Coronavirus thread

[Karl Henning]

Opinion: We are asking the wrong question about the origins of covid

[Florestan]

Inching better. Just wanted to report.

Great news.

[Madiel]

Opinion: We are asking the wrong question about the origins of covid

Frankly even that article gives a bit too much credence to the laboratory hypothesis and doesn't critique it enough, even though it contains the basic elements of the critique.

Firstly, it gives examples of laboratory accidents, in which it was laboratory workers who got sick or died. So we know how to link a disease to a laboratory. Through laboratory workers. Not market stall holders.

Second, it mentions that an estimated three quarters of diseases are zoonotic.

The desire to blame the Chinese for this disease as much as possible is political. You can in fact still make an argument about whether conditions in China make the emergence of zoonotic diseases more likely. But from the beginning I've had this recurring sense that many people simply aren't familiar with the fact that most diseases are zoonotic and just instinctively prefer an explanation that the Chinese "did" something, and have only settled for choosing between a deliberate act and an accidental one.

I was hearing scientists say that the disease was natural rather than engineered as early as March or April 2020. They could readily tell that much about it.

[Karl Henning]

Frankly even that article gives a bit too much credence to the laboratory hypothesis and doesn't critique it enough, even though it contains the basic elements of the critique.

That's entirely fair.

[Madiel]

Also, regards the lack of Chinese cooperation... it isn't paranoia if people really show signs of being out to get you.

I can't imagine the USA would be prepared to throw open laboratories for inspection just because someone started saying "it came from a laboratory because they have laboratories". Which is pretty much what happened. Wuhan is a large city. Large cities having laboratories is not a shocking revelation.

[greg]

I can't imagine the USA would be prepared to throw open laboratories for inspection just because someone started saying "it came from a laboratory because they have laboratories". Which is pretty much what happened. Wuhan is a large city. Large cities having laboratories is not a shocking revelation.

Um, it was a little more specific than that.
More comparable to something like a reported robbery at a store by a guy wearing red gloves and a hoodie, and then very close to that location there is a guy walking around in red gloves and a hoodie.

It totally could still be the wrong guy, could all be a coincidence (after all, many guys in the world are wearing red gloves and a hoodie right now), but it's why it was worth looking into. Timing, location, the very specific thing they were studying, etc.

[Todd]

FBI Director Christopher Wray publicly stated today that the FBI's stance is that the virus leaked from a lab in China.  The interview was given to Fox News.  It is accessible (at least partly) here: FBI director says COVID pandemic 'most likely' originated from Chinese lab.

This raises several issues.  Is the FBI acting in good faith?  Is the FBI flat out lying?  (Same goes for the Department of Energy.)  How will this be viewed through the grotesquely distorted lens of politics?  For instance, more American liberals trust the FBI than conservatives now.  Will we see a reversion to the historical norm, which was the inverse?  Will non-American hangers-on follow the lead of American liberals?  Is this all too conveniently timed to ratchet up pressure on China?  A yes to this question, or an inclination to believe this is the case, would be cynical, and as has been reiterated on this forum, cynicism bad. 

As mentioned before, this is a very serious topic that demands a very serious approach and a consensus should be reached across the globe.  That may not be in the cards.  Without knowing the cause, it will not be possible to formulate proper policy responses, for the proper policies vary quite widely based on whether this was a zoonotic or man-made virus.  That translates into more wasted spending and a certainty of authoritarian actions being used in potential future public health emergencies. 

I doubt such an event will occur again in my statistically probable lifetime, so I am not motivated to track down potentially profitable investment opportunities beyond health care sector ETFs and funds, which reliably beat broad market indices. 

[Madiel]

Um, it was a little more specific than that.
More comparable to something like a reported robbery at a store by a guy wearing red gloves and a hoodie, and then very close to that location there is a guy walking around in red gloves and a hoodie.

It totally could still be the wrong guy, could all be a coincidence (after all, many guys in the world are wearing red gloves and a hoodie right now), but it's why it was worth looking into. Timing, location, the very specific thing they were studying, etc.

