There is nobody on this forum who does not believe it was leaked from the lab. Nobody. There are people who believe it, and people who believe it's their duty to argue against it.
Wait: you believe all the posters who suggest zoonotic origins actually know it came from the lab and are just arguing against it because they believe it is their duty to keep this untruth alive?
That is truly bonkers.
I think a lab leak is the most likely hypothesis, because it is an awfully big coincidence that Covid appeared in the same city as the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
But SARS and MERS and AIDS and a bunch of other diseases made the animal-to-man jump without going via a lab. It's possible, if unlikely, that a decade from now, we discover a cave of bats 60 miles from Wuhan where CV19 is commonly carried; in which case, we'll need to revisit this.
Because absent a direct admission from someone at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, that's where we are: there's strong circumstantial evidence for it being a lab leak, but there's no smoking gun.
So your contention is bizarre. Do you really assume that your fellow men just go around lying to each other all the time because...? Do you go around lying to people all the time just because...? If not, why do you assume that other people do?
I'm not sure it's that big a coincidence. There must be quite a few virology research labs dotted around the world, and they will generally be in or near big cities, which is where outbreaks of disease are likely to occur.
Oh ffs. This wasn’t any old virology lab
This was the biggest lab in the world investigating coronaviruses. It was the ONLY lab in the world investigating coronaviruses in bats and trying to make them more pathogenic to mankind - gain of function - by passing them through humanised mice
On top of that this precise lab made a proposal to do genetic engineering on the novel bat coronaviruses around 2018 that precisely match the weird evolutions that we see in SARSCOV-2
And they did this in low level BSL2 labs (280m from the market) that Jeremy Farrar called “Wild West”
As one of the main virologists in the world said in 2020 “it’s a nightmare of circumstantial evidence”
Why is there the discrepancy between 280 metres from the market and 49 minutes from the market? They are very different.
Because of people trying to obscure the truth. The fact that the Wuhan CDC is 2 minutes walk from the market is so inconvenient people of bad faith strive to ignore it
The Wuhan CDC had strong links to the WIV. Both did intense research on novel bat coronaviruses, but the Wuhan CDC was much shoddier (BSL2). Initially it was denied that they had bats there, then too much evidence emerged that they did. eg
"Was there any other possible pathway? We screened the area around the seafood market and identified two laboratories conducting research on bat coronavirus. Within ~280 meters from the market, there was the Wuhan Center for Disease Control & Prevention (WHCDC) (Figure 1, from Baidu and Google maps). WHCDC hosted animals in laboratories for research purpose, one of which was specialized in pathogens collection and identification 4-6. In one of their studies, 155 bats including Rhinolophus affinis were captured in Hubei province, and other 450 bats were captured in Zhejiang province 4. The expert in collection was noted in the Author Contributions (JHT). Moreover, he was broadcasted for collecting viruses on nation-wide newspapers and websites in 2017 and 2019 7,8. He described that he was once by attacked by bats and the blood of a bat shot on his skin. He knew the extreme danger of the infection so he quarantined himself for 14 days 7. In another accident, he quarantined himself again because bats peed on him. He was once thrilled for capturing a bat carrying a live tick 8. "
This is from a research paper publushed in Feb 2020, by two Chinese scientists. They concluded the leak came from the Wuhan CDC and spread, as you would expect, in the very nearby wet market. The answer was right there all along, the Chinese admitted it!
But then the Chinese deleted this paper and I've no idea what happened to the authors. Probably they fell out of a bamboo window
The fact that people can know this and still claim to bel
There is nobody on this forum who does not believe it was leaked from the lab. Nobody. There are people who believe it, and people who believe it's their duty to argue against it.
Wait: you believe all the posters who suggest zoonotic origins actually know it came from the lab and are just arguing against it because they believe it is their duty to keep this untruth alive?
That is truly bonkers.
I think a lab leak is the most likely hypothesis, because it is an awfully big coincidence that Covid appeared in the same city as the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
But SARS and MERS and AIDS and a bunch of other diseases made the animal-to-man jump without going via a lab. It's possible, if unlikely, that a decade from now, we discover a cave of bats 60 miles from Wuhan where CV19 is commonly carried; in which case, we'll need to revisit this.
