The Lab Leak Hypothesis

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-escape-theory.html

by api • 6 years ago

213 219 6 years ago

api5• 6 years ago

I'm not convinced either way, but posting because this is an articulate well written non-sensational discussion of the idea.

If it is true, it was almost certainly an accident. Nobody really benefited from this (even if China really has eradicated it, it's damaged their export-heavy economy badly), and if it was terrorists they would have claimed responsibility since that's the point of terrorism. Biological warfare is dumb anyway. It's like trying to use a grenade as a handgun. Yes it does damage the enemy, but...

coolspot• 6 years ago

However, the state-sponsored gain-of-function research towards particular properties is not an accident.

The Wuhan Institute of Virology has published papers on how they were able to modify a bat virus to achieve more dangerous properties [77][88].

[77] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4797993/

[88] https://www.nature.com/news/engineered-bat-virus-stirs-debat...

api5• 6 years ago

That always did strike me as reckless. It reminds me of 1950s and 1960s atomic testing: yes, there is value in the knowledge gained, but the method of gaining it was a bit YOLO.

sukilot2• 6 years ago

Nature.com says:

Editors’ note, March 2020: We are aware that this story is being used as the basis for unverified theories that the novel coronavirus causing COVID-19 was engineered. There is no evidence that this is true; scientists believe that an animal is the most likely source of the coronavirus.

which seems to be unscientific editorializing. There is some evidence, as presented in the OP for example, and there is "no evidence" for any other origin theory either. And the Chinese government in Wuhan showed from the start with Li Wenliang's experience, that any evidence that pointed to imperfect competence in Wuhan would be destroyed by the totalitarian government.

anon90013• 6 years ago

How close are we to DIY viruses?

If I was a teenager interested in biology, and I wanted to maybe build a "harmless" virus just to see if I could do it, how achievable might that be?

I watched computer viruses go from:

researchers -> tinkerers -> vandals -> criminals -> governments

At this point we just assume every computer is compromised, and we carve out enclaves of varying security for whatever risk level we're willing to assume.

I can imagine a future where pandemics happen at the same frequency as school shootings do today. How far away is that?

anonymousiam• 6 years ago

The interesting thing for me is the contrast in the behavior of the Chinese government between the previous viral leaks from China. I'm citing a few references from before 2020: https://www.the-scientist.com/news-analysis/sars-escaped-bei... https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2019/3/20/18260669/deadly...

The previous behavior was to acknowledge the leaks and try to contain them. The current behavior is to arrest people who document the government cover up. Why the change in behavior, unless the government absolutely knows what happened and is trying to control the information?

sukilot2• 6 years ago

Your China article is from 2004. China's regime's ability to control media and its residents is stronger now than then, and the people in charge are more insecure and defensive. That may be enough to explain the change in PR strategy.

Alternatively, past leaks simply weren't bad enough to embarrass the State and could be blamed on local officials. This one got so big so fast that a more defensive posture was required.

XorNot3• 6 years ago

China is now an authoritarian strongman dictatorship since 2004.

Melting_Harps• 6 years ago

Nobody really benefited from this (even if China really has eradicated it, it's damaged their export-heavy economy badly)

This narrative has to stop: the CCP just illegally annexed Hong Kong 27 years ahead of the hand over and violated it's autonomy in direct violation of the internationally recognized treaty, which may arguably require China to return HK to British control--but the UK is entirely destroyed due to COIVD and yet another lockdown and post Brexit economic downturn so they've been neutralized. The CCP set a very dangerous precedent, especially with regards to Taiwan in that region, along the lines of what Russia did when in annexed Crimea, which resulted in several years of armed conflict and even more untold human rights violations.

The CCP committed Crimes against Humanity to do so and passed the National Security Law which has removed rule of Law in what was once a beacon of Western values in an geographic and ethnically Eastern province, which had served as an experimental working model that proved the two systems and cultures could operate alongside one another which also served as the gateway for Western Investment into the Chinese Economy.

I've gone in depth in earlier posts, so look at it for a more elaborated view. But, this tired narrative breaks down under the most basic amount of scrutiny and needs to stop bein repeated: China as a collective may not have gained a lot, but the CCP has without a doubt consolidated a great deal of power and proven itself to be (for the time being until de-coupling takes place in earnest) an indispensable component due to its concentration to serve as the manufacturing hub of the World. And this is detrimental for many reasons I've outlined before.

As for no evidence, I honestly do not know what to make of Dr. Yan's work, especially because of who backed her, but her story is not only very compelling as a whole but it is also inline with the typical MO the CCP follows when they want to dissapear someone. And her involvement at the WHO as well as work in HK is what speaks volume, she elaborated quite a lot about the gain of function work that was being done in several labs where she and her other colleagues worked at, including Hong Kong, by the CCP with Corona based viruses--specifically those found in bats.

I'm completely out of my depth and only took basic virology courses in my undergrad so I cannot speak to the validity of her research papers, but what I can say, especially after SARS and H1N1 in my recent memory is that in retrospect is the CCP has always been an opportunistic bad actor during these pandemics, and its behaviour with the forced border opening, quarantine exemptions, mandatory contact tracing of locals with continued crossings from the mainland into Hong Kong exemplified to what lengths it will go to see that it's will be done, consequences be damned.

It wanted the protests to stop, the threat of secession from the CCP was real espcially with Billionaires like Jimmy Lai openly getting involved in the yellow movement (which is why he had to be made an example of) so the NSL had to be passed at all costs, and now we're seeing what that looks like as more and more Hongkongers fear for their lives as they are being imprisoned retroactively for something that was completely legal--protesting, even non-violent ones as in the case of Agnes Chow. As well as the removal of politicians and placing enforcement of financial censorship as it sees fit.

jsz0• 6 years ago

Nobody really benefited from this

Nobody benefits but who gets hurt the least? Totalitarian regimes are inherently more capable of dealing with the problem for obvious reasons.

CraigJPerry• 6 years ago

In 2019, I would have guessed wrong about how a hypothetical COVID-19 would play out.

I'd have pointed out that the US would unequivocally be one of the best nations at recovering from such a challenge:

    - Spent the prior 4 years warning the world that something like this could happen
    - Well prepared for this eventuality (stockpiles), have recently conducted dry run rehearsals for this exact eventuality, until recently had a funded unit of government for exactly this scenario
    - Has world leading healthcare
    - Has world leading pharma industry
    - Has money, scientists, doctors & other resources out the wazoo
    - Is a competent nation with a history of excellent execution in almost all theatres

Conversely i'd have argued totalitarian regimes would have performed the worst because of the politics of a regime like that - everything gets covered up. You'd have insufficient visibility to even begin to mount an effective response.

ineedasername2• 6 years ago

I don't see any evidence for the speculation it was lab created (or modified into it's current form) except for an acknowledgement that the capability to do so exists.

I don't doubt the possibility of such a thing occurring, but I just haven't seen any evidence to support this.

pimlottc• 6 years ago

I assume you mean to say “the speculation that it was...”?

ineedasername2• 6 years ago

Yep, corrected, thanks.

kbaker2• 6 years ago

For any skeptics out there, take an open-minded look at this article:

https://nerdhaspower.weebly.com/blog/scientific-evidence-and...

It goes quite deep into the genetic analysis of SARS-CoV-2 relative to existing bat coronaviruses, laying out the case that it is definitely of a non-natural origin.

I am not anywhere near knowledgeable enough to fully evaluate the claims, but I would really enjoy seeing a rebuttal that is as clearly written to make the case for a natural cause. To me the Nature article just says 'nah, evolution is random, therefore SARS-CoV-2 randomly happened.' but it would be nice to see more detail. Especially with the closest ancestor of RaTG13 being decades of evolution away. (not to mention the questions around the origin of RaTG13 on the author's site...)

kbaker2• 6 years ago

This is a good one as well with some more explanation.

https://yurideigin.medium.com/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-throug...

8note3• 6 years ago

My prior for this is that it's unlikely that we know all the bat viruses that exist.

If you find another virus that's closer, it no longer matters that the old ones were far away

fasteddie31003• 6 years ago

I think the closest natural virus was 95% similar. 5% seems pretty far for mutations. Is there a historical track record for finding the natural virus to a 99.9% similarity?

cma2• 6 years ago

We see around one base pair mutation per host transmission, so that would likely already put us outside 99.9% similarity even among humans with coronavirus wouldn't it?

Rough estimate:

(29,000 base pairs, just assuming 3.5 days between generations, 395 days since first affected person (probably it was a bit more), would be 112 mutations = 99.6% similarity)

And I think we'd expect more changes to be selected for in the early period of host adaptation.

andi999• 6 years ago

Your first sentence is missing the number, did you mean 'one bas pair'?

mabbo5• 6 years ago

Two answers.

First, it was 96% identical. But that was in 2013. Presume it's being passed bat to bat every few days for 6 years, then at some point made the jump to another species, most likely in a wet market. It's really not unreasonable to imagine a 4% drift in that time.

Second, we don't identify every virus or every strain of every virus. Just because we found one that was 96% similar doesn't mean that all the other bats carry an identical virus. It's quite likely we found a distant cousin of the umpteenth-grand-parent of covid-19, and sequenced it.

esja7• 6 years ago

Can you explain how that evolutionary path led to the virus becoming better adapted to humans than it is to bats, and can you explain how all the samples we have ever found, from the very beginning of this outbreak, are uniquely adapted to humans?

https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.06199

sradman4• 6 years ago

Is there a historical track record for finding the natural virus

SARS-1 [1]:

The viral outbreak was subsequently genetically traced to a colony of cave-dwelling horseshoe bats in Yunnan, China.

The Guardian reference [2] states:

Hence the efforts of Chinese scientists – led by Shi Zheng-Li and Cui Jie of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, China – to trace the source of the outbreak. Scientists initially suspected that civet cats, sold in markets in China, were the source of the virus but later turned their attention to bats, which they realised were the prime source of the virus. Civets were merely an intermediary.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severe_acute_respiratory_syn...

[2] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/dec/10/sars-virus-bat...

CoffeeDregs• 6 years ago

This is a good, balanced article. I've been of a similar mind for over a year now.

The chances of the CCP releasing a self-harming bioweapon in order to harm the US seems silly. But an accident involving a well-intentioned gain-of-function experiment seems quite possible and was something that the US was concerned about with its own gain-of-function research.

In any case, this, like so much of this other nonsense around Covid [lockdowns in Contra Costa County when the major hospitals were empty-ish; no gradual escalation of lockdown given mid-January knowledge of Covid], seems pretty amenable to a calm, clear analysis...

    Hypothesis                    | Evidence                               | Likelihood
    ------------------------------+----------------------------------------+-----------------
    CCP Virus                     | [That'd be 360 degree dumb of the CCP] | *low*
    Gain of function lab accident | [Existing concerns and experience]     | *moderate*
    Zoonotic transfer             | [No likely vector for extant virus]    | *moderate-low*

Doesn't seem too difficult...

MilnerRoute12• 6 years ago

The "likely vector" would be the millions of peasants living near bat caves in rural China (who actually have already been shown to have antibodies to bat viruses). And some of whom traveled to the market.

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/23/8417296...

So I would upgrade that quite a bit from "moderate-low." (One of the researchers in this NPR article seems to rate it as an obvious suspect, so I'd call that "high likelihood.")

travisoneill13• 6 years ago

Those millions of peasants living near bat caves would have traveled to thousands of markets all over China, but the virus originated at the one market in China that is basically across the street from a virus lab? It's not impossible, but my money is on the lab.

Amezarak2• 6 years ago

According to the article, the bat caves are nearly a thousand miles away. It seems unlikely peasants were traveling a thousand miles for the purpose of visting the market.

It also presents some reasons why bat viruses on their own were unlikely to become as contagious as COVID, citing the example of RaTG13's discovery.

So the "zoonotic transfer from bats" theory requires an extraordinary new strain (possible!) to travel a thousand miles before spreading enough to be detected.

Cactus2018• 6 years ago

The chances of the CCP releasing a self-harming bioweapon in order to harm the US seems silly.

But to harm someone else?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/04/health/coronavirus-neande...

]] Dr. Paabo said the DNA segment may account in part for why people of Bangladeshi descent are dying at a high rate of Covid-19 in the United Kingdom.

https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2020-09/oios-tan0930...

]] IMAGE: THESE GENETIC VARIANTS ARE ALMOST COMPLETELY ABSENT IN AFRICA AND OCCUR IN THE HIGHEST FREQUENCY IN BANGLADESH.

https://media.eurekalert.org/multimedia_prod/pub/web/244496_...

rossdavidh• 6 years ago

But, uh, Bangladesh itself has a lower rate, by far, than the U.K. While I greatly admire Dr. Paabo's work, this part seems pretty speculative.

peteradio2• 6 years ago

Not disagreeing with your Likelihoods but I'm not sure your evidence really makes sense. It does not really follow that a self-harm would always be avoided, the game of chess is all about sacrifice. Perhaps China thinks the West is short-sighted and would be politically bound to act against its long term interest, so why not? Maybe there are other reasons why you think the "CCP Virus" hypothesis is 360 stupid besides "self-harm"?

ivanhoe• 6 years ago

Wouldn't it be way easier and more logical to start the infection on a foreign soil? All the previous similar epidemics were successfully contained before reaching Europe, and if there was not for quite serious fuck ups in the beginning (Italian dude not even showing up on the meetings, etc.) perhaps even this one could have been stopped early on. So if it was China wanting to hurt US, then they'd have to be seriously stupid to first infect themselves and hope it will somehow reach US over Europe. It'd be like a terrorist who sends a bomb to their own address in hope that it will somehow eventually reach their enemies. It makes zero sense.

mmcgaha• 6 years ago

This is not my literal belief; it is only a logical extension of the discussion so . . .