Not the very specific thing they were studying. Unless you think "viruses" is specific.

If we are going to continue with this analogy, there was no proof that a robbery was involved. It reminds me of a relative of my mother who insisted she was robbed when my mother was pretty darn sure the relative just left something behind when leaving a train.

This again gets back to the problem with relying on intelligence agencies for this stuff. They are trained to find your "robber", so they are inevitably going to look for one rather than taking a step back and asking whether anyone at all was robbed.

After all, three quarters of losses are not robberies.

It's a clumsy analogy you've made, but three quarters of new diseases are zoonotic. The reasons for leaping to a human explanation simply weren't based on science. The disease appeared in a market with animals.

There is no reason to go looking for the laboratory at fault when the scientists say the virus shows no sign of being FROM a laboratory, ANY laboratory, in the first place. Starting with the existence of a laboratory in Wuhan is exactly backwards. You need to start with a laboratory-engineered virus, and then of course working out which laboratory engineered it would be fairly straightforward in the circumstances.

So sure, if a robbery was committed the robber is probably nearby. The problem is, people saw a guy in a hoodie nearby and leapt to the conclusion that there was a robbery, when the shopkeeper is regularly absent-minded and keeps forgetting he asked an employee to take stuff somewhere, and also has a hole in his pocket and drops money out whenever he's walking somewhere.  The shop shows no sign of a struggle. And sure, there's a camera image of that guy in the hoodie that we know was in the area, but there isn't the slightest hint on the footage that he took anything or even entered the store.

[Spotted Horses]

I can google things easily enough.  I was interested in the specific article you referenced, though now even you can't recall the original article with a high degree of confidence.  I asked about the word "purely" because that is an unusual word to use when describing scientific research.

The fact is that you do not know whether the Covid virus is zoonotic or man-made.  You apparently choose to believe the articles you googled.  That is fine.  I do not know whether Covid is zoonotic or man-made.  Additional research is needed.  This is reinforced by the findings published by the Energy Department, as well as earlier findings published by the FBI.  Given that around seven million people have died from the disease, trillions of dollars of public money around the world was misallocated to Covid responses (~$25 trillion was spent globally), at least hundreds of billions of dollars of that money was stolen (at least $560 billion of it in the US alone), and authoritarian policies were implemented everywhere, we, as in humanity, need to come as close as possible to determining with absolute certainty what the source of the virus was, and we need to reexamine public health and coercive state responses to the disease.  There is much to do still with respect to Covid.

More of the usual gaslighting. Yes, I am aware that all scientific knowledge is conditional on confirmation by further research. However, a consensus seems to be coalescing around the conclusion that the SARS-CoV-2 virus arose naturally. That is a non-political determination based on statistical analysis of the genome of the first identified variant of the virus. I assess the reliability of the various reports based on the review processes for the various scientific journals, meaning that nothing gets published unless the researchers fiercest competitors fail to shoot it down.

That is a separate question from whether the virus entered the general population at a market, or if a worker in a research lab became infected and carried the virus out. In the past there have been many instances of the former and a few instances of the latter. I don't get the impression that anyone talking has strong evidence either way. The "smoking gun" would be to match the sequence of the initial strain of SARS-CoV-2 to something that was known to be in the lab. That's what happened when there was an Anthrax attack in the U.S. and the strain used in the attack was an exact match to a strain being studied by the U.S. Army at Ft Derick, Maryland. A staff member there committed suicide before he could be indicted for the attack.

[Todd]

More of the usual gaslighting.

Huh?

I don't get the impression that anyone talking has strong evidence either way.

Correct, there are no "smoking guns".

[krummholz]

There is no reason to go looking for the laboratory at fault when the scientists say the virus shows no sign of being FROM a laboratory, ANY laboratory, in the first place.

