No, I never dismissed the lab leak theory. On the initial, now clearly inaccurate, data, the market hypothesis did seem the most reasonable, but as far back as 2015 I warned of the potential culture issues with regards to safety in BSL4 labs (quoted as such in Nature, no less).
I dismissed the design for purpose theory, but not other possibilities, such as accidental release or even the virus evolving in the lab. Indeed, back in April last year, I wrote a risk management scenario for use in lab training on the possibility of unintended evolution of the virus through propagation in human lung epithelial cells.
There are multiple instances of me saying similar to the NYT, WP and NPR, but I can't be bothered to find them. I have also consistently pointed out Peter Daszak's conflicts of interest and how absurd it was that he was on the WHO team.
The key attributes of a conspiracy theory: 1. Specificity 2. Plausibility 3. Undeniability 4. No real evidence for the theory in preference to other more usual explanations
The Lab Leak theory meets all four criteria. The assertion is highly specific, not only identifying the institute but suggesting a particular employee of it being responsible. A lab accidentally releasing a virus into the wild is very plausible, more so than associates of Prince Charles murdering Diana. The data isn't there to definitively prove a specific alternative explanation. From what I have seen at least, the Lab Leak is nothing more than associating the coincidence of a virology institute known to be researching similar viruses being in the neighbourhood of an early outbreak.
New viruses are regrettably common events. The likeliest explanation is that Covid 19 originated in the same way as all the others do. But that seems a feeble riposte. The theory will endure.
There is ample evidence. Try reading, rather than asserting. Start with that Bulletin essay. It is very powerful
This isn't as good but it is interesting, because it comes from an esteemed journalist who was a full on Natural Origins Wet Marketeer, and now he admits to serious doubts
Several crucial paragraphs. The genetic stuff:
'Nick Wade [author of the Bulletin article] quoted David Baltimore, who won the 1975 Nobel Prize for his work with viruses, as saying the specific amino acid sequences in the cleavage site made “a powerful challenge to the idea of a natural origin.” '
And then there's the biosafety angle:
"I spoke about Nick’s article last week with Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, the renowned Columbia University virus hunter who was one of the five co-authors on the seminal “proximal origin” paper.
"He favored a natural origin theory, he said, in part because he had assumed that all the Wuhan Institute’s 2019 work with SARS-like viruses had been done in its top-level BSL-4 lab, which was cleared to operate in 2017. (State Department cables from 2018 raised questions about how well-run the lab was.)
"But later he learned of studies with Dr. Shi’s name on them showing that work he considers dangerous had been done in level BSL-2 labs, which he considers highly porous to leaks, not just in 2016, but in 2020. “That’s screwed up,” he said. “It shouldn’t have happened. People should not be looking at bat viruses in BSL-2 labs. My view has changed.”"
And it turns out the "bat woman" at the lab has been lying about her research:
"Dr. Shi herself later told Scientific American that, when news of the new virus erupted, her first fear was that it had come from her institute. She did not sleep for days, she said, until she had finished checking her lab’s logs and assured herself that it had not.
"Since then, though, more has come to light about the work done by Dr. Shi’s teams. The most startling bit of information was that, rather than “finding” RaTG13 in her freezers in February, Dr. Shi had worked with it since at least 2016, but under a different name, RaBtCoV/4991.
Of all the hypotheses, It Came From The Lab has the best evidence, the most logic, and triumphs over Occam's Razor. The other's don't
As he says:
"That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. There is no proof of a leak.
But the Occam’s Razor argument — what’s the likeliest explanation, animal or lab? — keeps shifting in the direction of the latter."
I read the Nicholas Wade article, which is long. Part of it deconstructs evidence against the Lab Leak theory. It is really saying no-one has proved the negative for the theory, which we know and was my conspiracy theories point 3. Part of it draws attention to coincidences, which is restating the theory and isn't evidence as such.
It gets more interesting where he constructs a case for normal natural evolution being unlikely.Unfortunately I don't have the deep knowledge to judge one way or the other, except to point out at least some virologists think Covid 19 has the hallmarks of evolving naturally.
I think Wade is wrong on at least two points. There were broadly concurrent December outbreaks in Wuhan and Guangdong. Wherever Covid did start it wasn't with either of those outbreaks - it had been going for at least a month by then. Also he points out as a kind of dog that doesn't bark, no specific origin has been found for Covid, unlike SARS where they identified the origin in 4 months. I think it actually took many years and some luck to identify a bat cave in Yunnan province, a long distance from Guangdong, the documented first location of SARS - distance being another of his objections to a natural evolution of Covid 19. Incidentally no origin has been found for Ebola.
There is basically zero proper evidence for the Wet Market theory, they've tried and tried, but no. Even the WHO admit that
And we now know the first cases were not at the Market indeed it is possible the first cases were IN THE LAB - which, if we could ever confirm it, would be slam dunk
As the other guy I linked to says::
"That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. There is no proof of a leak.
But the Occam’s Razor argument — what’s the likeliest explanation, animal or lab? — keeps shifting in the direction of the latter."
We cannot be sure. But as things stand the lab leak is now the most plausible hypothesis, and it gets more plausible by the day. Ignoring it - as you want to do? - is nuts
Funnily enough, Ian Lipkin, who you quoted and is an eminent virologist, and someone I would pay attention to, whichever way he goes, said this as recently as this month:
Dr. Ian Lipkin of @Columbia_CII said that he'd hoped Contagion would help people "appreciate the importance of diseases that originate in animals and efforts to shut down wild animal markets where we presume SARS-CoV-2 to have originated.”
I should add that Chinese authorities clearly lack transparency, so I think they should be challenged and the lack of unmanipulated data shouldn't be "ignored" in this sense. I also think a lab leak is plausible, as I said at the start. Objectively I am not seeing any real reason at this point to believe a lab leak was the cause of the pandemic however.
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Hampstead Heath tricky to do if you want a full on rave. Yes, you can gather at the top of Parliament Hill but it’s a trek and not many escape routes if the rozzers come especially as the grass routes are full of fox holes now covered by the long grass
My serious suggestion for our next Eurovision entry: Bhangra.
Sing it in Punjabi, a couple of guys banging away on dhols and a dozen folk in traditional outfits dancing.
Would be bloody great.
I’d love to see it and it could produce a great spectacle. But it wouldn’t win would it, given the “traditional” views of many of the voters from those 39 countries.
How do you explain the Israeli transvestite winner?
There are probably several ways that the UK could be competitive (or, setting a low bar, not an embarrassment) if the BBC allowed it.
As a starter they need a decent song, or if not a particularly decent song, and least a song that doesn't combine not being very good with utter blandness.
To actually have a chance of winning (given the political dimension of the voting) would probably require something a bit more, let's say, 'controversial'. You could go down the Israeli route - pick something that has the UK political/Govt establishment up in arms, being denounced by ministers etc etc etc.
Alternatively there is the suggestion put forward by MaxPB(?) last night - do something that embraces the UK perception that everybody hates us, and glorifies in it.
But the BBC don't want to go down that route. It's just not worth the hassle to them. So they'll carry on putting up bland performers that give nobody any particular reason to vote for them.
The point about the way the voting works is that you can't vote against a song you hate, for whatever reason - only for a song you like. It doesn't matter if lots of people hate the song, as long as people like it. For years now, the UK has gone for a strategy of being as inoffensive as possible - trying to present something that no-one could object to too strongly. The Radio 2 strategy. But having few people hate it doesn't matter if no-one particularly likes it. Basically, you need something which stands out. Bhangra. Or metal. Or comedy. Or a bearded transvestite. Or really stupidly over the top choreography. Just, you know - something.
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
Old Shire joke:
Q. How do you know when there’s trouble in Cheltenham?
A. When you see all the police rushing to Gloucester.
No, I never dismissed the lab leak theory. On the initial, now clearly inaccurate, data, the market hypothesis did seem the most reasonable, but as far back as 2015 I warned of the potential culture issues with regards to safety in BSL4 labs (quoted as such in Nature, no less).
I dismissed the design for purpose theory, but not other possibilities, such as accidental release or even the virus evolving in the lab. Indeed, back in April last year, I wrote a risk management scenario for use in lab training on the possibility of unintended evolution of the virus through propagation in human lung epithelial cells.
There are multiple instances of me saying similar to the NYT, WP and NPR, but I can't be bothered to find them. I have also consistently pointed out Peter Daszak's conflicts of interest and how absurd it was that he was on the WHO team.
The key attributes of a conspiracy theory: 1. Specificity 2. Plausibility 3. Undeniability 4. No real evidence for the theory in preference to other more usual explanations
The Lab Leak theory meets all four criteria. The assertion is highly specific, not only identifying the institute but suggesting a particular employee of it being responsible. A lab accidentally releasing a virus into the wild is very plausible, more so than associates of Prince Charles murdering Diana. The data isn't there to definitively prove a specific alternative explanation. From what I have seen at least, the Lab Leak is nothing more than associating the coincidence of a virology institute known to be researching similar viruses being in the neighbourhood of an early outbreak.
New viruses are regrettably common events. The likeliest explanation is that Covid 19 originated in the same way as all the others do. But that seems a feeble riposte. The theory will endure.
There is ample evidence. Try reading, rather than asserting. Start with that Bulletin essay. It is very powerful
This isn't as gto light about the work done by Dr. Shi’s teams. The most startling bit of information was that, rather than “finding” RaTG13 in her freezers in February, Dr. Shi had worked with it since at least 2016, but under a different name, RaBtCoV/4991.
Of all the hypotheses, It Came From The Lab has the best evidence, the most logic, and triumphs over Occam's Razor. The other's don't
As he says:
"That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. There is no proof of a leak.
But the Occam’s Razor argument — what’s the likeliest explanation, animal or lab? — keeps shifting in the direction of the latter."
