China Rules Out Animal Market and Lab as Coronavirus Origin (wsj.com) 199
Chinese scientists in recent days said they had ruled out both a laboratory and an animal market in the city of Wuhan as possible origins of the coronavirus pandemic, in their most detailed pushback to date against allegations from U.S. officials and others over what might have sparked it. From a report: The director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, at the center of allegations around a potential laboratory accident, Wang Yanyi, over the weekend told China Central Television that the coronavirus was significantly different from any live pathogen that has been studied at the institute and that there therefore was no chance it could have leaked from there. Separately, China's top epidemiologist said Tuesday that testing of samples from a Wuhan food market, initially suspected as a path for the virus's spread to humans, failed to show links between animals being sold there and the pathogen.
Gao Fu, director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, said in comments carried in Chinese state media, "It now turns out that the market is one of the victims." The comments, aimed at countering what Beijing perceives as efforts from top U.S. officials to focus solely on China, are unlikely to pacify critics. The Chinese officials didn't address fundamental issues, such as widespread evidence that China initially covered up the extent of the outbreak. In their calls for more global scientific collaboration to track the source of the virus, they also stopped short of endorsing widespread scientific belief that the coronavirus originated in China.
Gao Fu, director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, said in comments carried in Chinese state media, "It now turns out that the market is one of the victims." The comments, aimed at countering what Beijing perceives as efforts from top U.S. officials to focus solely on China, are unlikely to pacify critics. The Chinese officials didn't address fundamental issues, such as widespread evidence that China initially covered up the extent of the outbreak. In their calls for more global scientific collaboration to track the source of the virus, they also stopped short of endorsing widespread scientific belief that the coronavirus originated in China.
China Says China Not Guilty (Score:2, Insightful)
Wow, who would have thought that a country with a history of compulsive lying would clear itself of blame?
I'm not even saying it DID come from a lab. I'm saying China is the last place on earth you can trust the verification of that to come from.
Re:China Says China Not Guilty (Score:5, Insightful)
You could have tried a valid criticism of the actual argument, but you went straight for "China man bad" line.
Re:China Says China Not Guilty (Score:4, Informative)
When the Director of the Wuhan Institute says that the virus didn't come from the Lab/Institute, you believe the Director?
Get Real!
Get Consistent!
Re: (Score:3)
I could not care less about what news media and public in the US cry when a police department makes a statement about their officers. It is completely irrelevant here.
I don't believe anyone, I'm interested in discussing the actual evidence presented.
This is impossible because threadshitting like yours and GPs kills any chance of discussing the actual report findings and their shortcomings, and that bothers me.
Impossibility of a discussion underscored by the many obviously "I disagree with your point" modera
Re:China Says China Not Guilty (Score:5, Insightful)
You could have tried a valid criticism of the actual argument
There is no "actual argument". The CCP is saying it didn't come from the lab because they say so. Pointing out that the CCP has a long history of lying about many things is a very valid criticism.
China is a huge country. There are thousands of "wet" markets. Yet this outbreak happened within spitting distance of the only virology lab in China studying these viruses. That could just be an extremely unlikely coincidence, but to convince the world we will need more than the word of known liars.
So far they haven't even identified the animal reservoir. Until that happens, nothing should be "ruled out".
Re: (Score:2)
That's the thing, the first outbreak might have been there (we don't actually know for sure) but that doesn't mean it's the origin. The initial jump from animal to humans could have been anywhere and then that person traveled.
We will probably never know now. China won't corporate with governments accusing it of a cover up, and if they find the origin people in those countries won't believe them anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
The initial jump from animal to humans could have been anywhere and then that person traveled.
Sure. Someone may have contracted the disease hundreds of kilometers away, and then for some unknown reason decided to travel to Wuhan and then, by pure coincidence, collapsed in front of the only virology lab in China researching these viruses.
Yup. That is totally plausible.
Also, the virus could have come from outer space. So it can't be the lab.