"The scientists" presumes there is a widely-held scientific consensus on this. There is certainly a consensus among certain scientists associated with public-health agencies, but how widely-held it is appears to be debatable. And it is clear that some other scientists have different views. Just today I read a post on the AAAS Science forums from a retired biologist who gave a very detailed and technical argument for why, in his opinion, it is extremely unlikely that the virus jumped to humans in a zoonotic event, and FAR more likely that it was engineered by humans.

(I am not a biologist and cannot vouch for the correctness of his argument. I'm only saying that there are scientists with what, to them, are very sound scientific reasons for the lab-leak hypothesis.)

[krummholz]

Inching better. Just wanted to report.

Glad to hear this Karl - may the improvement continue.

[Karl Henning]

Basically over it. Now it's pretty much just the reduced energy level which seems not to leave anybody soon enough. 

[vandermolen]

Today some leaked WhatsApp messages from a former (disgraced) Health Secretary here in the UK revealed that, at one stage during the early days of the pandemic, the government was considering ordering the public to 'EXTERMINATE ALL CATS' in the UK.
PS Don't show this message to Pohjola's Daughter!
    

[DavidW]

it is extremely unlikely that the virus jumped to humans in a zoonotic event, and FAR more likely that it was engineered by humans.

I read that as well. 

[Madiel]

"The scientists" presumes there is a widely-held scientific consensus on this. There is certainly a consensus among certain scientists associated with public-health agencies, but how widely-held it is appears to be debatable. And it is clear that some other scientists have different views. Just today I read a post on the AAAS Science forums from a retired biologist who gave a very detailed and technical argument for why, in his opinion, it is extremely unlikely that the virus jumped to humans in a zoonotic event, and FAR more likely that it was engineered by humans.

(I am not a biologist and cannot vouch for the correctness of his argument. I'm only saying that there are scientists with what, to them, are very sound scientific reasons for the lab-leak hypothesis.)

Yes, well, it was also possible for a great many years to wheel out certain scientists who didn't think human-caused climate change was a thing. Look where that got us.

I'm not even going to be the first person to point out in this conversation that the way science works means there is never going to be a complete consensus on anything. But my original point was that it's a question for scientists, not intelligence agencies. Just as climate change was a question for scientists, not politicians and Rupert Murdoch.

And while I agree the science on this is not completely settled, there is more support for Covid being zoonotic. The latest US intelligence report actually led to at least one article nicely setting out scientists discussing whether the intelligence report made sense, though I can't remember off the top of my head where I saw that.

[Florestan]

Basically over it. Now it's pretty much just the reduced energy level which seems not to leave anybody soon enough.

Excellent news.

[Pohjolas Daughter]

"The scientists" presumes there is a widely-held scientific consensus on this. There is certainly a consensus among certain scientists associated with public-health agencies, but how widely-held it is appears to be debatable. And it is clear that some other scientists have different views. Just today I read a post on the AAAS Science forums from a retired biologist who gave a very detailed and technical argument for why, in his opinion, it is extremely unlikely that the virus jumped to humans in a zoonotic event, and FAR more likely that it was engineered by humans.

(I am not a biologist and cannot vouch for the correctness of his argument. I'm only saying that there are scientists with what, to them, are very sound scientific reasons for the lab-leak hypothesis.)

I suppose that people will be debating this for a long long time.

Today some leaked WhatsApp messages from a former (disgraced) Health Secretary here in the UK revealed that, at one stage during the early days of the pandemic, the government was considering ordering the public to 'EXTERMINATE ALL CATS' in the UK.
PS Don't show this message to Pohjola's Daughter!
    

What the f*(#?!  Is there any validity behind this story?  No idea what WhatsApp is.  If anything, I suspect that someone was making a flippant remark...though thinking back, I remember China told people to bring in any/all of their pet bunnies. 

PD

[Florestan]

No idea what WhatsApp is.

    

[Pohjolas Daughter]

   

I've heard of it before, but have only a few downloaded apps on my cell phone (both bird ID programs).  So, tell me about it.  Why does it matter/importance (if it is)?

PD