If covid mostly kills old or otherwise compromised individuals then a socialist country could see it in their interest to release a virus that eliminates the least productive part of the population. It would not be as much self harm as an exercise to increase the strength of the whole.

manicdee2• 6 years ago

The third most common death from firearms in the USA is accidental discharge. This is where people have firearms, are trained in using them, but some circumstance led to the firearm being discharged without intent and injuring or killing someone.

There’s every reason to believe that a country attempting to develop bio weapons may accidentally release that bio weapon against its own people for the same reason: mistakes were made.

It may also be the case that the bio weapon was successfully deployed in the USA months before some unsuspecting American went on their tour of China thinking they will get over that mild flu in the clean air of Wuhan.

The USA health care system is basically designed to ensure that a pandemic will spread as quickly as possible, since the expense of medical care means people will actively avoid seeing a doctor unless they are literally dying.

So engineer a virus that affects wet membranes, limit its symptoms to “mild flu” and you will get maximal transmission even without propaganda suggesting that no action needs to be taken to control the disease because it’s not really that bad.

So in this hypothetical scenario it is not “360 dumb of the CCP” at all. They know how dangerous it is and how to contain it when it inevitably arrives on their shores. They have a vaccine but they won’t use it until a believable amount of time has passed. The future of warfare isn’t drones circling in the skies with guns pointed at the people on the ground.

gavrif2• 6 years ago

The third most common death from firearms in the USA is accidental discharge.

What is the fourth most common death from firearms in the USA?

wbl• 6 years ago

COVID is a terrible bioweapon. It's fragile, with an outer lipid membrane that has to be preserved. It's not very lethal to people of military age, and spreads readily between people making collateral damage inevitable.

nradov3• 6 years ago

Many of the "accidental discharge" deaths are actually intentional suicides or homicides but the investigators just couldn't prove what happened. And unfortunately it's common for people with no real training to possess firearms.

wesleywt• 6 years ago

Many people over estimate our capabilities regarding manipulation of biological systems. A gain function is extremely difficult to get right. It is more likely that zoonotic transfer occurred. Either within a wet market or people operating in that industry or a lab worker accidentally exposing him/herself.

Sequence analysis show a unique mutation that increased receptor binding affinity that was not predicted by previous models. It just shows, nature knows best.

I find this debate extremely stupid. We always known that as natural habitats are being encroached upon, the more likely diseases like this will emerge. By focusing on our human conspiracies, I am afraid we will ignore Nature's conspiracy to get us.

esja7• 6 years ago

Then can you explain how this virus became (instantly) better adapted to humans than it is to bats?

https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.06199

kunfuu3• 6 years ago

Yet another hypothesis being pushed by the CCP party-state is the seafood imports hypothesis. Although the motivation behind CCP's push is questionable, this hypothesis shall be treated seriously, given that in the early investigation before the ban, signs of the virus were detected at stores selling seafood instead of stores selling illegal games.

neonate2• 6 years ago

https://archive.is/j4l6T

et2o2• 6 years ago

This article is a masterpiece of disinformation.

127• 6 years ago

Which always makes me incredulous why nobody ever breaks these down piece by piece if it's so obvious. Education is much more effective than proof by repeated assertions.

et2o2• 6 years ago

Because it’s an extremely long article and it’s a lot of work for me to do for no reward.

emmelaich2• 6 years ago

You should elaborate on that.

MilnerRoute12• 6 years ago

Peter Daszak, the president of the EcoHealth Alliance researching the origins of pandemics, pointed out in April that nearly 3% of the population in China's rural farming regions near wild animals already had antibodies to coronaviruses similar to SARS. "We're finding 1 to 7 million people exposed to these viruses every year in Southeast Asia; that's the pathway. It's just so obvious to all of us working in the field..."

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsandsoda/2020/04/23/8417296...

chroem-• 6 years ago

Weren't there antibody studies of people in the US around that same time frame that claimed 30%+ (somewhere in that range if I recall) of the American public already had covid-19? There was some sort of issue with cross-reactivity that later came out. Did the above link take that into account?

esja7• 6 years ago

Daszak and EcoHealth have been working with Shi Zhengli for over 15 years[0]. He is not a neutral observer on this particular issue. And this year he has made a number of statements (like the one you quote) which do nothing to refute the lab leak hypothesis, and which only serve to direct attention elsewhere.

[0] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02473-4

koheripbal3• 6 years ago

Being similar to SARS is not meaningful evidence to draw a conclusion about COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2 virus). His data is from 2015 and cannot possibly indicate that anyone had been afflicted with COVID-19 at that time.

What he is saying is that animal-to-human coronavirus transmission is common - which most people agree upon. ...and possibly implying that there may be cross-immunity protection - also as many suspect.

...but for COVID-19 specifically, there is no evidence that it circulated in rural China prior to entering Wuhan.

...and sadly China is blocking the collection of samples for exactly that sort of serology/antibody analysis.

MilnerRoute12• 6 years ago

I'd like to ask everyone commenting on this article: who wrote it?

Seriously -- what do you know about the author of these words? (There's no "author's bio" anywhere on the page, or even if you click on his name.) So what do any of us know about him?

If you look him up on Wikipedia, it lists his occupation as novelist and fiction writer, as well as an "essayist." ("His fiction generally de-emphasizes narrative in favor of careful description and characterization....")

"Out of a total of ten fiction books, he also wrote three erotic novels."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicholson_Baker

His nonfiction works include a book about his more-famous fiction-writer friend John Updike, and a book about public libraries.

MilnerRoute12• 6 years ago

My favorite part of the article is where he says "there is no direct evidence for an experimental mishap..."

Followed a few words later by the word "Nevertheless..."

arduanika3• 6 years ago

A stark contrast with all the direct evidence for zoonotic origins?

andromeduck7• 6 years ago

So we're just going to ignore circumstantial evidence? If someone died in on my property and then I under threat of violence prevented police from collecting evidence and simultaneously is that not grounds for further suspicion or scruitney?

China has from the beginning barred neutral third parties from visiting the site and collecting samples - even of the disease itself and continues to do so while peddling conspiracies on state media that make Trump sound positively sane.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-guarding-ancient-bat-caves-...

anon90013• 6 years ago

Thanks for pointing this out. I'm not going to read the article.

This long-form stuff is particularly sticky. If the story is told well, you're likely going to remember it as true (or at least credible) even the story wasn't credible in the first place.

dehrmann2• 6 years ago

I recently read the Atlantic piece about semi-rich kids getting world-class coaches of prep school sports (crew, lacrosse, etc.) so they might be able to get on the team at elite colleges. Oops. At least it sounded like the general gist of the story was accurate.

baryphonic2• 6 years ago

The truth of a story does not depend on the credibility of its narrator. To assert otherwise is the definition of ad hominem.

Claims asserted may nonetheless be untrue or may not be as strong as claimed. But that requires careful, critical examination.

I'm perplexed by this reaction, as if reading something with a critical eye is impossible. Or, worse, that reading something by someone without a particular status or pedigree might become as infectious as SARS-2 itself and turn us into zombies or something.

dehrmann2• 6 years ago

"Out of a total of ten fiction books, he also wrote three erotic novels."

I recently listened to the 99% Invisible mini stories episode, and one was on novel adaptations of films. One of the points about the authors who write them is they often take the work to pay the bills.

setgree• 6 years ago

I read Baker's 'House of Holes' in 2014 and enjoyed it a lot. At least among a certain set, he's a well-known & respected author (here's a NYT review of House of Holes [0]). It's perfectly intelligible for a book about sex to be whimsical, raunchy, and intellectually serious all at once. He's also written a pacifist take on the Allies' involvement in WW II [1].

I agree that neglecting to include a bio was a strange choice. But, as Jim Geraghty at National Review points out today [2], The venue (New York Magazine) is what puts this hypothesis into the mainstream. Conservatives have been suggesting this was a possibility for a long time, but a NYM piece (potentially) legitimizes the idea to a very different audience:

Baker is pretty blunt about the fact that many scientists have had these suspicions, or at least concerns, since the beginning of the pandemic, but didn’t want to speak publicly about the possibility of a lab accident while the Trump administration was touting the same idea... New York magazine reaches a different audience from National Review, and it is good that a more left-of-center audience will be exposed to all of the evidence and arguments about this possibility. The possibility of a lab accident should not be seen as another crackpot conspiracy theory in a year full of them.

[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/books/house-of-holes-nich...

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/books/review/Toibin-t.htm...

[2] https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/01/the-wuhan-lab-leak-hy...

onionisafruit• 6 years ago

You point out the author lacks credentials. That’s a fair point. What isn’t relevant is whether he’s written novels...erotic or otherwise. No need to being that up.

MilnerRoute12• 6 years ago

He's a fiction writer.

I think that's relevant.

arduanika3• 6 years ago

If the proximity to China's only BSL-4 lab wasn't a tip-off, and the Chinese gov't coverup wasn't a tip-off, then maybe at the very least this kind of desperate ad hominem you're peddling will tip people off?

If the zoonotic hypothesis were true, I'd expect to see (1) a transparent international investigation of the Wuhan lab, and (2) a fundamental recognition that journalists are allowed to ask questions, no matter their credentials prior to undertaking an inquiry. Given that we've apparently had neither, the zoonotic explanation is severely weakened.

noetic_techy5• 6 years ago

Your comment is merely an ad hominem against the author, not the content.

ben0x539• 6 years ago

Estimating the credibility of the author is a great heuristic for deciding what writing should get my limited attention.

mardifoufs• 6 years ago

I mean that's what investigative journalism is. Do you only read political pieces written by political scientists? Or articles on accidents & disasters from experts in those fields? The author cited experts & scientists, asked them questions and well... investigated?

I just don't see how that's problematic, and while I don't usually think that appeals to authority are fallacious, suggesting that only scientists should be listened to regardless of the arguments presented by the author is a perfect example of a fallacious appeal to authoritity imo. Especially when the author presents quite a few scientific sources to support his claims.

You can obviously argue that those sources are not valid, which is obviously possible and even likely, but we should focus on attacking the argument not the person presenting it, seemingly in good faith.

manicdee2• 6 years ago

I don’t know who you are so I will just ignore the evidence you presented me.

mabbo5• 6 years ago

There is no direct evidence for these zoonotic possibilities, just as there is no direct evidence for an experimental mishap

But there is so much more opportunity for the zoonotic possibilities. In fact, this is the seventh time we've seen Betacoronavirus cross from bats, through another animal, and then into humans. SARS came via palm civets. MERS came via camels. Four more types cause a mild cold only and so they don't get sexy names or a deep investigation as to how humans became hosts.

So why would Covid-19 even need to come from a lab? We (humans) had wet markets filled with animals, including the very bats that carry the base virus. It's the perfect breeding ground to create a pandemic-level virus and probably a few thousand more viruses of lesser impact.

A lab accident — a dropped flask, a needle prick, a mouse bite, an illegibly labeled bottle — is apolitical.

Oh, I disagree. If the root cause is Big Government meddling where they ought not to, that tells us one story. If the root cause is unregulated wet markets with viruses crossing species freely, that tells a very different story.

Smaller government solves one problem, and more regulations solves the other. There are a lot of people who want each story to be the truth.

InTheArena7• 6 years ago

Except this is not just a USA story. The reality is that China is shutting down any research into the origins of the virus - at least by doctors not loyal to the government. They are arresting journalists who don’t tell the story they want to tell.

In the vacuum of information, it’s fair to point out that the market not being the source means something else was - and - there was a lab that had the closest variant to the virus within the same city.

If smallpox broke out in Atlanta, so you think anyone on earth wouldn’t immediately come to the conclusion that the CDC had a accident with their BSl? And there are 14 in the USA. Just one in China - and it’s Wuhan.

Let’s not act like this is a story about American regulation or deregulation.

InTheArena7• 6 years ago

Never mind that the author is dealing with a country that is committing genocide right now simply because some Muslims believe in Allah and not the state.

mabbo5• 6 years ago

Hey, if you want to say the Chinese government are corrupt, genocidal assholes, I'm with you.

What they want to cover up is any hint of fault. They want everyone to stay in line and question nothing, regardless of anything else.

I just don't think there's any real evidence of this being a man made pandemic either.

mantap• 6 years ago

Perhaps paradoxically the fact that other betacoronaviruses have made the jump to humans naturally, would increase the probability that this was a lab accident: scientists want to study the most likely candidates for a pandemic.

incrudible2• 6 years ago

So why would Covid-19 even need to come from a lab? We (humans) had wet markets filled with animals, including the very bats that carry the base virus. It's the perfect breeding ground to create a pandemic-level virus and probably a few thousand more viruses of lesser impact.

The question of how it got to Wuhan all the way from Southern China remains unanswered. There weren't any bats sold on the wet markets, nor has any other host animal been identified.

The virologists working in Wuhan did travel all the way to Southern China to collect bat coronavirus samples and they did perform gain-of-function experiments. Viruses - even highly pathogenic ones - have escaped labs on numerous occasions. There is a plausible scenario here.

There is another plausible scenario, which is that "ground zero" for Sars-CoV-2 is actually Southern China, just like Sars-CoV-1. However, the virus wasn't discovered there first, because it didn't cause enough illness. The outbreak in Wuhan, the 9th largest city in China, would've been discovered by chance.

emmelaich2• 6 years ago

Good points, and I tend to think the 'escaped from a lab' case is at least as strong as the zoonotic one.

A small counterpoint though -- the market is the Huanan market, i.e. specialising in south china sourced or styled food. I would not be surprised if some exotic animals were there but never admitted to.

RobertoG2• 6 years ago

>"The virologists working in Wuhan did travel all the way to Southern China to collect bat coronavirus samples and they did perform gain-of-function experiments. Viruses - even highly pathogenic ones - have escaped labs on numerous occasions. There is a plausible scenario here."

Another plausible scenario, in my opinion, is that the virus was brought to Wuhan by the virologists (in the virologist or their helpers) but never escaped from the lab itself.

If you have a bunch of people periodically going to interact with the bats, how improbable is that they get infected of something (unknowingly) on site?

mabbo5• 6 years ago

The question of how it got to Wuhan all the way from Southern China remains unanswered.

It's also important to remember that the related virus we're talking about in southern China was identified in 2013. More than six years before the outbreak.

It didn't stay still. It hopped around, bat to bat, maybe to other animals. We don't have the history of the virus since then. It could have very well made the jump the humans or some other animal, years ago but only recently made the last few mutations to become the beast it is now.

Plus, it's a virus. It didn't take one path, it took all of them that it could. Each virus created a million more, repeat ad-infinitum.

So the idea that there's some mystery to how it traveled to Wuhan doesn't bother me. Viruses get around.

lamontcg• 6 years ago

The question of how it got to Wuhan all the way from Southern China remains unanswered.

There are coronavirus-carrying bats in Hubei province.

travisoneill13• 6 years ago

There are thousands of wet markets in China, but very few virus labs. Out of all the wet markets in China, the virus just happened to originate at the one right next to the virus lab? That alone is enough evidence to make the lab escape theory the most likely origin. Though it's far from certain.

incrudible2• 6 years ago

The virus likely didn't originate at the wildlife market, because many of the early patients had no connection to it.

There is a building of the Wuhan CDC (not the WIV) near the wildlife market, but the Wuhan CDC has numerous buildings and this particular one doesn't seem to be implicated in coronavirus research.

MilnerRoute12• 6 years ago

Snopes.com points out that the market wasn't "right next to the virus lab."

It was in fact a full seven miles away.

https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/04/01/covid-19-bioweapon/

RyEgswuCsn3• 6 years ago

There are thousands of wet markets in China, but very few provincial capital cities (Wuhan is one). Out of all the wet markets in China, the virus just happened to originate at the one next to the provincial administrative office? That alone is enough evidence to make the provincial administrative office the most likely origin of the virus, right?

noetic_techy5• 6 years ago

Yes but the jumps typically flame out. This virus has an extremely well adapted human furin site well outside of typical Bat Corona virus. This is more in line with gain of function research.

99_002• 6 years ago

We (humans) had wet markets filled with animals, including the very bats that carry the base virus.

That's not in evidence.

Bats were initially suggested to be the source of the virus, although it remains unclear if bats were sold there (Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market).
Despite the role that the market played in the pandemic, it is yet unclear whether the novel coronavirus outbreak started in the market.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huanan_Seafood_Wholesale_Marke...

0-_-0• 6 years ago

In fact, this is the seventh time we've seen Betacoronavirus cross from bats.

This is also not the first time a lab leak caused an outbreak, the 2004 SARS outbreak was caused by a lab leak [1]

[1] https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/gb-...

himinlomax2• 6 years ago

The main point here is that the lab escape hypothesis has been hitherto dismissed out of hand when it ought not to be.

I agree that the natural zoonotic contamination hypothesis is more plausible to begin with, but since it has not been confirmed (as in: no natural reservoir has been identified), the less plausible but nonetheless not implausible lab escape hypothesis should still be on the table.

kasey_junk• 6 years ago

The President of the United States is on record as saying it came from a lab.

I’m not sure how that translates to “dismissed out of hand”.

collyw6• 6 years ago

You have no questions about the validity of data coming out of China?

The fact that there is China's first biosaftey level 4 lab in the same town where the virus originated doesn't arouse any suspicion whatsoever?

cheph• 6 years ago

We (humans) had wet markets filled with animals, including the very bats that carry the base virus.

No wet markets here where I am ... so maybe speak for yourself.

36463736e6• 6 years ago

So your country doesn't have stores or markets that carry live fish or display meat on a counter?

thinkingemote• 6 years ago

Look up the definition of what a wet market is. for example, most markets in the UK can be classed as wet, as well as many large supermarkets with a meat or fish counter

esja7• 6 years ago

Can you explain how this virus became (instantly) better adapted to humans than it is to bats?

https://arxiv.org/abs/2005.06199

EliRivers• 6 years ago

Looks like it didn't become better adapted. Already was. In lots of species, it's less well adapted. This is a non-story.

nradov3• 6 years ago

There is circumstantial evidence to indicate that the OC43 beta coronavirus crossed from animals in 1889 and killed about a million people worldwide. It can still be fatal to elderly or immunocompromised patients. The only reason it doesn't kill many people today is that most of us are infected as children and build up a level of immunity, so subsequent reinfections tend to have mild symptoms. Just like SARS-CoV-2.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7252012/

tim3332• 6 years ago

Maybe that's how SARS-CoV-2 will end up - people will get it as kids and become immunized.

throwaway1892623• 6 years ago

SARS has leaked from Chinese labs multiple times. And the only lab in the world specializing in coronaviruses was ~1000 ft away from the first cases. The leaked US diplomatic cables urge the US to help China with this very lab because biosecurity there was so concerning to visiting scientists. It's also the only BSL4 lab in China. In addition the head of that lab has published numerous papers about generic engineering of coronaviruses. That lab also discovered the closest ancestor of COVID.

COVID is also interestingly contagious among minks and ferrets, common lab animals used for serial passage. It's also undergone remarkably little generic drift since the pandemic began. Since the moment it was released it was already human adapted. Extremely suspicious for a brand new virus.

For SARS, MERS, etc we were able to find a 99.9% identical virus in nature. The closest one we have to COVID is 96%, quite distant genetically.

The last time we couldn't find the virus in nature was the 1976 flu pandemic. 20 years later scientists began admitting that it was triggered by a lab leak. When genetic engineering became advanced enough it was obvious that the strain was identical to a pandemic flu strain from the 50's.