Re: (Score:2)
Someone may have contracted the disease hundreds of kilometers away, and then for some unknown reason decided to travel to Wuhan and then
And what gives you any reason to think that couldn't happen? People travel to distant places within their own country all the time.
then, by pure coincidence, collapsed in front of the only virology lab in China researching these viruses.
This is just priming. The infection would have been spreading for a long time. If this incident did happen, then yes it could be coincidence, because there could have been thousands of people around the city who were also exhibiting symptoms elsewhere.
This is a literal case of selection bias.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You're not looking for the single word "conspiracy", you're looking for the phrase "conspiracy theory". You can find more about this arcane topic here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry, They're reporting it didn't come from the market, either, so each possibility is, reportedly, equally unlikely.
Comment removed (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The "virus coming from the lab" is a conspiracy theory that originated, sadly, at the very top of the US government hierarchy
No. The accusation that it came from the lab came from Wuhan. The story was circulating on WeChat back in January. I first heard about the lab connection when my wife's brother, who lives in Shanghai, forwarded me a link.
without any evidence whatsoever.
The evidence is that the outbreak started a few hundred meters from the lab. The chance that is a coincidence is literally a million-to-one.
Is that proof "beyond a reasonable doubt"? Perhaps not. But this isn't a courtroom, so that standard doesn't apply. China holds all the informati
Re: (Score:2)
No. The accusation that it came from the lab came from Wuhan.
No, the accusations came in early January from some Israeli "security analyst" who has been peddling stories about "China bioweapons", and followed a report about the Institute on Radio Free Asia, a known outpost of freedom and democracy sponsored by we know who. Initially the accusations were about an engineered virus.
This, of course, was picked by some wingnut publications (e.g. the Washington Times of Sun Moon fame), made it into chats and forums online, and briefly into the mainstream news.
Then it was d
Re: (Score:3)
Stop trying to gaslight us. The Wuhan Lab and its proximity to a wet market associated with the outbreak was a topic of conversation in January.
Indeed, even before the end of January there were stories suggesting that the wet market may not be the source of the infection:
https://www.sciencemag.org/new... [sciencemag.org]
https://www.popsci.com/story/h... [popsci.com]
Just because you were ignorant doesn't mean the rest of us were.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Well, the theory about "virus originating from the Lab" came from the boss in White house himself (a known conspiracy nut and a habitual liar) and from the State Department (which fabricated "evidence" to justify a war).
If you believe ANYTHING from someone like them, then I have no doubt you've bought that bridge already. Good luck selling it.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You could have tried a valid criticism of the actual argument, but you went straight for "China man bad" line.
You're in the same boat. You could have asked him for it. Fact is, both of you are victims and are not responsible for the outbreak. China however is. So instead of going at each other do turn your attention to China, because they need to show responsibility.
The evidence we have so far points clearly at China as the centre of the outbreak. Not only this, but when it got detected did they stay inactive. Nobody is perfect and it could have been a very unlucky chain of events for China. If so then they could j
Re: (Score:2)
It would never have been able to be contained unless you had prior knowledge or visibility of who carried the disease e.g. if it turned your skin green, you could isolate everyone easily. The problem for any country where an epidemic starts is that you cannot claim a pandemic until you have evidence of it and you can't do that until you have
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
What argument?
This one (taken from a different, non-paywalled source, but I assume WSJ quotes the same report):
Based on the analysis of 112 quality samples from 326 confirmed cases reported in Shanghai between January 20 and February 25, researchers found two major lineages (clade I and clade II) with differential exposure history during the early phase of the outbreak in Wuhan. There has been no direct evidence that the cross-species COVID-19 transmission originally occurred in the Huanan market in Wuhan, although it was a probable place for human-to-human transmission of the virus because of its relatively high crowd density.
