More Evidence Covid-19 Originated at Wuhan Market in Two New Studies (cnn.com) 394
"Two new studies provide more evidence that the coronavirus pandemic originated in a Wuhan, China market where live animals were sold," reports the Associated Press, "further bolstering the theory that the virus emerged in the wild rather than escaping from a Chinese lab."
CNN reports: "All eight COVID-19 cases detected prior to 20 December were from the western side of the market, where mammal species were also sold," the [first] study says. The proximity to five stalls that sold live or recently butchered animals was predictive of human cases... The "extraordinary" pattern that emerged from mapping these cases was very clear, said another co-author, Michael Worobey, department head of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Arizona.
The researchers mapped the earliest cases that had no connection to the market, Worobey noted, and those people lived or worked in close proximity to the market. "This is an indication that the virus started spreading in people who worked at the market but then started that spread ... into the surrounding local community as vendors went into local shops, infected people who worked in those shops," Worobey said.
The other study takes a molecular approach and seems to determine when the first coronavirus infections crossed from animals to humans.... The researchers suggest that the first animal-to-human transmission probably happened around November 18, 2019, and it came from lineage B. They found the lineage B type only in people who had a direct connection to the Huanan market.
"All this evidence tells us the same thing: It points right to this particular market in the middle of Wuhan," said Kristian Andersen a professor in the Department of Immunology and Microbiology at Scripps Research and coauthor of one of the studies. The AP quotes Andersen as saying "I was quite convinced of the lab leak myself until we dove into this very carefully and looked at it much closer." Andersen said they found case clusters inside the market, too, "and that clustering is very, very specifically in the parts of the market" where they now know people were selling wildlife, such as raccoon dogs, that are susceptible to infection with the coronavirus.... Matthew Aliota, a researcher in the college of veterinary medicine at the University of Minnesota, said in his mind the pair of studies "kind of puts to rest, hopefully, the lab leak hypothesis."
"Both of these two studies really provide compelling evidence for the natural origin hypothesis," said Aliota, who wasn't involved in either study. Since sampling an animal that was at the market is impossible, "this is maybe as close to a smoking gun as you could get."
CNN notes that Worobey also had initially thought the lab leak had been a possibility, but now says the epidemiological preponderance of cases linked to the market is "not a mirage. It's a real thing.
"It's just not plausible that this virus was introduced any other way than through the wildlife trade." To reduce the chances of future pandemics, the researchers hope they can determine exactly what animal may have first become infected and how.
"The raw ingredients for a zoonotic virus with pandemic potential are still lurking in the wild," said Joel Wertheim, an associate adjunct professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego. He believes the world needs to do a much better job doing surveillance and monitoring animals and other potential threats to human health.
CNN reports: "All eight COVID-19 cases detected prior to 20 December were from the western side of the market, where mammal species were also sold," the [first] study says. The proximity to five stalls that sold live or recently butchered animals was predictive of human cases... The "extraordinary" pattern that emerged from mapping these cases was very clear, said another co-author, Michael Worobey, department head of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Arizona.
The researchers mapped the earliest cases that had no connection to the market, Worobey noted, and those people lived or worked in close proximity to the market. "This is an indication that the virus started spreading in people who worked at the market but then started that spread ... into the surrounding local community as vendors went into local shops, infected people who worked in those shops," Worobey said.
The other study takes a molecular approach and seems to determine when the first coronavirus infections crossed from animals to humans.... The researchers suggest that the first animal-to-human transmission probably happened around November 18, 2019, and it came from lineage B. They found the lineage B type only in people who had a direct connection to the Huanan market.
"All this evidence tells us the same thing: It points right to this particular market in the middle of Wuhan," said Kristian Andersen a professor in the Department of Immunology and Microbiology at Scripps Research and coauthor of one of the studies. The AP quotes Andersen as saying "I was quite convinced of the lab leak myself until we dove into this very carefully and looked at it much closer." Andersen said they found case clusters inside the market, too, "and that clustering is very, very specifically in the parts of the market" where they now know people were selling wildlife, such as raccoon dogs, that are susceptible to infection with the coronavirus.... Matthew Aliota, a researcher in the college of veterinary medicine at the University of Minnesota, said in his mind the pair of studies "kind of puts to rest, hopefully, the lab leak hypothesis."