I read the Nicholas Wade article, which is long. Part of it deconstructs evidence against the Lab Leak theory. It is really saying no-one has proved the negative for the theory, which we know and was my conspiracy theories point 3. Part of it draws attention to coincidences, which is restating the theory and isn't evidence as such.
It gets more interesting where he constructs a case for normal natural evolution being unlikely.Unfortunately I don't have the deep knowledge to judge one way or the other, except to point out at least some virologists think Covid 19 has the hallmarks of evolving naturally.
I think Wade is wrong on at least two points. There were broadly concurrent December outbreaks in Wuhan and Guangdong. Wherever Covid did start it wasn't with either of those outbreaks - it had been going for at least a month by then. Also he points out as a kind of dog that doesn't bark, no specific origin has been found for Covid, unlike SARS where they identified the origin in 4 months. I think it actually took many years and some luck to identify a bat cave in Yunnan province, a long distance from Guangdong, the documented first location of SARS - distance being another of his objections to a natural evolution of Covid 19. Incidentally no origin has been found for Ebola.
There is basically zero proper evide
We cannot be sure. But as things stand the lab leak is now the most plausible hypothesis, and it gets more plausible by the day. Ignoring it - as you want to do? - is nuts
Funnily enough, Ian Lipkin, who you quoted and is an eminent virologist, and someone I would pay attention to, whichever way he goes, said this as recently as this month:
Dr. Ian Lipkin of @Columbia_CII said that he'd hoped Contagion would help people "appreciate the importance of diseases that originate in animals and efforts to shut down wild animal markets where we presume SARS-CoV-2 to have originated.”
I should add that Chinese authorities clearly lack transparency, so I think they should be challenged and the lack of unmanipulated data shouldn't be "ignored" in this sense. I also think a lab leak is plausible, as I said at the start. Objectively I am not seeing any real reason at this point to believe a lab leak was the cause of the pandemic however.
And yet your hero Lipkin has now CHANGED HIS MIND. And thinks it came from the lab:
"I spoke about Nick’s article last week with Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, the renowned Columbia University virus hunter who was one of the five co-authors on the seminal “proximal origin” paper.
"He favored a natural origin theory, he said, in part because he had assumed that all the Wuhan Institute’s 2019 work with SARS-like viruses had been done in its top-level BSL-4 lab, which was cleared to operate in 2017. (State Department cables from 2018 raised questions about how well-run the lab was.)
"But later he learned of studies with Dr. Shi’s name on them showing that work he considers dangerous had been done in level BSL-2 labs, which he considers highly porous to leaks, not just in 2016, but in 2020.
“That’s screwed up,” he said. “It shouldn’t have happened. People should not be looking at bat viruses in BSL-2 labs. My view has changed.”"
I've belatedly realised you are probably just a bit dim
My serious suggestion for our next Eurovision entry: Bhangra.
Sing it in Punjabi, a couple of guys banging away on dhols and a dozen folk in traditional outfits dancing.
Would be bloody great.
I’d love to see it and it could produce a great spectacle. But it wouldn’t win would it, given the “traditional” views of many of the voters from those 39 countries.
How do you explain the Israeli transvestite winner?
There are probably several ways that the UK could be competitive (or, setting a low bar, not an embarrassment) if the BBC allowed it.
As a starter they need a decent song, or if not a particularly decent song, and least a song that doesn't combine not being very good with utter blandness.
To actually have a chance of winning (given the political dimension of the voting) would probably require something a bit more, let's say, 'controversial'. You could go down the Israeli route - pick something that has the UK political/Govt establishment up in arms, being denounced by ministers etc etc etc.
Alternatively there is the suggestion put forward by MaxPB(?) last night - do something that embraces the UK perception that everybody hates us, and glorifies in it.
But the BBC don't want to go down that route. It's just not worth the hassle to them. So they'll carry on putting up bland performers that give nobody any particular reason to vote for them.
The point about the way the voting works is that you can't vote against a song you hate, for whatever reason - only for a song you like. It doesn't matter if lots of people hate the song, as long as people like it. For years now, the UK has gone for a strategy of being as inoffensive as possible - trying to present something that no-one could object to too strongly. The Radio 2 strategy. But having few people hate it doesn't matter if no-one particularly likes it. Basically, you need something which stands out. Bhangra. Or metal. Or comedy. Or a bearded transvestite. Or really stupidly over the top choreography. Just, you know - something.
Which of course is even more relevant in a competition where 39 countries are voting compared to the past when the numbers were less than 20.
Alternatively there is the suggestion put forward by MaxPB(?) last night - do something that embraces the UK perception that everybody hates us, and glorifies in it.
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Jesus - that is bad. Why has this not been reported?
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
Old Shire joke:
Q. How do you know when there’s trouble in Cheltenham?
A. When you see all the police rushing to Gloucester.
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Jesus - that is bad. Why has this not been reported?
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
It grew slowly. I watched it happen, like the boiling frog. I knew it would end like this
What's more, this is happening during the worst weather since the Pleistocene. Imagine what it would be like if the weather was like last year?! The crowds would be intense
The cops, the council, and Starmer have no choice. Fencing will work for now - until they find a better solution
Just on China and the virus - is there any latest consensus amongst Western Intelligence agencies about quite how many Chinese actually died in Wuhan (or further afield)?
My serious suggestion for our next Eurovision entry: Bhangra.
Sing it in Punjabi, a couple of guys banging away on dhols and a dozen folk in traditional outfits dancing.
Would be bloody great.
I’d love to see it and it could produce a great spectacle. But it wouldn’t win would it, given the “traditional” views of many of the voters from those 39 countries.
How do you explain the Israeli transvestite winner?
There are probably several ways that the UK could be competitive (or, setting a low bar, not an embarrassment) if the BBC allowed it.
As a starter they need a decent song, or if not a particularly decent song, and least a song that doesn't combine not being very good with utter blandness.
To actually have a chance of winning (given the political dimension of the voting) would probably require something a bit more, let's say, 'controversial'. You could go down the Israeli route - pick something that has the UK political/Govt establishment up in arms, being denounced by ministers etc etc etc.
Alternatively there is the suggestion put forward by MaxPB(?) last night - do something that embraces the UK perception that everybody hates us, and glorifies in it.
But the BBC don't want to go down that route. It's just not worth the hassle to them. So they'll carry on putting up bland performers that give nobody any particular reason to vote for them.
The point about the way the voting works is that you can't vote against a song you hate, for whatever reason - only for a song you like. It doesn't matter if lots of people hate the song, as long as people like it. For years now, the UK has gone for a strategy of being as inoffensive as possible - trying to present something that no-one could object to too strongly. The Radio 2 strategy. But having few people hate it doesn't matter if no-one particularly likes it. Basically, you need something which stands out. Bhangra. Or metal. Or comedy. Or a bearded transvestite. Or really stupidly over the top choreography. Just, you know - something.
Which of course is even more relevant in a competition where 39 countries are voting compared to the past when the numbers were less than 20.
Yes, to develop the point further: a song which 1% of each country loves and 30% hate will win the competition easily. A song which no one loves and no one hates will lose.
My serious suggestion for our next Eurovision entry: Bhangra.
Sing it in Punjabi, a couple of guys banging away on dhols and a dozen folk in traditional outfits dancing.
Would be bloody great.
I’d love to see it and it could produce a great spectacle. But it wouldn’t win would it, given the “traditional” views of many of the voters from those 39 countries.
How do you explain the Israeli transvestite winner?
There are probably several ways that the UK could be competitive (or, setting a low bar, not an embarrassment) if the BBC allowed it.
As a starter they need a decent song, or if not a particularly decent song, and least a song that doesn't combine not being very good with utter blandness.
To actually have a chance of winning (given the political dimension of the voting) would probably require something a bit more, let's say, 'controversial'. You could go down the Israeli route - pick something that has the UK political/Govt establishment up in arms, being denounced by ministers etc etc etc.
Alternatively there is the suggestion put forward by MaxPB(?) last night - do something that embraces the UK perception that everybody hates us, and glorifies in it.
But the BBC don't want to go down that route. It's just not worth the hassle to them. So they'll carry on putting up bland performers that give nobody any particular reason to vote for them.
The point about the way the voting works is that you can't vote against a song you hate, for whatever reason - only for a song you like. It doesn't matter if lots of people hate the song, as long as people like it. For years now, the UK has gone for a strategy of being as inoffensive as possible - trying to present something that no-one could object to too strongly. The Radio 2 strategy. But having few people hate it doesn't matter if no-one particularly likes it. Basically, you need something which stands out. Bhangra. Or metal. Or comedy. Or a bearded transvestite. Or really stupidly over the top choreography. Just, you know - something.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Jesus - that is bad. Why has this not been reported?
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
It grew slowly. I watched it happen, like the boiling frog. I knew it would end like this
What's more, this is happening during the worst weather since the Pleistocene. Imagine what it would be like if the weather was like last year?! The crowds would be intense
The cops, the council, and Starmer have no choice. Fencing will work for now - until they find a better solution
The key is to crush it ASAP. We had a similar situation near where we live - quiet street in North London, great views over London and suddenly drug dealers started coming on a nightly basis to do their deals. When the Police cracked down and stopped the cars, they found they were coming from Streatham and Bethnal Green amongst other places to deal, thinking there would be less attention. Social media apparently to blame.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Very true
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
Given the timing it looks like the US government has known all about this for a year or more and decided to release the details to cause maximum embarrassment for the WHO and China. I've long thought it very likely that the US intelligence agencies would keep a watch on such labs, and if not they certainly would have started as soon as concerns were raised.
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Jesus - that is bad. Why has this not been reported?
