Coronavirus thread

[ritter]

Good evening to you, Andrei.

The thing is, there seems to be no scientific evidence for the points you make. But, there's no scientific evidence against them either.

I have no sympathy for the Chinese government and the Communist Party (none whatsoever), but am not going to blame them for this just because I don't like them. Remember, the end does not justify the means...

[Florestan]

The thing is, there seems to be no scientific evidence for the points you make. But, there's no scientific evidence against them either.

Precisely, which means that until and unless said evidence is found, both positions can be equally true or equally false (only not simultaneously so). What I can't understand is the stern refusal of some people to even consider the possibility that the "accidental lab leakage" theory be true, based only and solely on the word of the lab's director.

I have no sympathy for the Chinese government and the Communist Party (none whatsoever), but am not going to blame them for this just because I don't like them.

Nobody in their minds can blame them for an accidental release, if this is what really happened. What many people, and apparently some governments too which can hardly be regarded as Trumpist (Australia, France, Germany) blame them for --- and rightly so, imo --- is (1) the mismanagement of the incipient phase of the disaster, which mismanagement was entirely politically motivated and resulted in the worldwide crisis being much worse than it could have been if they had handled it quicker and more transparent, and (2) the subsequent campaign of propaganda and misinformation aimed at covering up their responsibility.

[ritter]

The thing is, I insist, I'm not going to speculate on theories just because they suit my agenda.

Be that as it may, the recent data from France (an infected person as early as December 2019) might potentially shed new light on the whole thing.

And...we haven't even talked of the 5G - Covid-19 relation....

[Florestan]

The thing is, I insist, I'm not going to speculate on theories just because they suit my agenda.

I don't know about your agenda but I have none. 

[ritter]

Yes, I know, just a innocent bystander 

[MusicTurner]

There are increasing speculations about earlier cases in Europe etc., and WHO now suggests that countries dig more into it.

But so far, only the single, French case exists, and some say that it is not conclusive anyway.

However, in Lombardy, Northern Italy, which was severely hit, it may have occurred in October-November, since there was a significant increase in the number of registered pneumonia cases there.

The leading Swedish spokesperson, Tegnell, now also says they might have had it Sweden back in October-November, when a lot of sportsmen came back from the Military Olympics in Wuhan, which had participants from more than 100 countries. But they are not thought to have infected anyone in Sweden, and there's no real proof, except stories about team members getting sick etc. Sweden is not going to use its resources on investigating this right now, Tegnell said.

[drogulus]

     You can't build an affirmative case for a lab release hypothesis based on what China would lie about if the case was true. You can suppose, as I do, that they'd be prone to lie about it if they thought they would get away with it. I also suppose they wouldn't get away with it. Scientists are hard to muzzle. Ask Trump.

     China leaks like a sieve, we all know that when we are in the knowing mode. Scientists leak as a matter of principle. Intelligence agencies below the level of Trumpist acting acting acting apparatchiki super know it.

[Todd]

Scientists say a now-dominant strain of the coronavirus appears to be more contagious than original

Fuck.

[drogulus]

There are increasing speculations about earlier cases in Europe etc., and WHO now suggests that countries dig more into it.

But so far, only the single, French case exists, and some say that it is not conclusive anyway.

However, in Lombardia, Northern Italy, which was severely hit, it may have occurred in October-November, since there was a significant increase in the number of registered pneumonia cases there.

The leading Swedish spokesperson, Tegnell, now also says they might have had it Sweden back in October-November, when a lot of sportsmen came back from the Military Olympics in Wuhan, which had participants from more than 100 countries. But they are not thought to have infected anyone in Sweden, and there's no real proof, except stories about team members getting sick etc. Sweden is not going to use its ressources on investigating this right now, Tegnell said.

     I wonder how far back we can push the lab release hypothesis to accommodate new information about earlier cases. Can we go all the way back to the Boxer Rebellion?

[MusicTurner]

Another case is the Inter football team from Milan, where the player Romelu Lukaku claimed that 23 out of 25 of the team's layers showed symptoms of the virus, before its verified arrival, when they played Cagliari in January. One player had to leave the field, but they were never tested. Lukaku went straight to bed after the game.

Before the claims, he had donated a large amount, £ 88,000, to a local hospital help the fight against the virus, which would suggest some seriousness in his general approach. But he 'apologized' to Inter the day after, for his remarks, that came in a twitter conversation with a journalist, Kat Kerkhof. The case was then considered 'settled'.

[JBS]

     . I also suppose they wouldn't get away with it.

I don't think you should be so confident about that.

Given that whatever evidence there is, is under the control of authorities who have a motivation to suppress anything that supports the lab release, the most reasonable attitude is to not dismiss the lab release theory as blithely as you do.

[JBS]

     I wonder how far back we can push the lab release hypothesis to accommodate new information about earlier cases. Can we go all the way back to the Boxer Rebellion?

But if it appeared that early outside China, wouldn't that tend to scupper the "wet market"  theory as well?

[drogulus]

But if it appeared that early outside China, wouldn't that tend to scupper the "wet market"  theory as well?

     Yes, and that's a good thing. Bats don't visit wet markets a thousand miles away from their home. People do that. The virus cluster at the market didn't involve bats. The virus crossed the species barrier near the bat caves.

[JBS]

     Yes, and that's a good thing. Bats don't visit wet markets a thousand miles away from their home. People do that. The virus cluster at the market didn't involve bats. The virus crossed the species barrier near the bat caves.

I don't think I've seen that before. 
But it's certainly possible. But how do you account for the fact that it seems to have first appeared in Wuhan if the first human cases were that far away?

[JBS]

Just saw this
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-israel-treatment-idUSKBN22G2WT

[drogulus]

I don't think I've seen that before. 
But it's certainly possible. But how do you account for the fact that it seems to have first appeared in Wuhan if the first human cases were that far away?

      An NPR article says:

In early January 2020, Chinese scientists sequenced the entire genome for SARS-CoV-2 and published it online. Researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China compared its genome to a library of known viruses — and found a 96% match with coronavirus samples taken from horseshoe bats from Yunnan.

     I'm waiting to see if they can trace the new virus to bats near Wuhan. If they can my speculation will be superfluous and I will disown it.

     

[Herman]

You're barking up the wrong tree.

[Florestan]

I'm not going to speculate on theories just because they suit my agenda.

There are speculations and speculations. If the lab were located 700 miles away from Wuhan any speculation would be wild. Given its location, though, the "accidental lab escape" speculation is reasonable unless and until solid evidence proves it wrong.

Given that whatever evidence there is, is under the control of authorities who have a motivation to suppress anything that supports the lab release, the most reasonable attitude is to not dismiss the lab release theory [...]

+ 1.

[ritter]

O ciel, che noia! 

Good day, Andrei!

[milk]

There are speculations and speculations. If the lab were located 700 miles away from Wuhan any speculation would be wild. Given its location, though, the "accidental lab escape" speculation is reasonable unless and until solid evidence proves it wrong.

+ 1.

It's not reasonable at all. It may be right or wrong and you may think as you like but it's not reasonable if you're defining reason in the usual fashion. I mean, if it's a fallacy then it's unreasonable by definition. So, this is called "shifting the burden of proof" and it also fits into the formal "argument from ignorance fallacy."
see here:
https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/phil_of_religion_text/CHAPTER_5_ARGUMENTS_EXPERIENCE/Burden-of-Proof.htm
and here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
You can certainly say, "I believe this" and even, like my sister, say something like, "it's too coincidental." However, IMHO, you can't claim it's rational for the reasons I stated.