"Both of these two studies really provide compelling evidence for the natural origin hypothesis," said Aliota, who wasn't involved in either study. Since sampling an animal that was at the market is impossible, "this is maybe as close to a smoking gun as you could get."
CNN notes that Worobey also had initially thought the lab leak had been a possibility, but now says the epidemiological preponderance of cases linked to the market is "not a mirage. It's a real thing.
"It's just not plausible that this virus was introduced any other way than through the wildlife trade." To reduce the chances of future pandemics, the researchers hope they can determine exactly what animal may have first become infected and how.
"The raw ingredients for a zoonotic virus with pandemic potential are still lurking in the wild," said Joel Wertheim, an associate adjunct professor of medicine at the University of California, San Diego. He believes the world needs to do a much better job doing surveillance and monitoring animals and other potential threats to human health.
Ockham's Razor (Score:3)
A constant stream of wild animals being transported to and sold in the Wuhan market would eventually transmit a form of the disease which easily infect from human to human - who would have thought!
Buyers and sellers working in close proximity to the known animal reservoir of a fast evolving virus, day in, day out, for years and years - it's as if that is much more likely to cause a pandemic - than some researcher manage to hit the exact kinds of mutations needed, or find the exact virus, and then for one single unlikely event to spread it and outcompete all the coronavirus variants in the bats in the market.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
It's as if the most likely explanation is the correct one!
Yes, it's just totally bat crazy (badum ching!) to think that a lab a stone's throw away that just happened to be studying coronaviruses (and adding to their functionality!) might deserve a look here as well.
Re: Ockham's Razor (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It's as if the most likely explanation is the correct one!
Yes, I agree that CERN probably gated it in from Hell.
And since it's hell-spawn, that explains why it doesn't respond to good patriotic treatments like Ivermectin and gargling Chlorox.
OK, if it came from the wet market, (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
what was the animal?
We still don't know for sure the original host population, but probably bats.
https://www.futuremedicine.com... [futuremedicine.com]
There were no bats who were candidates to be intermediate hosts in the wet market.
You clearly have no clue, or you'd be aware that bats are the likely *original* hosts. Intermediate means between the reservoir population and humans.
The virus appears to have been genetically modified.
Must be aliens then :-(
OK, yes it originated in bats, was genetically altered at the Wuhan lab (using US tax dollars), and then infected a human, either by accident or on purpose. It did not come from the wet market, no intermediate host has been found.
My congratulations to the Chinese forgers (Score:2)
They've created - after an initial panic when the WHO committee asked too hard questions and were blocked from this dataset - the data necessary to point to the outcome they want the world to believe.
Hint: it's quicker to assume politicians from all countries are lying, but this is especially true of China's.
correlation is not causation (Score:2, Informative)
Oh dear. It seems my esteemed colleague scientists have forgotten that correlation is not causation. These finding are not smoking guns, but evidence of action by Patient Zero. There is no evidence that the crossover happened at the market, only that the spread was rooted there.
It's just as plausible that someone from the lab became infected in an unrealized exposure, thought they had a cold, went later to shop at the market and had a good sneeze, infecting a handful of people. The lab rat then went hom
Re: correlation is not causation (Score:3, Insightful)
Utter BS (Score:5, Insightful)
All we have now is papers that look at the data the Chinese authorities have not destroyed, altered or redacted. Surprise, surprise, none of it points to the lab. I've never been so disappointed in the scientific community's willingness to engage in coordinated ass-covering because it's quite a bit of professional egg on your face to kill 6 million people.
In March 2020, a directive from the Chinese government — highlighted by the Associated Press — instructed researchers at universities, companies and medical institutions to have all studies on COVID-19 vetted by government research units and then published under the direction of public opinion teams. Those who don’t follow procedures, the document warned, “shall be held accountable”.
That's from Nature [nature.com]. And take a quick minute to look at which does point a giant finger at the lab. [originofcovid.org]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Maybe the reason why no reputable publications have published papers claiming it is from a lab is because there is no reputable science to suggest that it was.
The whole conspiracy theory doesn't hold up anyway, because the claimed lie that it originated in a web market that the Chinese government had been repeatedly warned was going to produce something like this, is hardly covering them in glory. Especially after SARS and swine flu, everyone knew this was how these things happen and that wet markets needed
Re:Utter BS (Score:4, Insightful)
because there is no reputable science to suggest that it was
Again, the Chinese authorities have done their utmost to prohibit and inhibit investigation into the WIV. As clearly demonstrated in the Nature article I linked.