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
It grew slowly. I watched it happen, like the boiling frog. I knew it would end like this
What's more, this is happening during the worst weather since the Pleistocene. Imagine what it would be like if the weather was like last year?! The crowds would be intense
The cops, the council, and Starmer have no choice. Fencing will work for now - until they find a better solution
The key is to crush it ASAP. We had a similar situation near where we live - quiet street in North London, great views over London and suddenly drug dealers started coming on a nightly basis to do their deals. When the Police cracked down and stopped the cars, they found they were coming from Streatham and Bethnal Green amongst other places to deal, thinking there would be less attention. Social media apparently to blame.
Yes, these kids are from all over, now. And pretty obvious gangs
It started quite sweetly. It was poor kids from council estates - with no gardens - in Camden - who just wanted to let off lockdown steam. Picnicking Somalian families were discovering this wonderful park. Good for them.
But it has evolved into something much more sinister, sadly
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
Well they could hardly just let it pass, could they?
I suppose there may be those who would welcome the opportunity for a confrontation/reckoning with China - on an issue where we would unambiguously hold the moral high ground and probably widespread public support. But at best it wouldn't be an "opportunity" that would be universally welcomed.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
That's another angle. Even if one could link it to Trumps defunding of the relevant agencies that might have stopped it.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Very true
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
Does it matter? Suppose it is the lab. That means we will in the recent past have experienced dangerous viruses cross over from animal hosts both directly and from laboratories. It doesn't mean wet markets are safe.
What difference does it make to our response to this or the next pandemic? I guess some publicity-seeking lawyers would file suit but what else?
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
Well they could hardly just let it pass, could they?
I suppose there may be those who would welcome the opportunity for a confrontation/reckoning with China - on an issue where we would unambiguously hold the moral high ground and probably widespread public support. But at best it wouldn't be an "opportunity" that would be universally welcomed.
Oh I see. Yes, it would lead (rightly) to a demand for action against China from the public but that's something we should have faced up to 6-7 years ago, IMHO.
#LiberalSpringCherry blossom @liberalspring · May 14 A mainstream party that will defend the 21st June is one which could be the next government. We must deliver this message loudly & clearly to the incumbent @LibDems leadership advising them it’s in their best interests to change course & work with us willingly.
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Jesus - that is bad. Why has this not been reported?
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
It grew slowly. I watched it happen, like the boiling frog. I knew it would end like this
What's more, this is happening during the worst weather since the Pleistocene. Imagine what it would be like if the weather was like last year?! The crowds would be intense
The cops, the council, and Starmer have no choice. Fencing will work for now - until they find a better solution
Thanks. Did the police try to stop it at the start? I'm interested in how it has developed.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
They can bury the story on the day the UAP report comes out.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
WTH is "gain of function" if not for a biological weapon? Oh we just tweaked the RNA to make it more transmissible/deadly to find out how much more awful a virus could be?
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Jesus - that is bad. Why has this not been reported?
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
It grew slowly. I watched it happen, like the boiling frog. I knew it would end like this
What's more, this is happening during the worst weather since the Pleistocene. Imagine what it would be like if the weather was like last year?! The crowds would be intense
The cops, the council, and Starmer have no choice. Fencing will work for now - until they find a better solution
The key is to crush it ASAP. We had a similar situation near where we live - quiet street in North London, great views over London and suddenly drug dealers started coming on a nightly basis to do their deals. When the Police cracked down and stopped the cars, they found they were coming from Streatham and Bethnal Green amongst other places to deal, thinking there would be less attention. Social media apparently to blame.
Yes, these kids are from all over, now. And pretty obvious gangs
It started quite sweetly. It was poor kids from council estates - with no gardens - in Camden - who just wanted to let off lockdown steam. Picnicking Somalian families were discovering this wonderful park. Good for them.
But it has evolved into something much more sinister, sadly
I went up to London for the first time in almost a year on Friday night and got what I can only describe as culture shock.
Our capital city is just so different to rural Hampshire in so many ways.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Very true
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
Does it matter? Suppose it is the lab. That means we will in the recent past have experienced dangerous viruses cross over from animal hosts both directly and from laboratories. It doesn't mean wet markets are safe.
What difference does it make to our response to this or the next pandemic? I guess some publicity-seeking lawyers would file suit but what else?
It matters because if you do have an accident in such a lab the only thing you can do to mitigate it is let everyone know as soon as possible.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Very true
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
Does it matter? Suppose it is the lab. That means we will in the recent past have experienced dangerous viruses cross over from animal hosts both directly and from laboratories. It doesn't mean wet markets are safe.
What difference does it make to our response to this or the next pandemic? I guess some publicity-seeking lawyers would file suit but what else?
It really REALLY matters!
How can it not? By some estimates 10 million people have died
When we have a train crash and 200 die there is a big inquiry and sometimes criminal charges.
10 million have died and the global economy has crashed. How can it not matter who is responsible? Are we just going to shrug and say "Well the Chinese dropped a test tube, it happens"
Moreover, we truly need to know if the gain-of-function research was the problem, making the virus even nastier. If this shit is implicated, we need to stop all this research worldwide immediately. It is already contentious: some scientists think making new dangerous viruses is stupidly perilous.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
WTH is "gain of function" if not for a biological weapon? Oh we just tweaked the RNA to make it more transmissible/deadly to find out how much more awful a virus could be?
I would assume the legitimate objective is to investigate the risk of currently harmless viruses endemically circulating in animals mututing into forms of virus transmissable and/or harmful to humans. And designing responses to combat it when it occurs.
No, I never dismissed the lab leak theory. On the initial, now clearly inaccurate, data, the market hypothesis did seem the most reasonable, but as far back as 2015 I warned of the potential culture issues with regards to safety in BSL4 labs (quoted as such in Nature, no less).
I dismissed the design for purpose theory, but not other possibilities, such as accidental release or even the virus evolving in the lab. Indeed, back in April last year, I wrote a risk management scenario for use in lab training on the possibility of unintended evolution of the virus through propagation in human lung epithelial cells.
There are multiple instances of me saying similar to the NYT, WP and NPR, but I can't be bothered to find them. I have also consistently pointed out Peter Daszak's conflicts of interest and how absurd it was that he was on the WHO team.
The key attributes of a conspiracy theory: 1. Specificity 2. Plausibility 3. Undeniability 4. No real evidence for the theory in preference to other more usual explanations
The Lab Leak theory meets all four criteria. The assertion is highly specific, not only identifying the institute but suggesting a particular employee of it being responsible. A lab accidentally releasing a virus into the wild is very plausible, more so than associates of Prince Charles murdering Diana. The data isn't there to definitively prove a specific alternative explanation. From what I have seen at least, the Lab Leak is nothing more than associating the coincidence of a virology institute known to be researching similar viruses being in the neighbourhood of an early outbreak.
New viruses are regrettably common events. The likeliest explanation is that Covid 19 originated in the same way as all the others do. But that seems a feeble riposte. The theory will endure.
There is ample evidence. Try reading, rather than asserting. Start with that Bulletin essay. It is very powerful
This isn't as good but it is interesting, because it comes from an esteemed journalist who was a full on Natural Origins Wet Marketeer, and now he admits to serious doubts
Several crucial paragraphs. The genetic stuff:
'Nick Wade [author of the Bulletin article] quoted David Baltimore, who won the 1975 Nobel Prize for his work with viruses, as saying the specific amino acid sequences in the cleavage site made “a powerful challenge to the idea of a natural origin.” '
And then there's the biosafety angle:
"I spoke about Nick’s article last week with Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, the renowned Columbia University virus hunter who was one of the five co-authors on the seminal “proximal origin” paper.
"He favored a natural origin theory, he said, in part because he had assumed that all the Wuhan Institute’s 2019 work with SARS-like viruses had been done in its top-level BSL-4 lab, which was cleared to operate in 2017. (State Department cables from 2018 raised questions about how well-run the lab was.)
"But later he learned of studies with Dr. Shi’s name on them showing that work he considers dangerous had been done in level BSL-2 labs, which he considers highly porous to leaks, not just in 2016, but in 2020. “That’s screwed up,” he said. “It shouldn’t have happened. People should not be looking at bat viruses in BSL-2 labs. My view has changed.”"
And it turns out the "bat woman" at the lab has been lying about her research:
"Dr. Shi herself later told Scientific American that, when news of the new virus erupted, her first fear was that it had come from her institute. She did not sleep for days, she said, until she had finished checking her lab’s logs and assured herself that it had not.
"Since then, though, more has come to light about the work done by Dr. Shi’s teams. The most startling bit of information was that, rather than “finding” RaTG13 in her freezers in February, Dr. Shi had worked with it since at least 2016, but under a different name, RaBtCoV/4991.
Of all the hypotheses, It Came From The Lab has the best evidence, the most logic, and triumphs over Occam's Razor. The other's don't
As he says:
"That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. There is no proof of a leak.
But the Occam’s Razor argument — what’s the likeliest explanation, animal or lab? — keeps shifting in the direction of the latter."
I read the Nicholas Wade article, which is long. Part of it deconstructs evidence against the Lab Leak theory. It is really saying no-one has proved the negative for the theory, which we know and was my conspiracy theories point 3. Part of it draws attention to coincidences, which is restating the theory and isn't evidence as such.
It gets more interesting where he constructs a case for normal natural evolution being unlikely.Unfortunately I don't have the deep knowledge to judge one way or the other, except to point out at least some virologists think Covid 19 has the hallmarks of evolving naturally.
I think Wade is wrong on at least two points. There were broadly concurrent December outbreaks in Wuhan and Guangdong. Wherever Covid did start it wasn't with either of those outbreaks - it had been going for at least a month by then. Also he points out as a kind of dog that doesn't bark, no specific origin has been found for Covid, unlike SARS where they identified the origin in 4 months. I think it actually took many years and some luck to identify a bat cave in Yunnan province, a long distance from Guangdong, the documented first location of SARS - distance being another of his objections to a natural evolution of Covid 19. Incidentally no origin has been found for Ebola.