Here's a bit more on the difficulties of making valid phylogenic interpretations: https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com]
Re:China Says China Not Guilty (Score:5, Insightful)
Which analysis was performed by the people,
who gave you the gene sequence of the new virus: https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com], which nobody had any problems "trusting".
See how easily the context changes your perceptions?
Re: (Score:2)
Gene sequence can be easily verified anywhere
So can the conclusions of this report, and no, travel is not required. One can examine the evidence presented in the report critically if they have knowledge of the subject. I'm sure we'll see comments when it gets published - apparently it is going to "Nature" too.
Field-work in China can only be conducted with China government's permission.
Yes, just like for field work in the US you'll need permission from the US government.
Which permission has not been granted to anyone not subject to China's will...
Really? Here's evidence contrary to your conjecture - a US scientist advising China on the coronavirus and stating the opposite of the report above: https://www [cbsnews.com]
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Travel to Shanghai is required to collect samples from patients in Shaghai.
The analysis was conducted "Based on the analysis of 112 quality samples from 326 confirmed cases reported in Shanghai between January 20 and February 25". And we are supposed to believe, that there were no 1120 other quality samples from thousands of other cases, which would've shown a different story.
Yes, really [cnn.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Travel to Shanghai is required to collect samples from patients in Shaghai.
Why do you think collecting samples is necessary?
And we are supposed to believe, that there were no 1120 other quality samples from thousands of other cases, which would've shown a different story.
No. Before traveling, you're supposed to propose at least some reasoning why those samples and the conclusions based on them are problematic. You do not propose such reasoning beyond "China man lying", which is irrelevant to the issue.
Yes, really [cnn.com].
It is only too natural to double check your work when you're being the target of propaganda attacks based on conspiracy theories by the lying head of state of a country, known to start wars half way across the world on false cla
Re: (Score:3)
Since the topic of the article is a scientific report by several scientists, a valid argument about "known liars" would have to show some evidence of the said scientists being "known liars".
Care to provide such evidence, which is sorely missing in the original comment?
Re: (Score:2)
China can and does pay scientists to say exactly what they want them to say. Just like the cigarette industry paid scientists to say smoking is good for the lungs. Why would you believe anything the Chinese government says?
Now, give me a comment denouncing the Tiananmen Square Massacre so I know you aren't a paid party shill. Or, you know, fuck right off.
Re: (Score:2)
China can and does pay scientists to say exactly what they want them to say.
This is no evidence about the report authors lying, just a conjecture that you pulled out of your ass.
Just like the cigarette industry paid scientists to say smoking is good for the lungs.
This is no evidence about the report authors lying either.
Try again - or, better, don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Just say that China was wrong to massacre people at Tiananmen Square. Unless, you know, you'll be hauled off and tortured for saying something like that.
And while you are at it, denounce the massacre and oppression of the Uighur Muslims in China. Unless that too would get you fed into the organ banks.
China lies and everyone in the entire world knows it. My country may be bad but it is 10000X better than China, even under this orange asshole Trump. See, I can call him an asshole. Tell me about Pooh-bear. Unl
Re: (Score:2)
Why are you trying to weasel out of your own argument? You said, quote:
"known liars may be lying now"
Where is your evidence that the report authors are known liars?
Changing the topic from the report to absurd allegations about me isn't going to win your original argument.
Try harder :)))
Re: (Score:2)
Look, Myself and most of the world don't trust flat earthers, anti-vacciners, or China. It's a valid opinion, and nothing you have done has made me trust China any more.
I. Will. Not. Trust. China. Get it?
Honestly, you are trying to say China is trustworthy, which is an exceptional opinion, the burden of proof is on you. Prove to me why I should ever trust China.
But you are a paid shill for the Chinese government, so I expect nothing from you except more lies. Asshole. Chinese people in general are great, bu
Re: (Score:2)
don't trust flat earthers, anti-vacciners, or China.
You choose to mistrust two conspiracy theories, and yet readily embrace a third one - the "virus came from the lab" - a lovely example of cognitive dissonance.
I. Will. Not. Trust. China. Get it?
Be my guest. I could not care less what you trust or not. See above, your opinions are too inconsistent to be taken seriously :)
Honestly, you are trying to say China is trustworthy,
Really, now? Where did I say that? Please be specific.
I simply called you out on your claim that some Chinese scientists are liars. You've been deflecting ever since instead of presenting evidence for it.
the burden of proof is on you.
Sure - my proof is yo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Notice how me denouncing or not denouncing anything at all is completely irrelevant to the topic under discussion?
Do you know that the tactic you propose - denouncing an "enamy" to boost one's claims of "competence" - was very popular and brought considerable?
Yep, Stalin's USSR.
Don't be like them, your loyalty must be with the free world's principles.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ooops. I think spun touched a nerve.
Re: (Score:2)
Since the topic of the article is a scientific report by several scientists, a valid argument about "known liars" would have to show some evidence of the said scientists being "known liars".
Care to provide such evidence, which is sorely missing in the original comment?
You speak as though people have the freedom to do and say what they want in China without repercussion. It does not mean the claim in the article is right or wrong, it means that the Chinese government exerts so much control over speech within its borders that you should always be at least somewhat skeptical of what comes out.
Re: (Score:2)
Being skeptical of the report means addressing claims and inconsistencies of the said report, or at least of reports of the said report, which I even quoted above for GP's convenience.
However, in the GP we don't observe any skepsis regarding the report. We have the old Soviet "I've not read it, but I condemn it" line, which is as dishonest as touting the CPP line.
Re: (Score:2)
Since you seem to want to defend China great deal then what are your thoughts on the Tiananmen Square Massacre?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
We can suspect China of lying when it says it didn't come from the lab. But when Pompeo said there was enormous evidence that it did, that was a falsifiable lie.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, but he's an elected official, not a party appointee so... wait... oh.
Re: (Score:2)
Except, there's enormous evidence the virus came from the lab in Wuhan. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Just following Trumps lead (Score:2)
I'm not responsible for anything....
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, who would have thought that a country with a history of compulsive lying would clear itself of blame?
I'm not even saying it DID come from a lab. I'm saying China is the last place on earth you can trust the verification of that to come from.
It's always been very unlikely to have been from the lab, simply because the lab publishes its work to obtain and maintain funding (including from US sources) and nothing like SARS-CoV-2 is in any of the lab's publications. That doesn't mean it's impossible that it's from the lab, it could be from a just-started project that hadn't published anything yet (not even grant proposals) and if you're willing to assume actual malice and intentional release, then the lab clearly wouldn't have published it. But if
Re: (Score:2)
News these days is full of "might", "could", "may" (Score:3)
in their most detailed pushback to date against allegations from U.S. officials and others over what might have sparked it.
[...bold mine...]
No one in the news business ever does any serious investigation(s). The so called democracies that "always seek the truth" are guilty as well, sadly.
Why should US officials speculate? Why not keep their mouths shut until they are sure?
Ohh...I know why...One word -- RATINGS.
Re: (Score:2)
It's more than ratings. The US has been engaging in a propaganda war with China for a while. You can speculate on the motives behind it. It's not because the government of China is an authoritarian regieme; the US has lots of "staunch allies" who are worse. It could be because China is the only nation currently posing a credible threat to the US's economic dominance however.
Boogieman (Score:2)
Communism (Score:2)
The trouble with communism, is ‘The Party must be protected above all else’. Lying is therefore acceptable if it protects the party.
Western democracies have their own issues (especially the USA which has become captured by corporates), but at least there is some level of accountability to the people and often to the truth.
You know and I know, the Chinese investigators will say what they are told to say. They may be telling the truth, but plot is trumps science.
Abandoning the truth is what ultima
Re: (Score:2)
Abandoning the truth is what ultimately undoes any society.
True, but authoritarian regimes can cause an amazing amount of suffering as they inevitably crumble. Just ask Russians how that revolution turned out for them. Or Germans who watched the rise of Nazism (and the Jews who faced the brunt of it). Or Koreans who backed the North. Or Cubans who backed Castro. Or Venezuelans who backed Chavez. The suffering and death of these millions is indescribable.
Well it came from SOMEWHERE in Wuhan (Score:2)
If it wasn't that particular wet market then it was another one. The RNA sequence evidence seems convincing enough that it's nothing human designed (besides how piss-poor it performs if it was intended as a weapon). So there was bat to something to human transmission somewhere in Wuhan from eating things you probably don't need to be eating, like the poor endangered pangolin. And now it's worse because you don't even know exactly where.
Of course they do (Score:2)
Blame-shifters gotta shift blame.
Let's hope (Score:2, Informative)
I'll just hope that we as a species start to handle this pandemic a little better.
I wear a mask in case I've got it, to avoid spreading if I have it.
And I appreciate when others do the same.
And I hope that there's a way to test enough people to figure out how this thing works and spreads in more detail.
I really hope there's a treatment, but I'm not holding my breath. Gonna be a while unless we get very lucky.
Re: (Score:2)
I dont wear a mask because Ive been forced to stay home for 2.5 Months by my government.
There has been almost NO spread in the community, if there was, every grocery store, costco, Canadian Tire, Home Depot would have had outbreaks.
In a greater area of 4.1 Million people, there have been less than a dozen cases of infections in such stores. These stores have been BUSY, because they are the only stores open and business hours where reduced and closed on Sundays.
Recent studies have determined that:
1. The viru
look at China's statistics vs rest of the world (Score:2)
Old news (Score:3, Insightful)
It's great to hear it from an authoritative source, however biased that source might be... but this was already expected to be the case. Offhand, I don't have my source available... but this was all reported at least a month ago, by researchers outside of China.
Genetically, the virus is mostly similar to other animal-borne coronaviruses, suggesting it began in bats and moved through pangolins, but it doesn't appear to reside in the muscle tissue that'd be used as a food, and the only connection to the Wuhan market is that several of the early cases (but not the earliest) were people that frequented the market.
That wet market, it should be noted, is essentially similar to American farmers' markets. Almost all slaughter happens in facilities outside the market area, and sanitation measures are generally comparable to Western standards.
The most likely vector for entering the human population is someone having an interaction with something contaminated by a pangolin. For example, we know the virus can be carried by dogs, so it could be (hypothetically) as simple as a pet dog attacking a pangolin, then licking its owner. We may never know.
Viruses happen outside China too (Score:5, Informative)
Look up the Hendra virus in Australia. It came from bats, through to horses and then infected horse trainers. No wet markets, no weird or unusual foods, just people coming into normal contact with animals. It does happen.
Re: (Score:2)
Hantavirus in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
Look up the Hendra virus in Australia. It came from bats, through to horses and then infected horse trainers. No wet markets, no weird or unusual foods, just people coming into normal contact with animals. It does happen.
How exactly the virus came into existence is secondary. It doesn't actually matter if it was created in a lab by an evil genius, or if Mother Nature made it. This is not about a virus, but about the outbreak of a virus. The emphasis is on the outbreak, meaning, the inability of a nation to contain it.
China not only needs to take responsibility in front of the world if they want to be seen as a sovereign nation, but they owe it to themselves, their own people. So even if in the outrages event of another nati
Re: (Score:3)
And MERS [wikipedia.org]. It is also a Coronavirus, and is much more deadly than the current SARS-CoV-2 virus that is causing the pandemic. It jumped from bats to camels, and from camels to humans.
Camels have been domesticated as beasts of burden and as a source for meat, milk and wool source for at about
Re:Viruses happen outside China too (Score:5, Informative)
Why go as far as Australia. The Norovirus outbreaks, of cruise ship notoriety, has its origin right here in Norwalk, Ohio virus [wikipedia.org] at an elementary school, affecting half of the students [nih.gov] there.