The whole conspiracy theory
Ah, you show your colors. It's a "conspiracy theory." You clearly didn't read the other link I provided. I double dare you to get a copy of Viral, read it, and think for yourself.
Especially after SARS
Indeed, SARS-COV, the virus for which they found an intermediary host and which was not very transmissible between humans during the 2003 outbreak. Then there's SARS-COV-2 which appeared on the scene right next to a viral research facility that was doing gain-of-function research on bat coronaviruses. The same low-security facility which had a history of safety issues (per state department memos). Despite lots of hunting, no intermediary host has been found for SARS-COV-2. We're supposed to believe that a bat virus in a wet market (where no bats were being sold) was riding along in another animal and then hopped over to humans and was immediately and amazingly well-tuned for human to human transmission.
But yes, dear, it's all a conspiracy theory.
Re:Utter BS (Score:4, Insightful)
"Buy and read this book" isn't the killer argument you think it is.
It is a conspiracy theory when there aren't any papers published in peer reviewed, reputable (or even disreputable) journals. As you say, the Chinese have not been forthcoming with access, so it's at best speculation.
Note also that the absence of bats at the market is not the trump card you think it is. The research presented here suggests that the market was the original spreader event, not necessarily the point at which it jumped to humans. So whoever got it first might simply have visited the market and given it to others, having encountered bats elsewhere.
Which is the same as the lab hypothesis. What these papers are saying is that the genetic lineage of the virus does not suggest lab growth, it appears to have gone from bats to pangolins to bats again and then to humans. Intermediaries have been found. Some people claim not enough intermediaries, which is an argument borrowed from those claiming that humans are not descended from apes. There's always one more intermediate stage you can shave it down to.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
just some circumstantial stuff
Overwhelming chain of circumstantial evidence but as we've already covered there can never be proof of the lab leak because China will never cooperate. Full stop. So every *other* theory needs to come with double asterisks that the lab leak is well supported by a mountain of circumstantial evidence and everything else is just speculation based on the evidence that remains. But if you wan to keep believing that a bat gave it to a pangolin which then gave it back to a bat which then infected animal X that
Re: (Score:3)
They just publish science.
Yeah, sure. The idea there's no political and professional ramifications for investigating the lab leak hypothesis is outright laughable. From day fucking one they were discussing how to hush-hush [theintercept.com] lab origin.
it means that there's a lot of easy means of tracing an origin that show it doesn't come from the lab.
Laughable again considering the Chinese authorities have done everything possible to inhibit a third party review of COVID origins much less the WIV lab. Whatever conclusions scientists reach need to come with a double asterisk indicating they aren't able to investigate anything about the lab. It's
I believe it! (Score:2)
Not more evidence. Re-hash of old evidence. (Score:2, Insightful)
Now do the lab leak and compare apples-to-apples.
Until you do, stfu about how one is more or less likely than the other and about how clearly you can see under your favorite streetlight.
Not convincing (Score:2, Troll)
I'm sorry, but this is not convincing at all. Where the cases were discovered is not necessarily where the virus was contracted. Also, it's not as if we can expect any honesty, about anything, from the CCP. If you remember, the CCP also tried to claim the virus came from Europe.
There is very substantial evidence that the virus was man-made. The location of the Wuhan lab is not the only evidence of the virus being created in a lab. Although the nearby Wuhan lab exists specifically to create such viruses.
Occam? Occam? (Score:2, Interesting)
If there are mass poisonings in your town, the likely suspect is the resident poison factory.
It came from the lab. Ask the guy who headed up the Lancet investigation:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-10980715/Covid-leaked-AMERICAN-lab-claims-professor-Jeffrey-Sachs.html [dailymail.co.uk]
Even if... (Score:3)
Evidence, what evidence, what investigation? (Score:3)
FACT: The lab performed Gain of Function experiments on bat coronavirus' to become potentially more infectious to humans. These GoF experments were part funded by the NIH. This funding was provided to a private company with financial links to Fauci.
In Major Shift, NIH Admits Funding Risky Virus Research in Wuhan [archive.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Last 7 pandemics (Score:5, Informative)
Definitely wrong.
If we look at the Chronology section of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org], the most recent multi-country epidemics or pandemics are:
Only one clearly came from China, with another one not yet clear or debatable.