There is basically zero proper evidence for the Wet Market theory, they've tried and tried, but no. Even the WHO admit that
And we now know the first cases were not at the Market indeed it is possible the first cases were IN THE LAB - which, if we could ever confirm it, would be slam dunk
As the other guy I linked to says::
"That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. There is no proof of a leak.
But the Occam’s Razor argument — what’s the likeliest explanation, animal or lab? — keeps shifting in the direction of the latter."
We cannot be sure. But as things stand the lab leak is now the most plausible hypothesis, and it gets more plausible by the day. Ignoring it - as you want to do? - is nuts
Not Italy then?
Dunno. But then I didn't know this, either:
VIRUS MYSTERY
Photo emerges ‘showing patient zero at Wuhan lab’ three years after bosses claimed she left and never to returned
At the time, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) denied online reports the first person to contract the killer virus was based at the top secret site and insisted Huang had left five years earlier never to return.
Now a photo has been published on Twitter which appears to pour cold water on those claims.
It purports to show Huang pictured standing at the back of large group of fellow researchers from the Lab of Diagnostic Microbiology.
The photo could be doctored, of course, or The Sun could be making it up, but at some point the circumstantial evidence for the lab leak will grow so mighty, we just have to accept it
It’s interesting this is all starting to coalesce now. About a year ago Mike Pompeo started making claims that the virus came from the lab and there was evidence of this. The media were quick to deny this as fact and state the US Intelligence services, among others, knew this was not the case and the story was used as an excuse to bash the Trump administration.
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Jesus - that is bad. Why has this not been reported?
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
It grew slowly. I watched it happen, like the boiling frog. I knew it would end like this
What's more, this is happening during the worst weather since the Pleistocene. Imagine what it would be like if the weather was like last year?! The crowds would be intense
The cops, the council, and Starmer have no choice. Fencing will work for now - until they find a better solution
Thanks. Did the police try to stop it at the start? I'm interested in how it has developed.
I guess they didn't notice, because for a long time it was *fairly* innocent, and we were all distracted by the horror of the pandemic. It has only become a massive issue in recent weeks
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Jesus - that is bad. Why has this not been reported?
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
It grew slowly. I watched it happen, like the boiling frog. I knew it would end like this
What's more, this is happening during the worst weather since the Pleistocene. Imagine what it would be like if the weather was like last year?! The crowds would be intense
The cops, the council, and Starmer have no choice. Fencing will work for now - until they find a better solution
Thanks. Did the police try to stop it at the start? I'm interested in how it has developed.
I guess they didn't notice, because for a long time it was *fairly* innocent, and we were all distracted by the horror of the pandemic. It has only become a massive issue in recent weeks
Interesting the Guardian kneejerk reaction story? Did they do ANY journalistic investigation into it before publication at all?
It seems to be all too common for supposed serious media these days. Discover that something is happening that doesn't make much sense ("Starmer intervening in with the local council to protect the pleasure parks of the wealthy elite"), and simply publish it without considering that if it doesn't make much sense, there might actually be a different story underneath the surface.
It's a bit like the regular condemnation of traveller bashing thing. All anti-traveller actions are always assumed to be wrong by default. Never a thought for the other side of the story.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Very true
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
Does it matter? Suppose it is the lab. That means we will in the recent past have experienced dangerous viruses cross over from animal hosts both directly and from laboratories. It doesn't mean wet markets are safe.
What difference does it make to our response to this or the next pandemic? I guess some publicity-seeking lawyers would file suit but what else?
It matters because if you do have an accident in such a lab the only thing you can do to mitigate it is let everyone know as soon as possible.
One reason for hoping it wasn't the lab is that, assuming it was an accident, I dread to think what has happened to some of those responsible in China.
My serious suggestion for our next Eurovision entry: Bhangra.
Sing it in Punjabi, a couple of guys banging away on dhols and a dozen folk in traditional outfits dancing.
Would be bloody great.
I’d love to see it and it could produce a great spectacle. But it wouldn’t win would it, given the “traditional” views of many of the voters from those 39 countries.
How do you explain the Israeli transvestite winner?
There are probably several ways that the UK could be competitive (or, setting a low bar, not an embarrassment) if the BBC allowed it.
As a starter they need a decent song, or if not a particularly decent song, and least a song that doesn't combine not being very good with utter blandness.
To actually have a chance of winning (given the political dimension of the voting) would probably require something a bit more, let's say, 'controversial'. You could go down the Israeli route - pick something that has the UK political/Govt establishment up in arms, being denounced by ministers etc etc etc.
Alternatively there is the suggestion put forward by MaxPB(?) last night - do something that embraces the UK perception that everybody hates us, and glorifies in it.
But the BBC don't want to go down that route. It's just not worth the hassle to them. So they'll carry on putting up bland performers that give nobody any particular reason to vote for them.
The point about the way the voting works is that you can't vote against a song you hate, for whatever reason - only for a song you like. It doesn't matter if lots of people hate the song, as long as people like it. For years now, the UK has gone for a strategy of being as inoffensive as possible - trying to present something that no-one could object to too strongly. The Radio 2 strategy. But having few people hate it doesn't matter if no-one particularly likes it. Basically, you need something which stands out. Bhangra. Or metal. Or comedy. Or a bearded transvestite. Or really stupidly over the top choreography. Just, you know - something.
Yes...our Eurovision strategy is a bit like LibDems and (currently) Labour in FPTP elections - almost nobody really dislikes Keir or Ed D, but...
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
I can't see what the problem is with closing parks late at night, from say midnight to 6am.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
WTH is "gain of function" if not for a biological weapon? Oh we just tweaked the RNA to make it more transmissible/deadly to find out how much more awful a virus could be?
I would assume the legitimate objective is to investigate the risk of currently harmless viruses endemically circulating in animals mututing into forms of virus transmissable and/or harmful to humans. And designing responses to combat it when it occurs.
Yeah, Wiki: "In virology, gain-of-function research is employed with the intention of better understanding current and future pandemics. In vaccine development, gain-of-function research is conducted in the hope of gaining a head start on a virus and being able to develop a vaccine or therapeutic before it emerges." Even if the intention was benign this has probably been the most costly research in human history. I dare say some of the stuff done at Porton Down is similarly dangerous, but why on earth would US funding back a research outfit like Wuhan's with unsurprisingly lax security?
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
Starmer is right, even if the optics are horrible. There's a new fashion for going up Primrose Hill at night, and turning it into a giant rave. I noticed this at the beginning of lockdown 1: the first signs. Kids, music, beer, spliff. It was innocent fun then
But lately it's got menacing and loud - brawls, knives, gangs, drugs, and they trash Primrose Hill on the way home at 3am. The council has no choice but to fence it, until they can think of a better solution
Sadly, I reckon they will end up closing it at night, with permanent gates, as they close Regent's Park
So what happens when they move to another green space nearby - Hampstead Heath, say. Or any of the other green spaces in London? Are they too going to be fenced off?
Maybe dealing with the crime might be a better solution?
Well, yeah. Or open the clubs as others have said
But right now Primrose Hill residents need immediate respite from the chaos. Fencing is the only way (and I hate it)
Immediate respite would be sending the police there every evening from tonight onwards to arrest the troublemakers and charge them.
Too much to expect the police to do their job, I suppose.
The police ARE there. They disperse them if they can - and get missiles hurled at them for their pains. But these crowds are huge now. It's too much foir the police to do unless you expect them to send a riot squad of 200 coppers every night
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Jesus - that is bad. Why has this not been reported?
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
It grew slowly. I watched it happen, like the boiling frog. I knew it would end like this
What's more, this is happening during the worst weather since the Pleistocene. Imagine what it would be like if the weather was like last year?! The crowds would be intense
The cops, the council, and Starmer have no choice. Fencing will work for now - until they find a better solution
Thanks. Did the police try to stop it at the start? I'm interested in how it has developed.
I guess they didn't notice, because for a long time it was *fairly* innocent, and we were all distracted by the horror of the pandemic. It has only become a massive issue in recent weeks
Interesting the Guardian kneejerk reaction story? Did they do ANY journalistic investigation into it before publication at all?
It seems to be all too common for supposed serious media these days. Discover that something is happening that doesn't make much sense ("Starmer intervening in with the local council to protect the pleasure parks of the wealthy elite"), and simply publish it without considering that if it doesn't make much sense, there might actually be a different story underneath the surface.
It's a bit like the regular condemnation of traveller bashing thing. All anti-traveller actions are always assumed to be wrong by default. Never a thought for the other side of the story.
The Guardian also seems to think that Primrose Hill will become some "gated square" for the local rich, and the poor will have to wait outside. It is such bollocks. The park will still be open to all, every day, most of the day. But because it is now such a magnet for drugs, crime, fights, general violence, they will fence it at night, over the summer, to prevent kids getting stabbed and the neighborhood getting trashed
Then find a long term solution. Starmer is right to take the stance he has: good for him
If people do decide that teleworking from Wiltshire and Somerset is the way forward, London could get that NYC 80s vibe...it already has the low level shitty crime, the knife crime and the gangs...and a piss poor Mayor who is a total do-nothing.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Very true
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
Does it matter? Suppose it is the lab. That means we will in the recent past have experienced dangerous viruses cross over from animal hosts both directly and from laboratories. It doesn't mean wet markets are safe.
What difference does it make to our response to this or the next pandemic? I guess some publicity-seeking lawyers would file suit but what else?
It matters because if you do have an accident in such a lab the only thing you can do to mitigate it is let everyone know as soon as possible.
One reason for hoping it wasn't the lab is that, assuming it was an accident, I dread to think what has happened to some of those responsible in China.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
That idea sounds like it would thoroughly deserve zero points.
My other plan, which would have the bonus of really annoying her, is for us to pick a Polish singer with a band from across Eastern Europe. They could even sing in Polish.
More seriously, why not something in Welsh?