In reality, the scientist new from the beginning that the 1976 pandemic was a lab leak but the information was thoroughly suppressed so that the soviet union would cooperate with monitoring. This is exactly what happened with China early in the pandemic. Nobody wanted to criticize people being welded into their homes because China was providing data on the virus. I am completely convinced that this is why the lab leak hypothesis for COVID is being "debunked"

To me there is overwhelming evidence that COVID is a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. IMO the only reason everybody is denying it is the severe political repercussions for China essentially killing more people than WWII. US researchers are co-authors on many of the institutes papers on coronavirus genetic manipulation. The US was funding some of their research, presumably because gain of function research is banned in the states.

nradov3• 6 years ago

Are you referring to the 1976 or 1977 influenza? There is evidence of a lab leak or other human origin for the 1977 strain but the original source was never definitively identified.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4542197/

https://mbio.asm.org/content/6/4/e01013-15.full

eganist• 6 years ago

SARS has leaked from Chinese labs multiple times. And the only lab in the world specializing in coronaviruses was ~1000 ft away from the first cases. The leaked US diplomatic cables urge the US to help China with this very lab because biosecurity there was so concerning to visiting scientists. It's also the only BSL4 lab in China. In addition the head of that lab has published numerous papers about generic engineering of coronaviruses. That lab also discovered the closest ancestor of COVID.

Can you kindly cite literally every sentence of this? I googled, but my Google-fu is weak.

scott-smith_us• 6 years ago

There isn't any direct evidence that it was leaked from a lab, but there isn't any evidence that it wasn't...

Sheesh. We're in Glenn Beck territory now.

esja7• 6 years ago

There is a large amount of circumstantial evidence that the virus was leaked from the same lab which had been involved in gain of function research on exactly these viruses (specifically to make them more infectious to humans). Direct evidence cannot be obtained, because the CCP has not allowed any access to the labs or records.

No evidence has been presented for any alternative theory, and the stories the CCP have put out have been discredited very quickly.

InTheArena7• 6 years ago

I might have missed this in the article - but I believe a separate recent article pointed out that none of the animals tested from the market had any signs of this virus - this China was looking at other sites.

Just not the wuhan lab which is a few hundred yards from the market?

There were also articles about a year before covid about how people were dealing out about the lax security of the Wuhan lab.

https://thebulletin.org/2014/03/threatened-pandemics-and-lab...

https://www.nature.com/news/inside-the-chinese-lab-poised-to...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions...

MilnerRoute12• 6 years ago

It's probably more helpful if you can share the URLs of the articles you're citing.

Snopes.com delved into the one about lax security, and it turned out to just be something somebody shared on a social media web site. (It had the name "ResearchGate", which many wrongly assumed meant it was an actual research paper when it was just a social media post.)

https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/04/01/covid-19-bioweapon/

InTheArena7• 6 years ago

https://www.nature.com/news/inside-the-chinese-lab-poised-to...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions...

InTheArena7• 6 years ago

“ What the U.S. officials learned during their visits concerned them so much that they dispatched two diplomatic cables categorized as Sensitive But Unclassified back to Washington. The cables warned about safety and management weaknesses at the WIV lab and proposed more attention and help. The first cable, which I obtained, also warns that the lab’s work on bat coronaviruses and their potential human transmission represented a risk of a new SARS-like pandemic”

InTheArena7• 6 years ago

In April 2004, China reported a case of SARS in a nurse who had cared for a researcher at the Chinese National Institute of Virology (NIV). While ill, the researcher had traveled twice by train from Beijing to Anhui province, where she was nursed by her mother, a physician, who fell ill and died. The nurse in turn infected five third-generation cases, causing no deaths.

Subsequent investigation uncovered three unrelated laboratory infections in different researchers at the NIV. At least of two primary patients had never worked with live SARS virus. Many shortcomings in biosecurity were found at the NIV, and the specific cause of the outbreak was traced to an inadequately inactivated preparation of SARS virus that was used in general (that is, not biosecure) laboratory areas, including one where the primary cases worked. It had not been tested to confirm its safety after inactivation, as it should have been.

dasudasu• 6 years ago

This is from a country that lets its state officials run wild with claims that it was imported from the US army into Wuhan, while keeping a tight enough leash to disappear any citizen when they cross arbitrary lines, and whose official line is now that it came to Wuhan through imported frozen seafood. We'll never know the origins, realistically.

InTheArena7• 6 years ago

https://thebulletin.org/2014/03/threatened-pandemics-and-lab...

Coronavirus a have escaped labs on at least ten occasions. At least four times from China.

Why is this article controversial and this comment being downvoted - Other then China doesn’t like it? Isn’t it reasonable to think they might have been a eleventh?

mensetmanusman• 6 years ago

Also an MIT alum, and in July I was considering the bayesian priors of the situation:

Roll a dice representing all the possible bat-human interaction sites in the world.

How often do you get a result so incredibly close to one of the few sites in the world that intentionally collects these things?

I have worked in clean room environments for years. Everyone eventually has an off day (lack of sleep, usually) where you experience a near miss... (glad I don’t work in bio).

arduanika3• 6 years ago

Apparently you're being downvoted for pointing out that scientists are human. I am so sorry this is happening to you.

odyssey7• 6 years ago

This is the geographic dimension, but there is also the time one. The time dimension can seem to link the outbreak to the start of gain-of-function research in labs around the world.

Roll a dice representing all the possible years of bat-human interaction.

How often do you get a result so incredibly close to the start of related gain-of-function research?

flukus• 6 years ago

How often do you get a result so incredibly close to one of the few sites in the world that intentionally collects these things?

Very often for organizations like that who have labs and offices over much of the country. Take a look at the CDC locations for instance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centers_for_Disease_Control_an...) , if an outbreak were to start anywhere in the US there would be a "suspicious" CDC office nearby.

Even higher when you consider these things tend to be near major cities and that's where a new virus is most likely to be discovered and grow exponentially. It could have been spreading among rural areas for months with no one noticing, until one contagious person travels to a large city.

andromeduck7• 6 years ago

Except China has only 2 BSL4 labs and though both are in big cities by Western standards, neither are near the costal population centers in which the majority of China actually resides.

bsder• 6 years ago

Well, is there anywhere else in China other than Wuhan that could/would identify a new virus like this before it goes mega-exponential?

AIDS, for example, only got flagged because a normally extremely healthy group started appearing with diseases associated with the very old and failing immune systems. And, even then, it took quite a while to figure out that it was a virus.