Re: (Score:2)
To be fair, they specified "global pandemics" so let's list those off, descending by date started:
1. "COVID-19 pandemic" - COVID-19 (2019–present)
2. "HIV/AIDS global pandemic" - HIV/AIDS (1981–present)
3. "Hong Kong flu" - Influenza A/H3N2 (1968–1969)
4. "1957–1958 influenza pandemic" - Influenza A/H2N2 (1957–1958)
5. "Spanish flu" - Influenza A/H1N1 (1918–1920)
6. "Third plague pandemic" - Bubonic plague (1855–1960)
7. "1846–1860 cholera pandemic" - Cholera (1846
Re: (Score:2)
Only one? What?
And you missed one - Pandemic H1N1/09 "Swine Flu" pandemic - origin Mexico.
1) Covid - Wuhan, China. Vector from bats to humans unknown.
2 Hong Kong Flu - likely came from Chinese mainland "On 11 July, before the outbreak in the colony was first noted, the Hong Kong newspaper Ming Pao reported an outbreak of respiratory illness in Guangdong Province" and other evidence of this.
3) 1957–1958 Asian flu pandemic - "was a global pandemic of influenza A virus subtype H2N2 that originated in Gui
Re: (Score:2)
Touche.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Until China decides to grow up
Nice racism there bud. Do you realize China is much bigger than Wuhan, dipshit?
Do you realize that your "modern" US has people that go out and kill wild animals to eat also? They even then hang up their corpses as trophies.
Should we tarnish you as a barbaric redneck hillbilly based on the practices of a small group of people in your country?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: Last 7 pandemics (Score:4, Informative)
People making this excuse for racism disregard that when saying "China needs to grow up" about Wuhan practices, the context is the Han people of Wuhan, not the nation state.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
While technically true, unfortunately anti-China rhetoric all too often does result in attacks on Chinese people.
I'm not saying don't do it, just like I wouldn't say don't criticise Israel because it sometimes results in anti-Semitism, but some care when doing it is definitely helpful.
Re: Last 7 pandemics (Score:5, Informative)
The CCP is a long term actively purposeful genocidal slaver state that unwillingly harvests prisoner organs. It is literally the most evil nation currently in existence on the planet.
Re: Last 7 pandemics (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Last 7 pandemics (Score:4, Insightful)
Chinese could feed their gap toothed faces.
Ah, you just LITERALLY showed your racism here, you retarded cunt.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeppers.
It should, perhaps, be noted that the fire-bombings that preceded the two nukes actually did more damage than the nukes.
The terrifying thing about the nukes was that it took just one plane to demolish a city, rather than a thousand planes.
Plus the fact that the Japanese did NOT know that we'd used up our fissionables by that point. We were making more, of course, but there wasn't going to be a third atom bomb for months, at least.
Re: (Score:2)
It should, perhaps, be noted that the fire-bombings that preceded the two nukes actually did more damage than the nukes.
The terrifying thing about the nukes was that it took just one plane to demolish a city, rather than a thousand planes.
Most of the death and destruction was in a 1-2km (1 mile) radius. Nukes were small then. It was nothing compared to the Tokyo fire-bombing, or Dresden.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Re: (Score:2)
Which is one reason of many why the nukes weren't necessary [youtube.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Selling things in markets happens in civilized countries.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Live fish trade. Wet market? Anywhere animals are sold live is a "wet" market. It's a tradition that descends from the ages before refrigeration. It is still valid. Not everything sold at these markets is for food. Not everything is slaughtered at the market.
Not a hell of a lot of difference with a livestock market or your local pet store.
Raccoon dogs are sold live at "wet" markets to the fur trade as breeders. There is a strong case for banning the sale of wild caught mammals at markets (or anywhere
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Pigs. Many flues are started as pig viruses and due to their close biochemistry to human's, they jump ship.
While we're on the subject of civilized countries, note the graph in
https://www.npr.org/sections/g... [npr.org]
Now, does the U.S. seem like a civilized country? They even give you a graph so you needn't worry your dainty head with real figures.
Re: (Score:3)
I think you have the wrong end of the stick here. The bush meat trade is actually a *modern* development in China. China, like the US, has always had recreational hunters and rural people who hunted to put a little extra meat on the table, but your average city dweller in China didn't grow up with his dear old granny serving him steaming bowls of pangolin stew. That's just as weird over there as eating squirrel stew would be over here. The bush meat trade was promoted by officials during economic libera
Re: (Score:3)
The last 7 global pandemics have all come from China.