Isn't it well established that the fortunes of the UK (and Ireland) in Eurovision very directly coincided with the abolition of the language rule in 1999. Before then the UK did very well because people were more likely to vote for songs where they understood the words?
If people preferred songs where they understood the words then the ENO would be doing a lot better than they are.
ENO?
English National Opera: they perform all operas in English rather than the original languages. It made more sense in the days before surtitles, but not so much now.
Not sure that follows... What that says is that people that like/patronise opera don't prefer songs that they understand the words to.
I assume that the idea behind the ENO was an attempt to open up opera to the masses (which in itself supports the idea as a working hypothesis - and you indeed acknowledge that it made sense). Maybe "the masses" just don't really like opera that much, and that is what explains why it isn't/wasn't more successful...
It’s more that ENO isn’t very good…
My Dad tried to democratise opera by selling tickets for £10 and giving new performers a chance vs wheeling in superannuated faded stars. The opera establishment came down on him & Savoy Opera and crushed it. Apparently it’s not meant to be accessible to ordinary people
Note - these are guidelines only, not laws, and they can be ignored, but they are still ridiculous guidelines and appear to be the result of a personal domestic dispute involving a senior official. Which is pretty outrageous.
I’ve signed the petition and I would be grateful if others could too.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
WTH is "gain of function" if not for a biological weapon? Oh we just tweaked the RNA to make it more transmissible/deadly to find out how much more awful a virus could be?
I would assume the legitimate objective is to investigate the risk of currently harmless viruses endemically circulating in animals mututing into forms of virus transmissable and/or harmful to humans. And designing responses to combat it when it occurs.
Yeah, Wiki: "In virology, gain-of-function research is employed with the intention of better understanding current and future pandemics. In vaccine development, gain-of-function research is conducted in the hope of gaining a head start on a virus and being able to develop a vaccine or therapeutic before it emerges." Even if the intention was benign this has probably been the most costly research in human history. I dare say some of the stuff done at Porton Down is similarly dangerous, but why on earth would US funding back a research outfit like Wuhan's with unsurprisingly lax security?
This is a good and comprehensive take on "gain of function" and the Wuhan lab
A telling paragraph (tho other scientists disagree):
"Richard Ebright, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University and a critic of gain-of-function research, told the Washington Post that the EcoHealth/Wuhan lab research “was — unequivocally — gain-of-function research.” He said it “met the definition for gain-of-function research of concern under the 2014 Pause.” That definition, as we said, pertained to “projects that may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route.”"
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
WTH is "gain of function" if not for a biological weapon? Oh we just tweaked the RNA to make it more transmissible/deadly to find out how much more awful a virus could be?
I would assume the legitimate objective is to investigate the risk of currently harmless viruses endemically circulating in animals mututing into forms of virus transmissable and/or harmful to humans. And designing responses to combat it when it occurs.
Yeah, Wiki: "In virology, gain-of-function research is employed with the intention of better understanding current and future pandemics. In vaccine development, gain-of-function research is conducted in the hope of gaining a head start on a virus and being able to develop a vaccine or therapeutic before it emerges." Even if the intention was benign this has probably been the most costly research in human history. I dare say some of the stuff done at Porton Down is similarly dangerous, but why on earth would US funding back a research outfit like Wuhan's with unsurprisingly lax security?
Maybe the point of the funding wasn't to allow it to happen, but, given it was already happening, to have an insight into what the Chinese were doing, provide reassurance that the research was being done for legitimate purposes and/or actually contribute to improving the security etc.
The UK is alarmed by reports of the arrest of @nexta_tv journalist Roman Protasevich & circumstances that led to his flight being forced to land in Minsk. We are coordinating with our allies. This outlandish action by Lukashenko will have serious implications.
My serious suggestion for our next Eurovision entry: Bhangra.
Sing it in Punjabi, a couple of guys banging away on dhols and a dozen folk in traditional outfits dancing.
Would be bloody great.
I’d love to see it and it could produce a great spectacle. But it wouldn’t win would it, given the “traditional” views of many of the voters from those 39 countries.
How do you explain the Israeli transvestite winner?
There are probably several ways that the UK could be competitive (or, setting a low bar, not an embarrassment) if the BBC allowed it.
As a starter they need a decent song, or if not a particularly decent song, and least a song that doesn't combine not being very good with utter blandness.
To actually have a chance of winning (given the political dimension of the voting) would probably require something a bit more, let's say, 'controversial'. You could go down the Israeli route - pick something that has the UK political/Govt establishment up in arms, being denounced by ministers etc etc etc.
Alternatively there is the suggestion put forward by MaxPB(?) last night - do something that embraces the UK perception that everybody hates us, and glorifies in it.
But the BBC don't want to go down that route. It's just not worth the hassle to them. So they'll carry on putting up bland performers that give nobody any particular reason to vote for them.
The point about the way the voting works is that you can't vote against a song you hate, for whatever reason - only for a song you like. It doesn't matter if lots of people hate the song, as long as people like it. For years now, the UK has gone for a strategy of being as inoffensive as possible - trying to present something that no-one could object to too strongly. The Radio 2 strategy. But having few people hate it doesn't matter if no-one particularly likes it. Basically, you need something which stands out. Bhangra. Or metal. Or comedy. Or a bearded transvestite. Or really stupidly over the top choreography. Just, you know - something.
Yes...our Eurovision strategy is a bit like LibDems and (currently) Labour in FPTP elections - almost nobody really dislikes Keir or Ed D, but...
That is just not true.. unless you.mean loathe. Davey is a nobody who is completely unknown or cared about .. Starmer is ineffective and totally lacking in charisma.. wiill the fake tears make any difference... unlikely.....
No, I never dismissed the lab leak theory. On the initial, now clearly inaccurate, data, the market hypothesis did seem the most reasonable, but as far back as 2015 I warned of the potential culture issues with regards to safety in BSL4 labs (quoted as such in Nature, no less).
I dismissed the design for purpose theory, but not other possibilities, such as accidental release or even the virus evolving in the lab. Indeed, back in April last year, I wrote a risk management scenario for use in lab training on the possibility of unintended evolution of the virus through propagation in human lung epithelial cells.
There are multiple instances of me saying similar to the NYT, WP and NPR, but I can't be bothered to find them. I have also consistently pointed out Peter Daszak's conflicts of interest and how absurd it was that he was on the WHO team.
The key attributes of a conspiracy theory: 1. Specificity 2. Plausibility 3. Undeniability 4. No real evidence for the theory in preference to other more usual explanations
The Lab Leak theory meets all four criteria. The assertion is highly specific, not only identifying the institute but suggesting a particular employee of it being responsible. A lab accidentally releasing a virus into the wild is very plausible, more so than associates of Prince Charles murdering Diana. The data isn't there to definitively prove a specific alternative explanation. From what I have seen at least, the Lab Leak is nothing more than associating the coincidence of a virology institute known to be researching similar viruses being in the neighbourhood of an early outbreak.
New viruses are regrettably common events. The likeliest explanation is that Covid 19 originated in the same way as all the others do. But that seems a feeble riposte. The theory will endure.
There is ample evidence. Try reading, rather than asserting. Start with that Bulletin essay. It is very powerful
This isn't as good but it is interesting, because it comes from an esteemed journalist who was a full on Natural Origins Wet Marketeer, and now he admits to serious doubts
Several crucial paragraphs. The genetic stuff:
'Nick Wade [author of the Bulletin article] quoted David Baltimore, who won the 1975 Nobel Prize for his work with viruses, as saying the specific amino acid sequences in the cleavage site made “a powerful challenge to the idea of a natural origin.” '
And then there's the biosafety angle:
"I spoke about Nick’s article last week with Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, the renowned Columbia University virus hunter who was one of the five co-authors on the seminal “proximal origin” paper.
"He favored a natural origin theory, he said, in part because he had assumed that all the Wuhan Institute’s 2019 work with SARS-like viruses had been done in its top-level BSL-4 lab, which was cleared to operate in 2017. (State Department cables from 2018 raised questions about how well-run the lab was.)
"But later he learned of studies with Dr. Shi’s name on them showing that work he considers dangerous had been done in level BSL-2 labs, which he considers highly porous to leaks, not just in 2016, but in 2020. “That’s screwed up,” he said. “It shouldn’t have happened. People should not be looking at bat viruses in BSL-2 labs. My view has changed.”"
And it turns out the "bat woman" at the lab has been lying about her research:
"Dr. Shi herself later told Scientific American that, when news of the new virus erupted, her first fear was that it had come from her institute. She did not sleep for days, she said, until she had finished checking her lab’s logs and assured herself that it had not.
"Since then, though, more has come to light about the work done by Dr. Shi’s teams. The most startling bit of information was that, rather than “finding” RaTG13 in her freezers in February, Dr. Shi had worked with it since at least 2016, but under a different name, RaBtCoV/4991.
Of all the hypotheses, It Came From The Lab has the best evidence, the most logic, and triumphs over Occam's Razor. The other's don't
As he says:
"That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. There is no proof of a leak.
But the Occam’s Razor argument — what’s the likeliest explanation, animal or lab? — keeps shifting in the direction of the latter."
I read the Nicholas Wade article, which is long. Part of it deconstructs evidence against the Lab Leak theory. It is really saying no-one has proved the negative for the theory, which we know and was my conspiracy theories point 3. Part of it draws attention to coincidences, which is restating the theory and isn't evidence as such.
It gets more interesting where he constructs a case for normal natural evolution being unlikely.Unfortunately I don't have the deep knowledge to judge one way or the other, except to point out at least some virologists think Covid 19 has the hallmarks of evolving naturally.