Because absent a direct admission from someone at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, that's where we are: there's strong circumstantial evidence for it being a lab leak, but there's no smoking gun.
So your contention is bizarre. Do you really assume that your fellow men just go around lying to each other all the time because...? Do you go around lying to people all the time just because...? If not, why do you assume that other people do?
Deep down we all know it is highly likely it came from the lab. But for some it is an article of faith that it didn’t. And faith is the best metaphor here
How would you or Luckyguy know what anyone thinks? In my case, you are certainly wrong. My own feeling, from reading up on the scientific evidence, albeit without much expertise in the subject, is that zoonosis is the most likely explanation. I'm about 70% zoonosis, 30% lab leak at the moment.
No, I can accept you sincerely believe you believe this; but you are in a kind of wilful or unknowing denial
Self-delusion of that type isn't common - it would be mental. A more logical explanation is our zoonosis people are just arguing. Their argument is more important to them and their world view than what is true. It annoys me because I come to PB for adult discussion, which is based on good faith. However, it is what it is.
I’ll use my photo quote to conclude the argument. Here is the location of the Wuhan CDC in relation to the huanan seafood wet market. 280m not “40 minutes and 10km”
The Wuhan CDC kept thousands of bats, did extensive research alongside the WIV, had a history of accidents, spent months before the outbreak chaotically moving to this location, and worked at a dangerous BSL2 level - or “Wild West” as Jeremy Farrar of the Wellcome institute put it
I think the phrase is “case closed, m’Lud”
They will still argue.
Because, in a weird way, they do sincerely believe it. Like creationists confronted with Darwin's Theory of Evolution in the 19th century
At first their position is logical, or so they think. Then overwhelming evidence emerges which shows they are wrong. So their logical position then evolves into a pious faith, absent rationality. So their belief is sincere, albeit ludicrous, and they manage to silence the doubt in their own minds. That is, I reckon, the process at work
People like @foxy and @bondegezou have sincerely convinced themselves that it came from the market. You could probably show them a video of the first person with Covid being mauled on the scrotum by a mad frothy bat at the Wuhan lab, surrounded by signs saying Welcome to the Wuhan Bat Lab, and they'd still believe it came from the market. It is a religious tenet
And that really is it on this topic, for today. Places to see and people to go. Later
One good thing about the Farage Riots is that conservative commentators have suddenly noticed that there's an underclass of around 10%-15% who feel cut off from the rest of society. I'm not sure how they didn't notice that before but that's besides the point.
Given a bipartisan inclination to heal this divide in our society, what could this Parliament do to help this 10%-15% have a stake in our country again? Particularly asking PB_Tories here, what could Labour do that you would support them with?
Labour could start by not looking down their nose at them.
I am perfectly comfortable looking down my nose at people who loot Gregga and Lush, throw bricks at mosques and burn libraries.
It doesn't mean that they are irretrievably lost to society, but there should be no equivocation in condemning such actions.
This post is almost the perfect encapsulation of the problem - and the mistake that the established parties keep making.
The original post referred to 10-15% if the population. Andy then makes a perfectly benign, and reasonable comment.
And then the discussion immediately goes awry.
It is the same sort of issue as Hilary's 'deplorables' comment.
You don't gain a hearing by suggesting that an underclass are all rioting! You don't get people on side by telling them their views are wrong.
Reform are sweeping up these votes because they do politics differently. For a start, they don't seem to judge voters for their opinions in the way that so many others do....
Reform certainly do judge voters for their opinions. They are extremely judgemental about people with alternative lifestyles, of religious diversity and of the cardinal sin of immigrating here to improve their lives.
Have you ever read comment is free, you want judgemental about people who vote differently to them?
I didn't say other people are not judgemental, just that Reform certainly are, so what's your point?
Do you not think we should be judgemental about criminal acts and those that condone them?