Which ones?
Funny how Trump never mentioned the ones that started in the USA, eg.:
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandem... [cdc.gov]
(nb. you catch that one from "close contact" with pigs)
Re: (Score:2)
You are obsessed with Trump and politics. Why did you mention Trump?
China Virus, China Virus, China Virus, China Virus.
Swine flu originated in Mexico and was brought into the US.
...which raises the question of what exactly those Americans were doing with pigs in Mexico.
Re: (Score:2)
The last 7 mass shootings in the U.S. were caused by young white males. We should ban all U.S. young white males at least.
There, now do you see how stupid you sound?
Re: Last 7 pandemics (Score:2)
How many mass shootings does your favorite news outlet fail to report?!?
Re: Last 7 pandemics (Score:2)
Re:Last 7 pandemics (Score:4, Informative)
The majority of mass shootings as defined by four or more people shot in a single incident are committed by young black males.
Woud you like to lie again [statista.com]?
Even when you bring it down to school shootings, the Uvalde shooter was non-white hispanic.
Ah yes. One incident. Let's go back for the previous decade to get a better representation. Huh. Most school shootings are at white suburban schools by white guys [cnn.com]. Go back further and the trend continues. Funny that.
More relevant is that the common thread to the vast majority of lone killers who randomly go to places and shoot people is that the majority were on psychotropic prescription drugs
Bullshit. That's the excuse tabloids such as Fox like to trot out when a white guy blows away kids. There is zero evidence for this lie. Everything else you said based on this lie can summarily be ignored.
Re:Last 7 pandemics (Score:5, Insightful)
"China is exceptionally peaceful for a great nation, and never goes around the world attacking and killing people who don't obey it "
As long as we ignore Xin Jiang, Tibet, and what they have in store for Taiwan. The CCP has never been peaceful, they merely quietly eliminate all who threaten it. Lately, the CCP is acting like people of Krikkit (Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy) who noticed the rest of the world and decided it had to go.
Re:Last 7 pandemics (Score:5, Informative)
As long as we ignore Xin Jiang, Tibet, and what they have in store for Taiwan.
Since the communists took over, China has also fought conflicts in Korea, India, and Vietnam. It's not really "exceptionally peaceful" by any standards besides those that gloss over its actual history.
Re:Last 7 pandemics (Score:5, Informative)
While the USA stood and looked on with hands folded
Oh, indeed. With our hands folded. [wikipedia.org] What a foreboding start to your historical retelling.
When Mao Zedong emerged as the undisputed leader of the new Communist Chinese state in 1948, one of the very first things he did was to write to President Harry Truman proposing cooperation between China and the USA.
Wow, dude, that sounds like a totally good faith thing to do and I can't possibly imagine what would have persuaded an American President to reject close alliance with an insular, insane, brutal, maniacal communist dictator.
The Korean War was instigated by Washington
Oh wow, more super accurate history, I see. The Korean War wasn't literally led by the frickin United Nations against the communist uprising in Korea. And China wasn't a permanent member of and held veto power over the UN Security Council at the time when it began this "police action", either, I suppose. Nooo, instead, the Korean War was "instigated by Washington". Sure, whatever.
The wars with India and Vietnam were, in spite of very heavy fighting and losses in Vietnam, strictly border affairs.
Oh, I see. China is "exceptionally peaceful", and those wars were really just "border affairs". Mmm. Great point.
Re: (Score:2)
The Flying Tigers were a volunteer effort, not a US government effort.
Firstly, that's dubious. Secondly, the other poster didn't specify the government, they said the USA sat on our hands. If you're going to be so finely precise, spread the topping evenly, not selectively.
China, as in Mao's China
Did I say Mao's China?
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, let's ask the people of Tibet and Taiwan if they are a part of China.
Second, wouldn't we be totally justified in criticizing the US government for killing people in the US? In fact, don't people do that all the time?
Strange, strange post.
Nevertheless, the problem with China isn't necessarily that they engage in wars, it's that they are a totalitarian state that doesn't believe in individual freedom.
Re: (Score:2)
First of all, let's ask the people of Tibet and Taiwan if they are a part of China.
By all means go ahead and do so. I'm not stopping you. But please don't imply that you know their feelings and wishes until you have polled ALL of them.
Nevertheless, the problem with China isn't necessarily that they engage in wars, it's that they are a totalitarian state that doesn't believe in individual freedom.
