie implying that masks weren't effective, based on wanting to keep the supply for the healthcare industry). Then after the dust settles, people stay dug in and the politically-colored battle lines never go away. I'd say this kind of establishment-clearly-wrong but dissent-with-nothing-productive underlies most of the energy fueling the destructionists.
- aredox 1y ago
  >there was never broader discourse on if gain of function research is a good idea. There has always been tons of discussions if GoF is a good idea, for years. You don't know anything about the topic you are commenting about, do you?

triceratops 1y ago

> Remember how they branded the lab-leak hypothesis a conspiracy Who gives a shit if they did? (and from looking at the comments below it seems like they actually didn't) Does knowing it came from a lab help you not get Covid? It's called the Centers for Disease Control, not the Pandemic Origin Investigation Bureau.

aredox 1y ago
With these rabid haters, COVID-19 is at the same time "just a flu that doesn't hurt kids nor adults and can be cured with a cheap widely available medicine" and “a genetically engineered bioweapon that targets Black and white people but spared Ashkenazi Jews and Chinese people” (as explained by RFK jr, now in charge of the CDC).
dh2022 1y ago
These actions helped diminish the trust people had in CDC. So it made it a lot easier to fire these CDC executives.
- triceratops 1y ago
  Again, the other comments indicate they didn't do anything of the sort. People have their own agenda for diminishing trust in the CDC.