I think Wade is wrong on at least two points. There were broadly concurrent December outbreaks in Wuhan and Guangdong. Wherever Covid did start it wasn't with either of those outbreaks - it had been going for at least a month by then. Also he points out as a kind of dog that doesn't bark, no specific origin has been found for Covid, unlike SARS where they identified the origin in 4 months. I think it actually took many years and some luck to identify a bat cave in Yunnan province, a long distance from Guangdong, the documented first location of SARS - distance being another of his objections to a natural evolution of Covid 19. Incidentally no origin has been found for Ebola.
There is basically zero proper evidence for the Wet Market theory, they've tried and tried, but no. Even the WHO admit that
And we now know the first cases were not at the Market indeed it is possible the first cases were IN THE LAB - which, if we could ever confirm it, would be slam dunk
As the other guy I linked to says::
"That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. There is no proof of a leak.
But the Occam’s Razor argument — what’s the likeliest explanation, animal or lab? — keeps shifting in the direction of the latter."
We cannot be sure. But as things stand the lab leak is now the most plausible hypothesis, and it gets more plausible by the day. Ignoring it - as you want to do? - is nuts
Not Italy then?
Dunno. But then I didn't know this, either:
VIRUS MYSTERY
Photo emerges ‘showing patient zero at Wuhan lab’ three years after bosses claimed she left and never to returned
At the time, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) denied online reports the first person to contract the killer virus was based at the top secret site and insisted Huang had left five years earlier never to return.
Now a photo has been published on Twitter which appears to pour cold water on those claims.
It purports to show Huang pictured standing at the back of large group of fellow researchers from the Lab of Diagnostic Microbiology.
The photo could be doctored, of course, or The Sun could be making it up, but at some point the circumstantial evidence for the lab leak will grow so mighty, we just have to accept it
It’s interesting this is all starting to coalesce now. About a year ago Mike Pompeo started making claims that the virus came from the lab and there was evidence of this. The media were quick to deny this as fact and state the US Intelligence services, among others, knew this was not the case and the story was used as an excuse to bash the Trump administration.
It makes you wonder what they knew then.
The media Pooh-poohed it because Trump was President and also because they were so fixated on getting Trump out that any thing that could have obstructed that aim (eg evidence that CV escaped from the lab and therefore his anti-China stance may have become more popular) was to be discounted.
Now that he is out of the way and Biden is Prez, there is no issue. Also, it might be quite a handy way of putting pressure on China to not try anything over Taiwan, otherwise the whole world will be given the evidence on Wuhan
Are there any PBers from Camden Town (Primrose Hill borders) ?
One might expect that the leader of the opposition would have more to do than involve himself in a local council dispute over park gates. But to the shock of some locals, Sir Keir Starmer, MP for Holborn and St Pancras, has personally pushed for the erection of nine-foot tall aluminium barriers across Primrose Hill in north London.
Effectively, this means locking off London’s only permanently open royal park from the public on weekend evenings and maintaining its exclusivity for wealthy residents.
#LiberalSpringCherry blossom @liberalspring · May 14 A mainstream party that will defend the 21st June is one which could be the next government. We must deliver this message loudly & clearly to the incumbent @LibDems leadership advising them it’s in their best interests to change course & work with us willingly.
That's rather bizarre and unlikely logic.
A party defending the 21st June will have no impact on the next election.
By 2024: Either the 21st June went ahead without a hitch, in which case its moot. Or the 21st June was delayed, but lifting lockdown well ahead years before the election, so 21st June is moot. Or 21st June was cancelled, lockdown was never lifted and we're still in a dystopian lockdown in 2024. In which case we have huge problems to deal with and the exact date of 21st June is moot.
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Very true
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
Does it matter? Suppose it is the lab. That means we will in the recent past have experienced dangerous viruses cross over from animal hosts both directly and from laboratories. It doesn't mean wet markets are safe.
What difference does it make to our response to this or the next pandemic? I guess some publicity-seeking lawyers would file suit but what else?
It matters because if you do have an accident in such a lab the only thing you can do to mitigate it is let everyone know as soon as possible.
One reason for hoping it wasn't the lab is that, assuming it was an accident, I dread to think what has happened to some of those responsible in China.
Torture, prison and execution, are the rumours
Torture? In this circumstance what would be the point?
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
WTH is "gain of function" if not for a biological weapon? Oh we just tweaked the RNA to make it more transmissible/deadly to find out how much more awful a virus could be?
I would assume the legitimate objective is to investigate the risk of currently harmless viruses endemically circulating in animals mututing into forms of virus transmissable and/or harmful to humans. And designing responses to combat it when it occurs.
Yeah, Wiki: "In virology, gain-of-function research is employed with the intention of better understanding current and future pandemics. In vaccine development, gain-of-function research is conducted in the hope of gaining a head start on a virus and being able to develop a vaccine or therapeutic before it emerges." Even if the intention was benign this has probably been the most costly research in human history. I dare say some of the stuff done at Porton Down is similarly dangerous, but why on earth would US funding back a research outfit like Wuhan's with unsurprisingly lax security?
Maybe the point of the funding wasn't to allow it to happen, but, given it was already happening, to have an insight into what the Chinese were doing, provide reassurance that the research was being done for legitimate purposes and/or actually contribute to improving the security etc.
A very good way to see if the Chinese were going bio-weapons research. If they were, it would be unlikely they would leave an American sponsored project in Wuhan alone. Either they would shut it down, or try and "borrow" data.
Plus insight into the Chinese scientific community in this area - are lots of scientists in the field suddenly not publishing/working in the usual places....
What happened today is an attack not only on Lithuania.
This is the act of state terrorism directed against the security of citizens of the #EU and other countries.
And:
The airspace of Belarus is unsafe for everyone. The EU must take effective measures to protect all individuals, regardless of their nationality, who are at risk from inadequate actions of the regime.
Together with international partners, we will work to close the airspace of Belarus to international flights.
What happened today is an attack not only on Lithuania; it is a signal for the entire European Union and international organisations.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
That idea sounds like it would thoroughly deserve zero points.
My other plan, which would have the bonus of really annoying her, is for us to pick a Polish singer with a band from across Eastern Europe. They could even sing in Polish.
More seriously, why not something in Welsh?
Isn't it well established that the fortunes of the UK (and Ireland) in Eurovision very directly coincided with the abolition of the language rule in 1999. Before then the UK did very well because people were more likely to vote for songs where they understood the words?
If people preferred songs where they understood the words then the ENO would be doing a lot better than they are.
ENO?
English National Opera: they perform all operas in English rather than the original languages. It made more sense in the days before surtitles, but not so much now.
Not sure that follows... What that says is that people that like/patronise opera don't prefer songs that they understand the words to.
I assume that the idea behind the ENO was an attempt to open up opera to the masses (which in itself supports the idea as a working hypothesis - and you indeed acknowledge that it made sense). Maybe "the masses" just don't really like opera that much, and that is what explains why it isn't/wasn't more successful...
It’s more that ENO isn’t very good…
My Dad tried to democratise opera by selling tickets for £10 and giving new performers a chance vs wheeling in superannuated faded stars. The opera establishment came down on him & Savoy Opera and crushed it. Apparently it’s not meant to be accessible to ordinary people
Shades of the savage attacks on the building of the Globe theatre?
I spent a bit of time reading this guys tweets and stuff, partly because he seemed to be on the money about the EU vaccination programme. However he seems to have some dubious (IMO) views about the US (Trump in particular and things like the Jan 6th insurrection - he appears to be almost in the "tourist outing" camp...)
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Very true
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
Does it matter? Suppose it is the lab. That means we will in the recent past have experienced dangerous viruses cross over from animal hosts both directly and from laboratories. It doesn't mean wet markets are safe.
What difference does it make to our response to this or the next pandemic? I guess some publicity-seeking lawyers would file suit but what else?
It matters because if you do have an accident in such a lab the only thing you can do to mitigate it is let everyone know as soon as possible.
One reason for hoping it wasn't the lab is that, assuming it was an accident, I dread to think what has happened to some of those responsible in China.
Torture, prison and execution, are the rumours
Torture? In this circumstance what would be the point?
Just for the bantz?
Truthfully, I have no clue. But I have read they were tortured. Grotesque
Maybe the Chinese authorities wanted to make sure they weren't spies or something? Right now who would say *anything* is "too bad even for China"
If people do decide that teleworking from Wiltshire and Somerset is the way forward, London could get that NYC 80s vibe...it already has the low level shitty crime, the knife crime and the gangs...and a piss poor Mayor who is a total do-nothing.
Chairs of parliament foreign affairs committees from United Kingdom Germany Ireland Czech Republic Latvia Lithuania Poland United States are calling for the suspension of Belarus from the International Civil Aviation Organisation.
Closing borders to commercial traffic could also be on the table & can be implemented fast
My serious suggestion for our next Eurovision entry: Bhangra.
Sing it in Punjabi, a couple of guys banging away on dhols and a dozen folk in traditional outfits dancing.
Would be bloody great.
I’d love to see it and it could produce a great spectacle. But it wouldn’t win would it, given the “traditional” views of many of the voters from those 39 countries.
How do you explain the Israeli transvestite winner?
There are probably several ways that the UK could be competitive (or, setting a low bar, not an embarrassment) if the BBC allowed it.
As a starter they need a decent song, or if not a particularly decent song, and least a song that doesn't combine not being very good with utter blandness.
To actually have a chance of winning (given the political dimension of the voting) would probably require something a bit more, let's say, 'controversial'. You could go down the Israeli route - pick something that has the UK political/Govt establishment up in arms, being denounced by ministers etc etc etc.
Alternatively there is the suggestion put forward by MaxPB(?) last night - do something that embraces the UK perception that everybody hates us, and glorifies in it.
But the BBC don't want to go down that route. It's just not worth the hassle to them. So they'll carry on putting up bland performers that give nobody any particular reason to vote for them.