There is the basis of a reasonable discussion there. One might rephrase that as, "They have a socialist state which puts the good of the community ahead of the ambitions and greed of a few individuals". In the USA, belief in the supremacy of the individual has gone a good deal too far. Just walk through San Francisco if you're in any doubt, and see how the m
Re: (Score:2)
But please don't imply that you know their feelings and wishes until you have polled ALL of them.
In Tibet, the population measurement is complicated by China's forced transfer of 15% of Tibet's population to mass labor/reeducation camps [newsweek.com].
Re: (Score:3)
Yes. Quite literally *everyone* does this. It creates better understanding of the virus, better vaccines, better test beds for existing vaccines, etc, etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Sigh. I thought this was common knowledge [politifact.com]. It is literally still under debate whether this was gain-of-function research. It is generally not debated whether it was considered to be high risk. There is no evidence that the virus came from a lab, but that would be moving the goalposts.
Re:Cover up! (Score:4, Funny)
But. But. We need more people to be vaccinated so my 5G coverage improves from all the nano-wireless-spy-bots injected in people! Stop outing us, man!
Re: (Score:2)
But. But. We need more people to be vaccinated so my 5G coverage improves from all the nano-wireless-spy-bots injected in people! Stop outing us, man!
And here we are. [9cache.com]
Re:Cover up! (Score:4, Funny)
Screw this, it's all a hoax. I've been vaccinated and my reception is as crappy as it always was. I didn't even get awesome Magneto powers.
Talk about empty promises!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Oh come on, I think we all know that Big Oil paid Putin to bribe Trump to say that COVID originated from the Wuhan Institute of Virology where coronavirus was studied and which suddenly replaced their brand new lab ventilation system days after the first suspected coronavirus symptoms popped up.
We all know that Brett Kavanaugh actually released COVID into the world in the 1970s, when he went on his wild raping spree that was only uncovered by the quick thinking of Nancy Pelosi and her team of intrepid inves
Re: (Score:3)
Except the Wuhan Institute of Virology didn't replace anything. They performed routine maintenance, which they do all the time.
Yes, the Republican memo claims some US$ 606 million was spent on that (and falsely claims the information on that has been redacted; they haven't). Whether that is malicious intent, or the writer of the memo being unable to actually turn Chinese numbers into Western numbers is unknown, but the real figure is 1000 times lower, at 3.93 million yan. A much more modest number, which is
Re: (Score:2)
Is there a source for your counter-information besides Zichen Wang's blog? Because that information I presented was entered into the Congressional record and nobody has ever sought to correct it, from either party. If it was an obvious typographical or mathematical error, one would think that would constitute an easy point score for the other team.
Re: (Score:2)
The original documents are linked in the blog. You can read them yourself. I did. The summary in the blog is correct.
As to why nobody has sought to correct it, that sounds like a "you" problem.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I'm going to wait for a more official confirmation than some dude's blog.
Re: (Score:3)
Green Eggs and Ham is in the Congressional record (Score:2)
entered into the Congressional record and nobody has ever sought to correct it,
So is Green Eggs and Ham. [cnbc.com]
Neither chamber of US Congress is a scientific body nor are its minutes a peer-reviewed journal.
Any moron who can convince enough idiots to check his name on a ballot (or pull a lever if they're not familiar with pencils) can spout any nonsense there without fear of being corrected OR replaced for being wrong or insane.
As for the sources...
The originating WP Opinion piece was corrected [washingtonpost.com] when the opinionator realized his "oopsie..." - quietly. [archive.org]
Opinion piece wasn't updated to address th
Re: (Score:2)
By getting raw Chinese numbers, from links referenced in his footnotes,
How do we know those numbers haven't been changed since the original publication?
Re: Cover up! (Score:2)
Sadly this sounds just like a real person Jordan Klepper would interview.
Re:Science or consensus. Pick one. (Score:5, Insightful)
You're almost right.
"Scientific absolute certainty" is rare. "Scientific Consensus" however is not.
If 98% of all scientists agree on something, then at that point in time there's "Scientific Consensus".
Casting doubt on that is just another way certain parties are trying to cast doubt on the whole scientific process.
For example there is "Scientific Consensus" that humans are exacerbating global warming on a significant scale. The chance of that being refuted are close to 0, regardless of what certain parties would like that to be.