In the middle of flu season, COVID probably wouldn't flag until your hospitals suddenly fill up for no reason. And even then most people would just write it off as a nasty flu. Otherwise, COVID is just a fairly invisible bump in your mortality rates for people with comorbidities and age. Do you really think China is gonna look too hard into a few extra old and/or sick people dying for some reason?

Given that a full hospital is likely to be the first point where someone will start looking for cause, that really has no relation to origin point.

And, I would argue, China is worse than that. A local party leader in China will absolutely not bump something like COVID up the chain until absolutely forced to. It is quite possible that there were other flare ups that were covered up and the Wuhan one was simply large enough to be uncontainable, close enough to a virology lab to get flagged, and occurred right before Chinese New Year which forced a government response.

ginko• 6 years ago

Well, is there anywhere else in China other than Wuhan that could/would identify a new virus like this before it goes mega-exponential?

As far as I know, the WIV wasn't involved in identifying the virus. That happened in Beijing after weeks of doctors sounding alarm bells about a new disease in Wuhan.

tremon2• 6 years ago

Otherwise, COVID is just a fairly invisible bump in your mortality rates for people with comorbidities and age.

What does the age distribution look like for the Wuhan region? I think I read somewhere that the percentage of old (70+) people is a lot smaller than in e.g. Europe, which might be another data point why this wasn't flagged earlier.

reissbaker3• 6 years ago

I do not have a strong opinion on lab origin vs zoonotic, but I think the idea that the virus didn't originate in Wuhan, or at least very near to Wuhan, is unlikely. China successfully contained COVID — enough to prevent their own population from getting much of it, at least — by implementing draconian lockdown measures for the Hubei province (of which Wuhan is the capital). I know people who had family trapped in Hubei: the highways were shut down and blockaded by government forces. Guards patrolled people entering and leaving their houses and apartments. In some cases, apartment buildings had their doors welded shut to prevent residents from leaving at all.

That didn't happen in Beijing, or Shanghai, or Guangzhou or anywhere else in China, because it didn't need to. The outbreak started somewhere in Hubei. The most likely place of anywhere in Hubei for it to have started is Wuhan, just statistically; it's the largest city, with the most people living in it (not to mention it had the first recorded outbreak). But if it wasn't Wuhan, it was somewhere nearby.

noetic_techy5• 6 years ago

I would implore those who are skeptical of a lab leak hypothesis to listen to the evolutionary biologist Bret Weinsteins Darkhorse Podcast with Yuri Deigin on the subject:

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/bret-weinstein-and-yur...

Related article by Deigin:

https://yurideigin.medium.com/lab-made-cov2-genealogy-throug...

The podcast is a much easier listen then the deep dive that is in the article. All in all, the facts do not rule out lab leak, and there are definitely mysteries to explain.

cygx• 6 years ago

Note that Bret is also a bit of a contrarian with a habit of 'just asking questions' (It is not clear their was substantial fraud in the 2020 U.S. election, but it is clear there is valid reason for concern. Why is there not broad, bipartisan interest in finding out?)

Doesn't mean he's necessarily wrong, and many of his takes are pretty reasonable, but personally, I nevertheless do take his opinions with an additional grain of salt...

sradman4• 6 years ago

Deigin conflates RNA samples with viral isolates that can be used to infect lab animals. Weinstein seems to be stuck on bat respiratory disease that spreads in roosting caves. He does not consider gastrointestinal infections spread by bat guano at night in their feeding range which is shared by nocturnal/arboreal pangolins and palm civets. Bat to human direct infection is also just as plausible near the horseshoe bat’s natural habitat.

The Barker article is confused about a 7-hour train ride not being compatible with a 4.5 day average incubation period.

I see no mysteries to explain just the hard work of animal surveillance required to connect the dots.

noetic_techy5• 6 years ago

And the well adapted to humans furin site is just plain luck? Its not like this has not happen before, SARS like virus's have crossed species within modern history that we have detected, and they all flame out eventually. I'm no virologist, but I believe its typically because of selection pressure and the mutations needed to start to adapt to humans don't come easily once a jump occurs, it usually takes a few jumps to get it right. This one came out already well adapted to humans and has a furin site not seen in other bat corona viruses, plus 4 additional amino acid chains that give it even more ability to infect cells. This is why Elon Musk got egg on his face for making the prediction that it would be over within a few months, that was based on past outbreaks.

Bret is very clear that yes, this can happen naturally, but the chances are very slim that such a alignment of events occurred in proximity to a lab that was performing gain of function research which does this very thing of combining aspects of multiple viruses and rapidly adapting them in either other animal hosts or petri dishes of cells, including human cells.

csense• 6 years ago

Back in March or so, I wrote a comment about this [1], citing some even earlier (January 2020-ish) HN commentary.

My conclusion: Lab leak's not inconsistent with the evidence, but there's no smoking gun.

China's behavior is highly suggestive of guilt -- the moving location on Google Maps, destroying records, and not permitting any outside investigation.

However, China could actually be completely innocent and just doing things that make them look guilty, because "we need to do something to get people to stop talking about this" may be a strong motive of their government.

For the record, personally I'm a little cheesed off that our politicians aren't making a bigger deal out of this. (E.g. give China a binary choice: Pick one, either (a) provide us a complete explanation of why you did the things that make you look guilty and let us see some evidence to back up that explanation, or (b) we'll assume it was negligence, and try to recover the costs of the virus by putting a ton of tariffs on your goods.) I don't even think Trump's said the words "Chinese virus" for months.

But who knows, maybe world powers have some secret agreements about how to handle bioweapon accidents? Maybe China's people and our people got together back in March or April, they privately admitted it was an accident and privately made some concessions, on the condition we don't publicly blame them, keep everything they said super classified for at least 70 years, and they don't publicly criticize US bioweapons programs if we don't criticize theirs? I'm just guessing here, but it seems plausible.

The one new argument I've heard only today is the argument "But how did it get all the way from where wild bats are to Wuhan?" (From two different sources, OP is one of them, I believe the other one was from CBS News on Youtube.)

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22805043

8note3• 6 years ago

I can't imagine the US government letting the Chinese government come in to investigate, so that's not the strongest argument

My view for China's actions is that they're likely by individual bureaucrats trying to hide their own incompetence from everyone

baja_blast2• 6 years ago

I can completely see an team of international scientists coming to the US to investigate the origins of an outbreak.

himinlomax2• 6 years ago

the moving location on Google Maps

Note that China intentionally fudges all locations, apparently you can see that in HK (where Maps is available), locations across the border are completely wrong (in the sea, etc)

esja7• 6 years ago

Western countries (and particularly the US) have been conducting similar research for years. Despite imposing bans and other restrictions on their own soil, they may want the option to continue doing this in less regulated places, e.g. China. In the same way and for the same reasons that our manufacturers have outsourced hazardous production processes to less regulated countries. Personally I think it needs to be banned everywhere, urgently, and an inspection regime imposed.