The point about the way the voting works is that you can't vote against a song you hate, for whatever reason - only for a song you like. It doesn't matter if lots of people hate the song, as long as people like it. For years now, the UK has gone for a strategy of being as inoffensive as possible - trying to present something that no-one could object to too strongly. The Radio 2 strategy. But having few people hate it doesn't matter if no-one particularly likes it. Basically, you need something which stands out. Bhangra. Or metal. Or comedy. Or a bearded transvestite. Or really stupidly over the top choreography. Just, you know - something.
Is this Julia Half-Baked being 'ironic' and trolling Remoaners d'ye think?
That idea sounds like it would thoroughly deserve zero points.
My other plan, which would have the bonus of really annoying her, is for us to pick a Polish singer with a band from across Eastern Europe. They could even sing in Polish.
More seriously, why not something in Welsh?
Isn't it well established that the fortunes of the UK (and Ireland) in Eurovision very directly coincided with the abolition of the language rule in 1999. Before then the UK did very well because people were more likely to vote for songs where they understood the words?
If people preferred songs where they understood the words then the ENO would be doing a lot better than they are.
ENO?
English National Opera: they perform all operas in English rather than the original languages. It made more sense in the days before surtitles, but not so much now.
Not sure that follows... What that says is that people that like/patronise opera don't prefer songs that they understand the words to.
I assume that the idea behind the ENO was an attempt to open up opera to the masses (which in itself supports the idea as a working hypothesis - and you indeed acknowledge that it made sense). Maybe "the masses" just don't really like opera that much, and that is what explains why it isn't/wasn't more successful...
It’s more that ENO isn’t very good…
My Dad tried to democratise opera by selling tickets for £10 and giving new performers a chance vs wheeling in superannuated faded stars. The opera establishment came down on him & Savoy Opera and crushed it. Apparently it’s not meant to be accessible to ordinary people
The problem with the ENO concept is that words are usually incomprehensible even when sung in English translation, an exception being opera with an original English libretto such as Nixon in China or The Death of Klinghoffer.
A slightly bizarre experience was Janacek's Jenufa in Budapest, sung in Slovak with Hungarian surtitles. I can't claim much familiarity with either language but it was perfectly enjoyable after a bit of homework. Tickets were £20 max and the theatre was half-empty on a Saturday night.
#LiberalSpringCherry blossom @liberalspring · May 14 A mainstream party that will defend the 21st June is one which could be the next government. We must deliver this message loudly & clearly to the incumbent @LibDems leadership advising them it’s in their best interests to change course & work with us willingly.
That's rather bizarre and unlikely logic.
A party defending the 21st June will have no impact on the next election.
By 2024: Either the 21st June went ahead without a hitch, in which case its moot. Or the 21st June was delayed, but lifting lockdown well ahead years before the election, so 21st June is moot. Or 21st June was cancelled, lockdown was never lifted and we're still in a dystopian lockdown in 2024. In which case we have huge problems to deal with and the exact date of 21st June is moot.
Indeed. As usual the word 'could' is doing a ton of lifting.
Chairs of parliament foreign affairs committees from United Kingdom Germany Ireland Czech Republic Latvia Lithuania Poland United States are calling for the suspension of Belarus from the International Civil Aviation Organisation.
Closing borders to commercial traffic could also be on the table & can be implemented fast
If people do decide that teleworking from Wiltshire and Somerset is the way forward, London could get that NYC 80s vibe...it already has the low level shitty crime, the knife crime and the gangs...and a piss poor Mayor who is a total do-nothing.
Great music though. 80s NYC I mean.
NYC in the 1970s and 1980s was NYC at its best - creatively. It wasn't just music. So much came out of that city then. The art, the writing, the energy. Strange but true
Chairs of parliament foreign affairs committees from United Kingdom Germany Ireland Czech Republic Latvia Lithuania Poland United States are calling for the suspension of Belarus from the International Civil Aviation Organisation.
Closing borders to commercial traffic could also be on the table & can be implemented fast
That YouGov RedWall poll the other day surprised me -
“Statement A: The various different ethnic groups living in Britain all generally get along well OR Statement B: There is an increasing amount of tension between the different ethnic groups living in Britain”
Red Wall 48-27 in favour of Statement B Rest of Britain 43-30 in favour of B
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
Very true
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
Does it matter? Suppose it is the lab. That means we will in the recent past have experienced dangerous viruses cross over from animal hosts both directly and from laboratories. It doesn't mean wet markets are safe.
What difference does it make to our response to this or the next pandemic? I guess some publicity-seeking lawyers would file suit but what else?
It matters because if you do have an accident in such a lab the only thing you can do to mitigate it is let everyone know as soon as possible.
One reason for hoping it wasn't the lab is that, assuming it was an accident, I dread to think what has happened to some of those responsible in China.
Torture, prison and execution, are the rumours
Torture? In this circumstance what would be the point?
Just for the bantz?
Truthfully, I have no clue. But I have read they were tortured. Grotesque
Maybe the Chinese authorities wanted to make sure they weren't spies or something? Right now who would say *anything* is "too bad even for China"
The state would have suspected them of deliberate sabotage. They caused huge damage to China, both in the death toll & economic impact, but also in reputation & loss of face internationally. Communist states always fear attacks from internal “fifth columnists” & in this case that fear would have meant putting those responsible to the question in order find out whether they were part of a larger conspiracy.
If you cross the CCP, the consequences are unlikely to be good, no matter whether you’re innocent or not.
More mealy mouthed platitudes from the EU Transport Commissioner:
UPDATE: expected landing time in Vilnius 21.19 local time. We need to verify all the facts and passengers on board - we cannot do this until the arrival in Vilnius. This kind of situation will have consequences.
She was put forward by Orban and her qualifications include a master's degree in European Integration and Security Studies, postgraduate studies in National Security and Defence Management and a bachelor's degree in mathematics.
Aims to reform the LibDems to be more anti-NPI and passports/apps for covid.
Looks like a Mike Yeadon project but others on here may know more.
The problem with this, looking at their '10 pledges' is that we know lockdowns DO work. We also know that vaccinating children is probably the best way of dealing with this going forwards for future generations.
Chairs of parliament foreign affairs committees from United Kingdom Germany Ireland Czech Republic Latvia Lithuania Poland United States are calling for the suspension of Belarus from the International Civil Aviation Organisation.
Closing borders to commercial traffic could also be on the table & can be implemented fast
The thing about the Lab theory is that there is clearly massive disincentive on all sides for it not to be concluded to be the origin. The consequences will be immense. Nobody wants it. The Chinese (who obviously know). The Americans. Europe. Nobody. So the evidence will have to be absolutely conclusive, overwhelming AND in the public domain before it will be acknowledged. Presumably the likes of the US Government will know first, if they don't already know. Unless they're not looking because they are so scared of the answer - which seems unlikely.
I can understand China have an overriding interest, but the rest?
America funded much of the most controversial gain-of-function virological research, in the Wuhan labs. Plenty of important Americans - scientists and otherwise - would rather this was not examined
WTH is "gain of function" if not for a biological weapon? Oh we just tweaked the RNA to make it more transmissible/deadly to find out how much more awful a virus could be?
I would assume the legitimate objective is to investigate the risk of currently harmless viruses endemically circulating in animals mututing into forms of virus transmissable and/or harmful to humans. And designing responses to combat it when it occurs.
Yeah, Wiki: "In virology, gain-of-function research is employed with the intention of better understanding current and future pandemics. In vaccine development, gain-of-function research is conducted in the hope of gaining a head start on a virus and being able to develop a vaccine or therapeutic before it emerges." Even if the intention was benign this has probably been the most costly research in human history. I dare say some of the stuff done at Porton Down is similarly dangerous, but why on earth would US funding back a research outfit like Wuhan's with unsurprisingly lax security?
This is a good and comprehensive take on "gain of function" and the Wuhan lab
A telling paragraph (tho other scientists disagree):
"Richard Ebright, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University and a critic of gain-of-function research, told the Washington Post that the EcoHealth/Wuhan lab research “was — unequivocally — gain-of-function research.” He said it “met the definition for gain-of-function research of concern under the 2014 Pause.” That definition, as we said, pertained to “projects that may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route.”"
*enhanced pathogenicity* - Jesus
It is the Weyland-Utani Corporation from the Alien franchise - it has moved aggressively to discover — and weaponize — alien lifeforms. Or indeed, those we already have here on Earth.
Are there any PBers who still vehemently deny the lab leak hypothesis?
IF so, why? Is it because of the WHO report? The Lancet letter? Perhaps it is because you fear anti-Chinese racism and the "natural origin" hypothesis is preferable in that respect.
Genuine question. On Twitter it mainly seems to be liberal-lefties who still deny the lab leak thingy, so I'm guessing it is a race thing. OR they are paid by China
Chilling testimony emerging from fellow passengers on the Athens-Vilnius flight, describing the moment when Roman Protasevich learned it was being diverted to #Belarus.
"He just turned to people and said he was facing the death penalty," passenger Monika Simkiene told @AFP.
Another passenger, Edvinas Dimsa, told AFP: "He was not screaming, but it was clear that he was very much afraid. It looked like if the window had been open, he would have jumped out of it."
More mealy mouthed platitudes from the EU Transport Commissioner:
UPDATE: expected landing time in Vilnius 21.19 local time. We need to verify all the facts and passengers on board - we cannot do this until the arrival in Vilnius. This kind of situation will have consequences.
She was put forward by Orban and her qualifications include a master's degree in European Integration and Security Studies, postgraduate studies in National Security and Defence Management and a bachelor's degree in mathematics.
Comments
Win win
Dr. Ian Lipkin of @Columbia_CII said that he'd hoped Contagion would help people "appreciate the importance of diseases that originate in animals and efforts to shut down wild animal markets where we presume SARS-CoV-2 to have originated.”
https://twitter.com/ColumbiaMSPH/status/1392858433335054342
I should add that Chinese authorities clearly lack transparency, so I think they should be challenged and the lack of unmanipulated data shouldn't be "ignored" in this sense. I also think a lab leak is plausible, as I said at the start. Objectively I am not seeing any real reason at this point to believe a lab leak was the cause of the pandemic however.