Judgemtal about criminal acts I fully support, however there is another sort of judgemental we see all the the time "They are voting against their own interests, they are too stupid to vote because they voted for something we think is bad"
Britain Elects @BritainElects So far there has been disorder in about four in ten seats where Reform came second in July – that’s 38 of them. In these same areas, the Reform vote averaged 19 percent, compared to the 14 per cent they received nationally.
Interesting and unsurprising, in a “so far there have been more catholics in places the pope visits th
I'd like to remind everyone that during COVID the lab leak theory was dismissed as fake news, yet here we are and most sensible people agree that COVID came from a lab leak, not what the Chinese told us that it was zoonotic transmission.
Regulating "fake news" is a truly sinister idea and is just a polite way of pushing through mass censorship. I expected nothing less from a Labour government, I'm just surprised they're doing it so early. I guess they're taking full advantage of the current opportunity and people willing to throw away their freedoms in the name of "community relations".
Most sensible people agree that COVID-19 came from zoonotic events. And by sensible people, I mean people working in virology and public health. The study of early genomic variation in the virus is particularly convincing.
No they don't. People who rely on public funding and want to appear not racist still state it might be what the Chinese told us. Everyone else with more than one brain cell can see what happened. You are the establishment, you are the censor and it is little wonder that you would back state censorship of speech. It's everything you've dreamed of, no dissent from what you and your masters deem acceptable or "truth". Anyone who says otherwise sees the inside of a jail cell.
Here's an anonymous survey of expert virologist, epidemiologists etc. showing that they think the most likely explanation is zoonosis.
"People doing dangerous science that killed 28 million people deny that science killed 28 million people and instead it was a pangolin in a hat"
Let us say that the probability of a lab leak is X.
Whereas the probability of a 'natural' cause is:
Y, the probability of zoonosis, multiplied by Z, the probability that the zoonosis would happen so near the lab.
Now people can debate what X and Y might be.
But Z has to be something like 0.0000001 or less.
So for Y*Z to be more likely than X then Y, zoonosis, needs to be about 1,000,000 more likely than X, lab leak.
This is a useful way of quantifying the circumstantial evidence / coincidence of the virus starting in Wuhan.
I’d probably go with a more prudent estimate of Z. Wuhan has a population of about 12 million. Contrary to some stories the actual lab was about 40 minutes away from the market, not just round the corner. So I think we can take 12m as the numerator over global population of 8bn as the denominator. That gives Z of 0.0015. So zoonosis would have to be roughly 666 times as likely. Still a big number.
There is nobody on this forum who does not believe it was leaked from the lab. Nobody. There are people who believe it, and people who believe it's their duty to argue against it.
Siri, show me someone who doesn't understand epidemiology or their fellow man.
you forgot people who think it could be either way and regard both extreme claims as scum
There is nobody on this forum who does not believe it was leaked from the lab. Nobody. There are people who believe it, and people who believe it's their duty to argue against it.
Wait: you believe all the posters who suggest zoonotic origins actually know it came from the lab and are just arguing against it because they believe it is their duty to keep this untruth alive?
That is truly bonkers.
I think a lab leak is the most likely hypothesis, because it is an awfully big coincidence that Covid appeared in the same city as the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
But SARS and MERS and AIDS and a bunch of other diseases made the animal-to-man jump without going via a lab. It's possible, if unlikely, that a decade from now, we discover a cave of bats 60 miles from Wuhan where CV19 is commonly carried; in which case, we'll need to revisit this.
Because absent a direct admission from someone at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, that's where we are: there's strong circumstantial evidence for it being a lab leak, but there's no smoking gun.
So your contention is bizarre. Do you really assume that your fellow men just go around lying to each other all the time because...? Do you go around lying to people all the time just because...? If not, why do you assume that other people do?
ermm most people lie most of the time if its going to cost them money
As it's a lazy Saturday afternoon in the football season I was wondering how Scottish teams were sorted into the 'Highland' and 'Lowland' leagues. The obvious way is by the elevation of their home grounds above sea level. Does the SFA have a less logical method?
Basically anything north or south of Stirling, the Tay.
Comments
you forgot people who think it could be either way and regard both extreme claims as scum