People trying to claim there is no such thing as "Scientific Consensus" or that it doesn't apply to their specific thing they disagree with, are almost always acting in bad faith.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Scientific consensus does form, but the consensus itself is not an argument for anything, since the majority can, and often is wrong - and the fact such consensus can be overturned is what separates science from religion.
Re: (Score:3)
Yep. And generally it needs a lot of proof to change that.
Knowledge evolves, just like Newton was right at the time.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
"scientific" implies that it is the result of following the scientific method. The term for what you are describing isn't "scientific consensus" - which is, of course an oxymoron because consensus is the polar opposite of science. Maybe try "consensus among scientistry-ists"
The Royal Society adopted "Nullius In Verba" as their motto for a reason. It means "upon no one's word" or "take no one's word for it". It is explicitly anti-authority for a reason. That motto, that philosophy, changed the world for
Re: (Score:3)
Scientific consensus is when most all the scientists in the field are in agreement, happens a lot.The scientific consensus is that the Sun is powered by fusion and at this point it would take some extraordinary evidence that it is powered by something else but there is still lots of science being done on how exactly it works, the H-H versus the carbon cycle for example.
Often scientific consensus is modified, the Earth is a sphere, actually it is an oblate sphere, actually it is a slightly pear shaped oblate
Re:Science or consensus. Pick one. (Score:4, Informative)
You have taken great pains to avoid my point: The thing that you persist in calling "scientific consensus" is not scientific and the name is (intentionally) misleading in an attempt to garb the non-scientific consensus in unearned prestige.
Presented with good evidence, it may very well be that most people who look at some question will come to the same conclusion, but their agreement is worse than useless - it actively hinders the process of science. This harm is greatly magnified when the consensus takes on a life of its own and people start believing reports about the consensus and join it via groupthink instead of joining the honest way after looking at the data.
Remember - this point is so important that the people who created the modern scientific method adopted it as their motto. They could have said "God save the King" or "To the stars through our work" or "better living through chemistry", but they didn't. They picked "Fuck your authority" because it was the most important thing.
Re: (Score:3)
I thought that the world now understood that "So you are saying" is the universal preface to abject stupidity. I guess you haven't seen the video.
Your second clue should have come around the time when you accused me of being stuck on gravity, a topic that I haven't mentioned even once, but you seem to be prattling on about endlessly. But for the record, yes, it is a damn good thing that gravity was revisited many times over the last few thousand years. Can you imagine if we had stuck with the first "scie
Re: (Score:3)
So you are saying that science should just revisit old science instead of moving to new science?
The idea that you believe this is an either/or position is disturbing. "Old" science should absolutely be revisited on a regular basis, and is the point the GP is making that you're missing--if you haven't done the experiment yourself, you are left with "this is what the book says" which is completely at odds with "take no one's word for it."
Obviously, you cannot progress if you do not stand on the shoulders of giants (otherwise you would likely make it no further than they) but the idea that you should no
Fauci scientific consensus (Score:3)
Scientists are human, and so political.
The Origin of Covid consensus, to the extent that there is one, was manufactured in an early meeting in which Fauci gathered together the people he funded to write a paper that denounced the lab leak because he partially funded the game of function research that produced it. Prior to the meeting several had said they thought the lab leak most likely. Then out came the outrageous "Proximal Origin" paper.
There is bullshit in science, as in everywhere else. If you want
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
More accurately, Pelosi is (hopefully) going to Taiwan to declare Jinping has a small penis and it will never grow. What the CCP does with this information is their own affair.
Re: Just as Pelosi is about to start a war with Ch (Score:5, Interesting)
Please point to where someone suggested that it didn't come from China, and that anyone that thinks it did is a racist. That's a really nice straw man you set up, so you could knock the hell out of it.
Everyone knows the pandemic started in Wuhan. The only question is where in Wuhan - the biolab, or the "wet market". These studies conclusively point to the market.
The huge glaring billboard of a point that you clearly missed is that calling it the "china virus" is a shitty racist thing to do, because it has caused a wave of racist violence against AAPI-descendent people from incredibly ignorant racist people. My wife, who was born in Cleveland of parents that emigrated from Japan (e.g. not "chinese in any way) has been harassed in a grocery store by these racists, because when you have a walking nationwide amplifier like the President using such hateful bullshit terms, angry aggrieved racist assholes listen and do likewise.