You don't know what you're talking about in this instance. I do
Basically, you need something which stands out. Bhangra. Or metal. Or comedy. Or a bearded transvestite. Or really stupidly over the top choreography. Just, you know - something.
Q. How do you know when there’s trouble in Cheltenham?
A. When you see all the police rushing to Gloucester.
"I spoke about Nick’s article last week with Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, the renowned Columbia University virus hunter who was one of the five co-authors on the seminal “proximal origin” paper.
"He favored a natural origin theory, he said, in part because he had assumed that all the Wuhan Institute’s 2019 work with SARS-like viruses had been done in its top-level BSL-4 lab, which was cleared to operate in 2017. (State Department cables from 2018 raised questions about how well-run the lab was.)
"But later he learned of studies with Dr. Shi’s name on them showing that work he considers dangerous had been done in level BSL-2 labs, which he considers highly porous to leaks, not just in 2016, but in 2020.
“That’s screwed up,” he said. “It shouldn’t have happened. People should not be looking at bat viruses in BSL-2 labs. My view has changed.”"
I've belatedly realised you are probably just a bit dim
Personally, if it is that bad, then I would be inclined to go in hard with whatever police manpower is needed to crush this once and for all. Otherwise all that will happen is that the problem will move somewhere else.
Did the problem start small and grow because nothing was done? Or what? I don't imagine a huge crowd turned up overnight, as it were.
What's more, this is happening during the worst weather since the Pleistocene. Imagine what it would be like if the weather was like last year?! The crowds would be intense
The cops, the council, and Starmer have no choice. Fencing will work for now - until they find a better solution
But we have no such disincentive, we can apply basic intelligence to the available evidence and say "lab"
It started quite sweetly. It was poor kids from council estates - with no gardens - in Camden - who just wanted to let off lockdown steam. Picnicking Somalian families were discovering this wonderful park. Good for them.
But it has evolved into something much more sinister, sadly
I suppose there may be those who would welcome the opportunity for a confrontation/reckoning with China - on an issue where we would unambiguously hold the moral high ground and probably widespread public support. But at best it wouldn't be an "opportunity" that would be universally welcomed.
What difference does it make to our response to this or the next pandemic? I guess some publicity-seeking lawyers would file suit but what else?
Aims to reform the LibDems to be more anti-NPI and passports/apps for covid.
Looks like a Mike Yeadon project but others on here may know more.
I’d hope the UK comes out against the actions quite hard..
They're a loose cannon on deck.
@liberalspring
·
May 14
A mainstream party that will defend the 21st June is one which could be the next government. We must deliver this message loudly & clearly to the incumbent
@LibDems
leadership advising them it’s in their best interests to change course & work with us willingly.
Our capital city is just so different to rural Hampshire in so many ways.
How can it not? By some estimates 10 million people have died
When we have a train crash and 200 die there is a big inquiry and sometimes criminal charges.
10 million have died and the global economy has crashed. How can it not matter who is responsible? Are we just going to shrug and say "Well the Chinese dropped a test tube, it happens"
Moreover, we truly need to know if the gain-of-function research was the problem, making the virus even nastier. If this shit is implicated, we need to stop all this research worldwide immediately. It is already contentious: some scientists think making new dangerous viruses is stupidly perilous.
It makes you wonder what they knew then.
It seems to be all too common for supposed serious media these days. Discover that something is happening that doesn't make much sense ("Starmer intervening in with the local council to protect the pleasure parks of the wealthy elite"), and simply publish it without considering that if it doesn't make much sense, there might actually be a different story underneath the surface.
It's a bit like the regular condemnation of traveller bashing thing. All anti-traveller actions are always assumed to be wrong by default. Never a thought for the other side of the story.
Even if the intention was benign this has probably been the most costly research in human history. I dare say some of the stuff done at Porton Down is similarly dangerous, but why on earth would US funding back a research outfit like Wuhan's with unsurprisingly lax security?
Then find a long term solution. Starmer is right to take the stance he has: good for him
My Dad tried to democratise opera by selling tickets for £10 and giving new performers a chance vs wheeling in superannuated faded stars. The opera establishment came down on him & Savoy Opera and crushed it. Apparently it’s not meant to be accessible to ordinary people
https://www.factcheck.org/2021/05/the-wuhan-lab-and-the-gain-of-function-disagreement/
A telling paragraph (tho other scientists disagree):
"Richard Ebright, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Rutgers University and a critic of gain-of-function research, told the Washington Post that the EcoHealth/Wuhan lab research “was — unequivocally — gain-of-function research.” He said it “met the definition for gain-of-function research of concern under the 2014 Pause.” That definition, as we said, pertained to “projects that may be reasonably anticipated to confer attributes to influenza, MERS, or SARS viruses such that the virus would have enhanced pathogenicity and/or transmissibility in mammals via the respiratory route.”"
*enhanced pathogenicity* - Jesus
The UK is alarmed by reports of the arrest of @nexta_tv journalist Roman Protasevich & circumstances that led to his flight being forced to land in Minsk. We are coordinating with our allies. This outlandish action by Lukashenko will have serious implications.
Now that he is out of the way and Biden is Prez, there is no issue. Also, it might be quite a handy way of putting pressure on China to not try anything over Taiwan, otherwise the whole world will be given the evidence on Wuhan
https://twitter.com/seanonolennon/status/1396532546482184195?s=20
On the bright side: there will be others
https://twitter.com/MacaesBruno/status/1396571912009043968?s=20
A party defending the 21st June will have no impact on the next election.
By 2024:
Either the 21st June went ahead without a hitch, in which case its moot.
Or the 21st June was delayed, but lifting lockdown well ahead years before the election, so 21st June is moot.
Or 21st June was cancelled, lockdown was never lifted and we're still in a dystopian lockdown in 2024. In which case we have huge problems to deal with and the exact date of 21st June is moot.
In this circumstance what would be the point?
Plus insight into the Chinese scientific community in this area - are lots of scientists in the field suddenly not publishing/working in the usual places....
What happened today is an attack not only on Lithuania.
This is the act of state terrorism directed against the security of citizens of the #EU and other countries.
And:
The airspace of Belarus is unsafe for everyone. The EU must take effective measures to protect all individuals, regardless of their nationality, who are at risk from inadequate actions of the regime.
Together with international partners, we will work to close the airspace of Belarus to international flights.
What happened today is an attack not only on Lithuania; it is a signal for the entire European Union and international organisations.
https://twitter.com/IngridaSimonyte/status/1396552770489135104?s=20
Truthfully, I have no clue. But I have read they were tortured. Grotesque
Maybe the Chinese authorities wanted to make sure they weren't spies or something? Right now who would say *anything* is "too bad even for China"
Closing borders to commercial traffic could also be on the table & can be implemented fast
https://twitter.com/NoYardstick/status/1396570970840879106?s=20
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=VJ920cN2HmA
A slightly bizarre experience was Janacek's Jenufa in Budapest, sung in Slovak with Hungarian surtitles. I can't claim much familiarity with either language but it was perfectly enjoyable after a bit of homework. Tickets were £20 max and the theatre was half-empty on a Saturday night.
Duetting with Shaun Ryder. Going lyrically, er, off-piste.....
With a side-order of Bez.
It was a toilet but a brilliant toilet
“Statement A: The various different ethnic groups living in Britain all generally get along well OR Statement B: There is an increasing amount of tension between the different ethnic groups living in Britain”
Red Wall 48-27 in favour of Statement B
Rest of Britain 43-30 in favour of B
If you cross the CCP, the consequences are unlikely to be good, no matter whether you’re innocent or not.
https://youtu.be/HiSdrvp2rnQ
UPDATE: expected landing time in Vilnius 21.19 local time. We need to verify all the facts and passengers on board - we cannot do this until the arrival in Vilnius. This kind of situation will have consequences.
https://twitter.com/AdinaValean/status/1396531443422085125?s=20
She was put forward by Orban and her qualifications include a master's degree in European Integration and Security Studies, postgraduate studies in National Security and Defence Management and a bachelor's degree in mathematics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adina-Ioana_Vălean
Edit - and the pax manifest would have been known before take-off! But the EU Transport Commissioner does not know that!
It's bordering on anti-science.
Taking the Initiative Party said she was being treated in intensive care after being shot in the head in the early hours of Sunday morning.
The BBC understands the incident happened in south London.
---
She is the very loud mouthed lady who turns up in faux para-military gear.
* - seems to be the reports elsewhere.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1396576077334650882?s=20
Are there any PBers who still vehemently deny the lab leak hypothesis?
IF so, why? Is it because of the WHO report? The Lancet letter? Perhaps it is because you fear anti-Chinese racism and the "natural origin" hypothesis is preferable in that respect.
Genuine question. On Twitter it mainly seems to be liberal-lefties who still deny the lab leak thingy, so I'm guessing it is a race thing. OR they are paid by China
"He just turned to people and said he was facing the death penalty," passenger Monika Simkiene told @AFP.
Another passenger, Edvinas Dimsa, told AFP: "He was not screaming, but it was clear that he was very much afraid. It looked like if the window had been open, he would have jumped out of it."
https://twitter.com/kjalee/status/1396572831069220866
Guy who actually funds gain-of-function research at Wuhan writes article in Guardian saying "lab leak hypothesis" is a mad Trumpite conspiracy
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jun/09/conspiracies-covid-19-lab-false-pandemic
It's barely worth reading. The most compelling section comes after the article itself:
"This article was amended on 11 June 2020 to make clear the writer’s past work with researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology."
The original version of the piece "forgot" to mention Daszak actually WORKED with the Wuhan lab
There's yer "conspiracy", right there