+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ headline (/showthread.php?tid=275145)
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - mrbigstuff - 02-28-2023
Tiangou wrote:
[quote=mrbigstuff]
I'm with Stewart. At least as far as we don't know what we don't know.
There are the crazies who said it couldn't have anything to do with China and a lab, even though it came from China, in close proximity to a lab with thesameunrelated inactive viruses. There are also the crazies on the other side who believed China was unleashing a bio-weapon, and it was all part of a huge conspiracy involving Fauci, Soros, Gates, etc. We will probably not know the answer for some time, as actual journalism has been stifled.
FTFY.
and yet
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00283-y
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - mrbigstuff - 02-28-2023
pdq wrote:
[quote=mrbigstuff]
I'm with Stewart. At least as far as we don't know what we don't know.
There are the crazies who said it couldn't have anything to do with China and a lab, even though it in close proximity to a lab with the same viruses.
“Close proximity” in this case means something like 7-10 miles. So the virus jumped that seven miles and caused an outbreak cluster at a market with live wild animals, without any clusters in between. And the viruses are the “same” in the sense that they are part of the same group of viruses, but appear to be genetically distinct from the viruses they worked on in the lab.
neaky:Not impossible, just not that likely, says the WHO and most virologists and epidemiologists who have studied it. SARS, another Coronavirus, almost certainly came from wild animals in China.
ah, so you think that the lab should have been located on a 2nd floor above the market for it to be in close proximity. like, the guy from the lab should have gone down to the market for lunch, touched a bunch of prep tables and then left.
the distinction between the viruses has not been made conclusively, that's why it is still being discussed.
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - Filliam H. Muffman - 02-28-2023
Such a shame that China destroyed all the data that would have proven where it came from....
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - kj - 02-28-2023
What if it did come from the lab? I've seen explanations of why it matters, and it's all pretty academic, but I think some think it would mean more than it actually would.
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - mrbigstuff - 02-28-2023
kj wrote:
What if it did come from the lab? I've seen explanations of why it matters, and it's all pretty academic, but I think some think it would mean more than it actually would.
I agree completely with that sentiment. My interest is the quick and vociferous denial that it could have possibly originated from a lab (or anywhere else) because that means you believe in conspiracy theories. Not true then and not true now. Journalists dropped this story because of the crazies on one side and fear of racially charged insinuations.
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - Tiangou - 02-28-2023
mrbigstuff wrote:
[quote=Tiangou]
[quote=mrbigstuff]
I'm with Stewart. At least as far as we don't know what we don't know.
There are the crazies who said it couldn't have anything to do with China and a lab, even though it came from China, in close proximity to a lab with thesameunrelated inactive viruses. There are also the crazies on the other side who believed China was unleashing a bio-weapon, and it was all part of a huge conspiracy involving Fauci, Soros, Gates, etc. We will probably not know the answer for some time, as actual journalism has been stifled.
FTFY.
and yet
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00283-y
I don't think that means what you think it means.
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - mrbigstuff - 02-28-2023
Tiangou wrote:
[quote=mrbigstuff]
[quote=Tiangou]
[quote=mrbigstuff]
I'm with Stewart. At least as far as we don't know what we don't know.
There are the crazies who said it couldn't have anything to do with China and a lab, even though it came from China, in close proximity to a lab with thesameunrelated inactive viruses. There are also the crazies on the other side who believed China was unleashing a bio-weapon, and it was all part of a huge conspiracy involving Fauci, Soros, Gates, etc. We will probably not know the answer for some time, as actual journalism has been stifled.
FTFY.
and yet
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00283-y
I don't think that means what you think it means.
what does it mean?
WHO abandons plans for crucial second phase of COVID-origins investigation
Sensitive studies in China were intended to pinpoint the source of the pandemic virus.
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - Tiangou - 02-28-2023
mrbigstuff wrote:
[quote=Tiangou]
[quote=mrbigstuff]
[quote=Tiangou]
[quote=mrbigstuff]
I'm with Stewart. At least as far as we don't know what we don't know.
There are the crazies who said it couldn't have anything to do with China and a lab, even though it came from China, in close proximity to a lab with thesameunrelated inactive viruses. There are also the crazies on the other side who believed China was unleashing a bio-weapon, and it was all part of a huge conspiracy involving Fauci, Soros, Gates, etc. We will probably not know the answer for some time, as actual journalism has been stifled.
FTFY.
and yet
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00283-y
I don't think that means what you think it means.
what does it mean?
WHO abandons plans for crucial second phase of COVID-origins investigation
Sensitive studies in China were intended to pinpoint the source of the pandemic virus.
The World Health Organization (WHO) has quietly shelved the second phase of its much-anticipated scientific investigation into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, citing ongoing challenges over attempts to conduct crucial studies in China, Nature has learned.
...In January 2021, an international team of experts convened by the WHO travelled to Wuhan, China, where the virus that causes COVID-19 was first detected. Together with Chinese researchers, the team reviewed evidence on when and how the virus might have emerged, as part of phase one. The team released a report in March that year outlining four possible scenarios, the most likely being that SARS-CoV-2 spread from bats to people, possibly through an intermediate species. Phase one was designed to lay the groundwork for a second phase of in-depth studies to pin down exactly what happened in China and elsewhere.
But two years since that high-profile trip, the WHO has abandoned its phase-two plans. “There is no phase two,” Maria Van Kerkhove, an epidemiologist at the WHO in Geneva, Switzerland, told Nature. The WHO planned for work to be done in phases, she said, but “that plan has changed.”
...Leaving us with the best intelligence pointing to zoonotic origins.
Period.
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - pdq - 03-01-2023
mrbigstuff wrote:
[quote=pdq]
[quote=mrbigstuff]
I'm with Stewart. At least as far as we don't know what we don't know.
There are the crazies who said it couldn't have anything to do with China and a lab, even though it in close proximity to a lab with the same viruses.
“Close proximity” in this case means something like 7-10 miles. So the virus jumped that seven miles and caused an outbreak cluster at a market with live wild animals, without any clusters in between. And the viruses are the “same” in the sense that they are part of the same group of viruses, but appear to be genetically distinct from the viruses they worked on in the lab.
neaky:Not impossible, just not that likely, says the WHO and most virologists and epidemiologists who have studied it. SARS, another Coronavirus, almost certainly came from wild animals in China.
ah, so you think that the lab should have been located on a 2nd floor above the market for it to be in close proximity. .
Well, that would be “close proximity”. But what we’re discussing is basic epidemiology - what, who, and where were the affected patients’ contacts? Are there commonalities?
In this case. basic epidemiology favors an origin at the wet market. That’s where the first bunch of Covid patients seemed to be exposed, and where the cases were clustered- not somewhere across town.
There’s a reason that the infectious disease experts generally favor this origin. They’re not certain, and few if any ever said they were; they just feel the evidence points that way.
Re: Four federal agencies consider lab-leak hypothesis for COVID origin, one ranks it "low confidence" spurring WSJ head - Filliam H. Muffman - 03-01-2023
Is it still true that the closest version of the virus found in the wild was ~1500 km away and the only site in Wuhan known to have animals from that location was the virus lab?