7 ms·

US State Department documents suggest Covid-19 leaked from a lab in Wuhan

9 points by urduntupu 2y ago

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
urduntupu 2y ago
Wait, that was a conspiracy theory in 2020, wasn't it? Does that mean China are part of a group of conspiracy practitioners?
- anonbanker 2y ago
  Theory: A tested hypothesis that is supported by evidence. Conspiracy: In criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime at some time in the future. Criminal law in some countries or for some conspiracies may require that at least one overt act be undertaken in furtherance of that agreement, to constitute an offense. So, a tested hypothesis supported by evidence of an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime. And the english-speaking public has been brainwashed into thinking these words mean something completely different when combined.
codingdave 2y ago
No, someone tweeted a letter that claims that such documents exist.
- anonbanker 2y ago
  > someone Nobody important, just a congressional subcommittee tasked with investigating the pandemic. That's all.
  - codingdave 2y ago
    That is a good callout, but the importance of the author doesn't change the fact that this links to a tweet which shows an image of a letter which claims that the unredacted documents would show such a suggestion. I'm not commenting on the veracity of it or not... just making sure to call out that a tweet of a letter is not the same thing as the documents themselves. The letter even says as much - that we need the content to be opened to the public. With the massive misinformation campaigns that are ongoing in our world, is important to be sure people dig all the way down to facts, and don't just accept tweets at face value.
daly 2y ago
Lab leak? Vincent Racaniello, a leading virologist (https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/ https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/) seems to think that the genetic sequence of the covid virus and the bat version of the virus are nearly identical. That genetic evidence seems to suggest that the covid virus had a natural bat source. Vincent talks about and shows safety practices for a "level 4 biolab" (https://www.bu.edu/articles/2013/video-offers-glimpse-of-biosafety-level-4-lab/ https://www.bu.edu/articles/2013/video-offers-glimpse-of-bio...) It might be the case that the biolab safety protocols were not followed. This seems unlikely. It might be the case that there was a cross-species transfer of the virus. This is a frequent event between species. Scientifically, a lab leak is less likely than a species-transfer. Politically, a lab leak is the only possible (i.e. politically useful) explanation. So your sources of information comes from a world-leading virologist and a state department spokesperson. You decide.
- tripletao 2y ago
  There's no question that SARS-CoV-2 evolved mostly in bats. The debate is whether its path to humans involved a research accident. That accident could involve genetic engineering, which would potentially leave genomic evidence but wouldn't necessarily. It could also involve collection (and accidental release) of a novel naturally-evolved virus. This was a major part of the WIV's research, visiting remote caves that no other humans routinely entered, and would leave no genomic evidence at all. So there is no way to distinguish the origin of the virus solely from genomic evidence. The WIV handled those novel viruses at BSL-2, not BSL-4. Dr. Shi acknowledged this explicitly in her interview with Science, linked below. Even Ralph Baric (who originated many of the techniques that the WIV scaled up, and whose own research was controversial long before the pandemic) has said that was an unacceptable risk. https://web.archive.org/web/20210727042832/https://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/Shi%20Zhengli%20Q%26A.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20210727042832/https://www.scien... If SARS-CoV-2 arose from a research accident, then it was probably from an American-funded Chinese lab, using techniques developed primarily by an American. So I don't see the political benefit to either country in entertaining that possibility, though I do see a benefit to both countries to downplaying it (as seems to have occurred). Long before the pandemic, a small subset of virologists and adjacent scientists advocated strongly for certain high-risk research on potential human pandemic pathogens, including laboratory enhancement of existing viruses (gain of function) and hunting of novel viruses from nature. That work was highly controversial, to the point that a three-year moratorium on funding was imposed, ending in 2017. Racaniello was among those advocates; so while he's certainly better-informed than the average person, he also faces a massive conflict of interest. I don't see why you'd trust him over the countless well-credentialed scientists who consider the origin of SARS-CoV-2 to be an open question.

