Please read the thread thanks.
lol come on this report is a joke.
âThere is no record of viruses closely related to SARS-CoV-2 in any laboratory before December 2019, or genomes that in combination could provide a SARS-CoV-2 genome,â it reads. âIn view of the above, a laboratory origin of the pandemic was considered to be extremely unlikely.â
This is the purest question-begging imaginable. The lab-origin theory requires China to be engaging in covert study of coronaviruses and this paragraph requires that they not be in order to make sense.
This isnât how it works. Read zikzakâs link and in particular the theory about it being a recombinant virus.
Edit, meaning this:
Petrovsky leans towards another potential scenario, namely that SARS-CoV-2 might be evolved from coronaviruses that snuck into lab cultures. Related viruses in the same culture, he explains, such as one optimized for human ACE2 binding and another not, can swap genetic material to create new strains. âWeâve had this sort of thing happen in our own lab,â he says. âOne day, youâre culturing flu, and then one day you sequence it, and you go, âHoly shit, where did this other virus come from in our culture?â Viruses are evolving the whole time, and itâs easy for a virus to get into your culture without you knowing it.â
1 Like
No it doesnât.
What is happening on this thread? Itâs devolved into utter nonsense from people utterly uninformed calling whole reports nonsense despite never reading the report and people seriously positing scientists are covering up a source of covid for grant money.
Itâs fucking pathetic honestly. Or maybe Iâm grumpy from working late, but good god the past 24 hours were bad here.
1 Like
Dude China are the ones with a fucking library of bat coronaviruses in their backyard. The prevailing theory is that the virus was brought into urban China via wet market or similar. The lab theory is that it was instead brought into a lab and accidentally released. Either way there are a giant number of novel coronaviruses out there. What the WHO report says is âwell if Chinese labs had seen this one before they would definitely tell usâ. Why?
For the record I still think it was likely not a lab accident, but itâs not a crazy theory. And the WHO report sheds no light whatsoever on it.
3 Likes
Yeah, I posted too quickly, most of the discussion was pretty silly but I did then go back and find the good links.
I think the relative probability hinges on what research they were carrying out and if a âmissing linkâ shows up somewhere. I agree that weâre not likely to know the former ever. In the absence of both, though, I do think the difference in interactions still carries some weight.
This is what I tried to say last night.
Itâs possible but not likely. Not likely is a subjective term. Apparently it means 49.9% to some. I personally put more like 1%.
And if it was simply an infection of a lab worker, that means the virus arose naturally. Through mutation and recombination.
This is a hypothetical argument on a likely unprovable point. What a freaking waste of brain and typing energy.
1 Like
The number of miles away that the lab was is a more relevant factor than most people realize. Ten vs thirty results in significantly different probabilities.
Whatâs the equation?
Yeah, I mean, both the wet market theory and the lab theory involve people going out and bringing the virus to Wuhan, but the lab theory involves fewer animals and storing them in a facility specifically designed to keep dangerous viruses from getting out. ofc people find the lab theory compelling for some doofy reason.
2 Likes
this is a good point, but on the other hand, china has also blocked the investigators who wrote the report that just came out from most of the WIV lab.
I donât want to come off like a conspiracy goober here, I donât think there is any reason to believe this was engineered and even less reason to think that it was intentionally released, and Iâm not convinced that âit was in a lab at some pointâ is a favorite, but it doesnât seem ridiculously unlikely.
Probably cause the virus first surfaced ten miles from a lab known to be studying said viruses.
Presumably they keep records of what stuff theyâre working on, so the lab theory now requires that they purged all those records and there are no whistleblowers.
1 Like
yeah and thatâs a dumb take, itâs essentially like when fukishima had that meltdown and we got the usual âthese 40-year-old outdated reactor designs have flaws therefore all nuclear power is badâ takes.
No comment, self parodying.
5 Likes
I donât think we need to know the exact calculation to be pretty confident that the distance is a factor
yeah, OK, this is what Iâm talking about. Does the WHO report include either of these? China definitely did contact tracing pretty early on, but did they start early enough and were those records available to the investigators?
Sheâs saying these guys are all running or funding or have associations with Fukishima labs.
Itâs settled! COVID was transmitted to an unknown person by an unknown animal in an unknown location under unknown circumstances. Case closed.
9 Likes