It was called the Norwalk Virus, until the rules to not name things after places or people came in effect, so it became Norovirus.
Oh well then... (Score:2, Insightful)
....if China says it's not that market or lab, that must be true.
I mean, they've been a paragon of honesty, transparency, and openness in government.
Re: (Score:2)
Lies, bloody lies and Twitter (Score:2)
oh, well, if China says (Score:4, Funny)
I mean, they're forthright and known to be honest. I guess that closes the case on the lab.
Make sense... (Score:4, Funny)
My dog said he wasn't the one who tipped over the garbage can and ate the food scraps too.
And Trump (Score:2)
isn't a giant boob and never said anything stupid.
OK sure......
Not our fault! We mean it! (Score:4, Insightful)
We couldn't find any traces of any virus in either the lab or the market. Ergo, it must not be from the lab or the market!
Note to self: redact that the market has been shut down for months, and the lab was just cleaned.
Vital knowledge (Score:2)
WHAT a SURPRISE!!! (Score:2)
It's a complete surprise that China has determined that China wasn't at fault for the Wuhan coronavirus, and that China's lies, murders and deceptions are totally irrelevant. I never could have guessed!
There are three possibilities.
1. The Wuhan coronavirus did jump from bats to humans at the wet market.
2. The Chinese virus lab in Wuhan INTENTIONALLY CREATED AND RELEASED the virus to infect the public.
3. The Chinese virus lab in Wuhan was studying the virus when it was accidentally (or incompetently) releas
Re: (Score:2)
Damn it! I need an EDIT function here.
A fourth possibility, that the virus was created in a US Army lab and released in Wuhan is ludicrous, and that the PRC government released this theory merely serves to suggest that Option 3 above was correct.
Re: (Score:2)
1. The Wuhan coronavirus did jump from bats to humans at the wet market.
It doesn't need to be at the wet market, it could be any countryside place where people commonly come into contact with bats and other animals.
This just in (Score:2)
Damned if you do, damned if you don't (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The article specifically states that "the coronavirus was significantly different from any live pathogen that has been studied at the institute and that there therefore was no chance it could have leaked from there."
And who disclosed what the institute was studying? Oh, that's right...the Chinese media and CCP. You know, the same folks who shuttled bodies around in Wuhan to keep outsiders from seeing the true death toll. The same ones who claim infection and death rates ridiculously out of line with, oh, say...THE REST OF THE ENTIRE WORLD. Yeah, sorry, not buying it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Why would you believe known liars when they have every motive in the world to lie in this case? Parroting back the words of authoritarian regimes does not make them any more legitimate.
Re:You know what would be nice? (Score:5, Interesting)
It is possible this is available from sources outside of China's influence, as the institute was involved in international collaborative programs.
It is unlikely that sources outside of China's control were sampling the fish market thoroughly enough, so it would be harder to verify that claim.
I'm usually loathe to over-apply Occam's razor, but which of these two scenarios make more sense?
1) A virus is detected in Wuhan, people immediately blame the nearest likely suspects and then double down on their blaming because they don't want to be wrong and they need someone to blame.
2) A virus is quickly detected exactly where it originated even though the first infection in a human wouldn't have been contagious for human-to-human transmission until several days after the infection occurred, and could have been transmitted several times before it reached a person that actually showed symptoms.
There's no question that the Wuhan market was a perfect environment for the virus to spread in, but it's a crap-shoot as to whether it originated there or not, given how often people interact with bats in the wild.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Finding the origins of the virus really is a crapshoot when a large percentage of the rural population in southern China as well as SE Asia already have antibodies to a variety of coronaviruses that came from bats.