The US may also have been complicit in this particular experiment. There was a lot of collaboration with Chinese researchers working in US labs and the US sponsoring the WIV, etc.

cageface• 6 years ago

I'm about as far as you can get politically from Trump but I agree that China needs to be much more transparent and accountable about this.

firen777• 6 years ago

Maybe China's people and our people got together back in March or April, they privately admitted it was an accident and privately made some concessions, on the condition we don't publicly blame them, keep everything they said super classified for at least 70 years, and they don't publicly criticize US bioweapons programs if we don't criticize theirs?

Not true. State friendly media and even state media here in China regularly push the narrative of foreign origin. They even claimed this a US bioweapon during height of their bullsh*t. And yes, a non-insignificant amount of people buy into this (data point of two: my parents).

burnthrow• 6 years ago

For those who think these concerns are fringe, see also this piece from the Washington Post Editorial Board a couple days ago: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/we-c...

coolgod2• 6 years ago

While we're discussing racist coronavirus conspiracies which can't explain the positive COVID results of Italian and French patients in November 2019, why don't we go all the way instead and discuss the conspiracies used by Trump supporters? The virus was clearly manufactured by the deep state to steal the election from Trump, to take away person freedoms and to implement a global reset. I find that theory to be much more believable and interesting than this Pottinger paid hit piece on China.

andromeduck7• 6 years ago

If you think Trump supporters are bad you should take a look at some of the CCTV archives.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/06/world/asia/china-covid-or...

coolgod2• 6 years ago

Wow! Another propaganda piece which repeat same falsehoods about COVID origins from China without providing meaningful substance. It's from the NYTimes too, a reputable fake news source which also slanders Trump. Could it be they are also in on the conspiracy to engineer this global reset by stealing the election from Trump using a lab engineered virus?

99_002• 6 years ago

https://project-evidence.github.io/

blackrock• 6 years ago

So.. let me try to understand this theory.

China was so smart, that their scientists were able to identify the virus from nature, and isolate it into a vial. Then, they let it leak out of the lab.

But yet, reports now indicate that the virus existed in Europe, before it was identified in Wuhan. [1]

Any one else scratching their head here about this logic?

Oh wait.. I got it. A Chinese spy carried the vial to Europe, and release it into the population of Italy and Spain, months before they “accidentally” released it in Wuhan.

This must be the most plausible explanation for how it leaked out of a Chinese lab, and infected people in Europe, before it infected people in Wuhan.

[1] https://twitter.com/DrEricDing/status/1345438947137236993

OisinMoran• 6 years ago

To update your reference class of how likely this is and what kind of countries this can happen in— one or more of the outbreaks of foot and mouth disease in the UK were caused by lab leaks.

2007: https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2007/08/report-l...

2011: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/countryside-i...

koheripbal3• 6 years ago

Also 2004: SARS in in China. - https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20040423/china-sars-death

someperson• 6 years ago

I'm only up to chapter 9 of 14 chapters, but this is a very thorough, well-researched, sober, long-form article that's very accessible to non-experts.

Great read, highly recommended.

sradman4• 6 years ago

Also see the HN thread Israeli startup claims Covid-19 likely originated in a lab, willing to bet on it [1].

Novelist Nicholson Barker has written a beautifully worded article but it lacks critical thinking.

Lab gain-of-function experiments begin with one or more known isolates that have been sequenced. One of these sequences will match large swathes of non-functional RNA in SARS-CoV-2 if the lab is the source. This is the evidence I personally need to consider the lab hypothesis plausible. Until then, the natural spillover hypothesis fits based on Occam’s razor.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25585833

sleepysysadmin• 6 years ago

Here's an article from August 2019.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/manitoba/ebola-henipah-china-...

The RCMP arrested 2 Chinese nationals who illegally sent highest risk viruses to Wuhan. Their security clearance was revoked and the University cut ties with them. the university stopped paying them immediately. Reassigned their students. Let that sink in... the university didnt fight at all.

Meanwhile the lab and public health was claiming that all policies and procedures were followed and they were innocent and yet nothing changed. They never got back into the lab. There's obviously no link at all to covid19, or is there?

In fact that 'investigation' never ever completed. There's no coincidences. The CBC reported on it because they caught wind of it via non-government sources. The students are the ones who originally broke the story. So why is the government tight lipped on this one?

throw2101051304• 6 years ago

Oh please, these reporters can't even get the story of Dr Li Wenliang straight, and still call him a whistleblower even though the timeline happened as follows:

30th December 2019 - Li Wenliang, an eye doctor sent a wechat message to colleagues warning there might be SARS going around

31st December 2019 - Wuhan made public statement about a "pneumonia of unknown cause", which was subsequently picked up by WHO https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2...

2st January 2020 - Li Wenliang was invited to the police station and asked to not spread rumours about the new illness

Let's review this timeline. Wuhan had made public of a "pneumonia of unknown cause" on the 31st December 2019, yet Li Wenliang is still called a whistleblower by many media news outlets https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-51403795

If anyone also want to mention Taiwan warning the WHO earlier than 31st December 2019, one need to just look at WHO's official statement here https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/transcr... (just search Taiwan).

What's my point in all of this? Well, from what I am seeing is that we are constantly presented with manufactured fake information wrapped in well articulated articles that is bought by the masses. How can we trust what any of these guys write when the evidence is circumstancial at best? I mean it's like me saying "gee, this Nicholson Baker claims he is not a satan worshipping paedophile, but what if..."

gdubs2• 6 years ago

This article does a really good job, IMO, of addressing the controversy inherent in the title and the implications therein.

But rather than just reading the headline, it’s a really well written article on “Gain of Function” research, and the history of contemporary bioweapons and infectious disease institutions. Particularly the funding, beginning in the 50’s, and exploding during the war on terror. It’s simply fascinating.

The desire to place blame, the political implications (plenty bipartisan), the funding — it’s not very hard to see why this subject provokes such strong reactions. But dismissing it out-of-hand misses the opportunity to delve deep into a field that is as consequential as nuclear weapons research.

thu21113• 6 years ago

Yes, it's a great article. Too bad many commenters won't have read it ;)

The most interesting part to me wasn't actually the lab leak part. That's been widely discussed for some time. The more interesting bit was how the anthrax scare turned out to be a lab worker who had a financial stake in vaccine research and apparently wanted funding to be increased ... and how that scare was used by the USG to justify drastic increases in funding towards bio-defence. If anyone has ever managed to more successfully or more cheaply achieve their goals through terrorism it's hard to think of an example!

gdubs2• 6 years ago

That part made me sit up in my chair — I remember that era, the anthrax scare, and yet never heard about that scientist!

The Lab Leak Hypothesis

Related Stories