Is it so hard to just call it "covid" like everyone already does unless being purposefully shitty or attempting to "own the libs" or some other fucking nonsense? Why do you need to focus on where it originated so badly, if not looking for a reason to justify racism or some kind of us-versus-them bullshit that only fuels division and hate? Because that's exactly what racists do, whether you want to admit it or not.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm genuinely sorry for the crap you and your wife have had to put up with. Those are ignorant assholes and ought to be put in their place.
But to your first point, I clearly remember that anyone who said Wuhan was the source along with the wet market hypothesis was a dangerous racist peddling in misinformation. This was one example. [summit.news]
It is also not racist to refer to the origin, e.g. Wuhan Flu, et al, We have several diseases that follow that convention, so I eagerly await the renaming of Middle East Respira
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Lab. (Score:5, Informative)
The CCP didn't want the lab investigation because they were worried it might be true; they knew there was research being done which wasn't supposed to be, and they knew the lab wasn't nearly as safe as was claimed. Keep in mind that originally they tried to act like it didn't start in the wet market (which they've been criticized for not properly regulating in the past) and have even made attempts to say it didn't even originate in China at all. Given their track record, a good hard look at the Lab Leak possibility was always necessary but for some reason certain US political groups decided it was a "wild, crazy conspiracy theory."
Re: Lab. (Score:5, Informative)
'looking less likely there was a lab leak'
Except for the early sequencing, lack of animal reservoir, 13 base pairs found in a patent that pre-dated the official sequence release, tribasic furin cleavage site known to be used by human researchers, HIV motifs
Yeah, just pure coincidence each and every one of these 1,000,000-to-1 occurrences
Re: (Score:2)
It can't be anything except what CNN tells us. They're the most trusted name in news, and we should always trust them, no matter what they say. If they say it came from a lab, we should trust them. If they say it didn't come from a lab, we should trust them.
And if later on they say it came from a lab again, we should still trust them.
Apples are not bananas, and CNN is always right, even if they're wrong. The world doesn't make sense any other way.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So where is the natural reservoir for it? Why haven't they been able to find any closer match to SARS-CoV-2 than a bat coronavirus that was being researched at WIV? Isn't it plausible that someone working at the lab visited that wet market and brought it there?
People selling animals for food is hardly a coincidence. Is there any evidence that food animals were infected with the virus before the first human case? Or did you really mean that it's a coincidence that humans were infected with the disease wi
Re: (Score:3)
Whatever CNN says is true. The natural reservoir obviously was there, but we weren't able to detect it in time - the entire reservoir disappeared, mutated, and got erased before anyone could actually observe it. Any logical objection you have to the wisdom and truth of CNN is moot, since CNN transcends all objections.
Stop objecting to the correct news! Every time we inject doubt into the conversation, we risk the power of the #MediaIndustrialComplex, and the worst thing that could ever happen is not trus
Re:Lab. (Score:4)
Of course you get angry and shouty when people point out your just-so-story.
The question isn't whether animals in wet markets have viruses. It's whether an animal brought this particular virus to this particular wet market.
You don't understand basic logic or probability. That's fine, nobody is perfect. But you should know better than to lose your temper when people are informing you.
Re: Lab. (Score:2)
Yes, and the minks in Europe and the deer in North America got it naturally and not through some careless human.
Zoonosis works in both directions. There's nothing magical about animal to human transmission that sets it apart from human to animal transmission. A 40 year old postdoc from that lab could have set off a cluster in both humans and animals in that market just the way someone obviously infected the mink and the deer and the zoo critters that ended up catching it.
Re: (Score:2)
Well golly, if it was detected in the sewer samples in Europe well before December, then it must have originated there. You seem to be particularly adept at epidemiology, maybe you could tell your theory to the researchers, I'm positive that never occurred to them. Surely they'll listen to you. Better get your epidemiology degree dusted off and show it to them first, they'll want to know to whom they are dealing.
Re: (Score:3)
That is actually my hypothesis, too. The oldest samples in Europe about I'm aware of are sewage water samples and blood samples from October 2019.
The Outbreak started in Wuhan, however how the virus got there: is completely unknown.
Re: (Score:2)
Needs citation.
Re: (Score:3)
That is an american myth.
Complete nonsense.
Neither does anyone use bats as lab animals nor do Chinese eat bats/
Re: (Score:2)
The CCP has changed their story many time. The CCP claimed the virus came from Europe. The CCP claimed the virus came from US troops. The CCP claimed the viruse came from a bat, then a pangolin.