A Cambridge university research paper suggested that the origins could be likely around Guangdong due to the fact that many of the people their in the beginning stages of the outbreak had type A versions of the virus. US and Australia had similar as well. The large majority in Wuhan had already
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
If we had a bunch of our own boys over there when the pandemic broke doing their own work to research this and corroborate. I wonder why we didn't?
What's there to wonder about? How many Chinese officials do we allow into the U.S. to investigate these kinds of incidents in our own country?
What country in general is going to allow investigators from another country into their own outside of some very special circumstances? The only times we see something like this happen is with international organizations (that are supposed to be independent) in countries that don't have enough of their own resources to handle it.
Re:You know what would be nice? (Score:5, Insightful)
We had CDC observers over there. We know exactly who got rid of them. It was the Trump administration.
https://www.reuters.com/articl... [reuters.com]
User rsilvergun was not making a hypothetical, they were coyly wording a known truth. You just made yourself look ignorant.
Re: (Score:2)
How does that hindsight thing work again? (Score:2)
Not exactly contradictory results, but I'm beginning to smell a triple negative around here. It would be nice if there was a clear contradiction. Then we'd know that at least one part was a lie. Time for the show of hands?
On the one hand, the Chinese government's politically motivated dishonesty is such an open secret that it's kind of hard to call it an actual lie anymore. Actually, not just limited to political motivations, but lying for profit has a long and "honorable" tradition. Looking at Chinese sour
Re: How does that hindsight thing work again? (Score:2)
The virus dna was sequenced outside of China pretty quickly. It's actually not so hard these days.
Re: (Score:3)
Modern DNA sequencing is fast - I believe hours or days is pretty normal for the sequencing process itself, and with a potentially terrifying new epidemic blossoming it's a fair bet that a sample would be rushed to the front of the queue.
Identifying and isolating the sample in the first place on the other hand... honestly I have no idea how long that would normally take, but I wouldn't think very long. Seems like the standard procedure would be probably be looking for shared abnormalities in blood work or
Re: (Score:2)
specifically designed to solve the retirement problem as countries around the world face an increasingly elderly population
Given the average age of the leaders of the world's countries, that would seem unlikely - they'd be shooting themselves in the foot!
Re: (Score:2)
You just described the vast majority of Chinese citizens, as well.
Not surprisingly, those problems are common everywhere in the world. (Yes, even Europe.)
Re:I believe them. (Score:5, Informative)
> On the other hand, the US government and most of the US populace are ignorant, untravelled, xenophobic and racist.
China doesn't have race problems. They just put minorities in "camps" and round up Africans.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/13... [cnn.com]
https://www.businessinsider.co... [businessinsider.com]
Reciprocated
https://kenyanreport.com/2020/... [kenyanreport.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Clearly you are a member of the Fifty Cent Party. The CCP is paying you half a buck for that post.
Re: (Score:2)
Prove you aren't a Chinese puppet. What happened in Tiananmen Square in 1989?
Re: (Score:2)
On the other hand, the US government and most of the US populace are ignorant, untravelled, xenophobic and racist. It comes as no shock that they are so dismissive of facts.
Am I the only person interpreting this post as sarcasm? Ah well, maybe that's wishful thinking on my part. Nobody actually believes a communist government tells the truth, especially about a significant issue where it may have goofed up. The only ones who would write the above are sarcastic jokesters or sycophant cronies.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The left wants to shift the blame entirely onto Trump as if he farted out the Covid pandemic himself. At least the right is pointing the finger at the primary culprit. Its really disgusting how they are carrying water for the PRC
Blaming Trump for the entirety of Covid-19 is wrong and an overreaction. However, Trump trying to shift the entirety of blame to China is equally wrong.
Trump reacted slowly, ignored advanced intelligence information that few had access to, dismantled pandemic gov't infrastructure, resisted wide-scale testing, relied upon his 'instinct', and cultivated the attitude that Covid-19 was no big deal.
The "right" isn't pointing the finger at the primary culprit - they are just giving Trump cover and allowing him to