9 points by urduntupu 2y ago

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

Wait, that was a conspiracy theory in 2020, wasn't it? Does that mean China are part of a group of conspiracy practitioners?

anonbanker 2y ago
Theory: A tested hypothesis that is supported by evidence. Conspiracy: In criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime at some time in the future. Criminal law in some countries or for some conspiracies may require that at least one overt act be undertaken in furtherance of that agreement, to constitute an offense. So, a tested hypothesis supported by evidence of an agreement between two or more people to commit a crime. And the english-speaking public has been brainwashed into thinking these words mean something completely different when combined.

codingdave 2y ago

No, someone tweeted a letter that claims that such documents exist.

anonbanker 2y ago
> someone Nobody important, just a congressional subcommittee tasked with investigating the pandemic. That's all.
- codingdave 2y ago
  That is a good callout, but the importance of the author doesn't change the fact that this links to a tweet which shows an image of a letter which claims that the unredacted documents would show such a suggestion. I'm not commenting on the veracity of it or not... just making sure to call out that a tweet of a letter is not the same thing as the documents themselves. The letter even says as much - that we need the content to be opened to the public. With the massive misinformation campaigns that are ongoing in our world, is important to be sure people dig all the way down to facts, and don't just accept tweets at face value.

daly 2y ago

Lab leak? Vincent Racaniello, a leading virologist (https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/ https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/) seems to think that the genetic sequence of the covid virus and the bat version of the virus are nearly identical. That genetic evidence seems to suggest that the covid virus had a natural bat source. Vincent talks about and shows safety practices for a "level 4 biolab" (https://www.bu.edu/articles/2013/video-offers-glimpse-of-biosafety-level-4-lab/ https://www.bu.edu/articles/2013/video-offers-glimpse-of-bio...) It might be the case that the biolab safety protocols were not followed. This seems unlikely. It might be the case that there was a cross-species transfer of the virus. This is a frequent event between species. Scientifically, a lab leak is less likely than a species-transfer. Politically, a lab leak is the only possible (i.e. politically useful) explanation. So your sources of information comes from a world-leading virologist and a state department spokesperson. You decide.

tripletao 2y ago
There's no question that SARS-CoV-2 evolved mostly in bats. The debate is whether its path to humans involved a research accident. That accident could involve genetic engineering, which would potentially leave genomic evidence but wouldn't necessarily. It could also involve collection (and accidental release) of a novel naturally-evolved virus. This was a major part of the WIV's research, visiting remote caves that no other humans routinely entered, and would leave no genomic evidence at all. So there is no way to distinguish the origin of the virus solely from genomic evidence. The WIV handled those novel viruses at BSL-2, not BSL-4. Dr. Shi acknowledged this explicitly in her interview with Science, linked below. Even Ralph Baric (who originated many of the techniques that the WIV scaled up, and whose own research was controversial long before the pandemic) has said that was an unacceptable risk. https://web.archive.org/web/20210727042832/https://www.sciencemag.org/sites/default/files/Shi%20Zhengli%20Q%26A.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20210727042832/https://www.scien... If SARS-CoV-2 arose from a research accident, then it was probably from an American-funded Chinese lab, using techniques developed primarily by an American. So I don't see the political benefit to either country in entertaining that possibility, though I do see a benefit to both countries to downplaying it (as seems to have occurred). Long before the pandemic, a small subset of virologists and adjacent scientists advocated strongly for certain high-risk research on potential human pandemic pathogens, including laboratory enhancement of existing viruses (gain of function) and hunting of novel viruses from nature. That work was highly controversial, to the point that a three-year moratorium on funding was imposed, ending in 2017. Racaniello was among those advocates; so while he's certainly better-informed than the average person, he also faces a massive conflict of interest. I don't see why you'd trust him over the countless well-credentialed scientists who consider the origin of SARS-CoV-2 to be an open question.