Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Exactly.

There is an investegative group from the WHO interviewing the Wuhan lab people and looking at various form of documentation.

The lab leak proponents claim that they are all lying and all the documents are fraudulent.

The lab leak proponents have the burden of proof and IMHO kinda should shut up until they can carry that burden.




Did you read the article. The investigative group is compromised. The doctors who were part of the group have strong connections and even experiments running in the same lab.


Oh - I forgot - the investigation is comprimised ...

Insanity!


I agree that compromised isn't a smart word to use about this, but even if you think all these questions have been settled, I'm surprised you don't agree that it is bad optics to have the investigator to be the funder of the research being investigated, and even worse when he says things like: well, we asked them and they said no, so that's that. The conflict of interest couldn't be more obvious.

It's the media's job to investigate conflicts of interest, so the fact that they didn't looked into that, and that they took Daszak's original so-called debunking at face value, is bad optics on another level. It has left a credibility vacuum, so it's unsurprising that articles like the current one are coming in from the margins.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: