It’s crazy to me how many people on even this forum, a place purportedly of science, continue to dismiss a lab leak origin out of hand citing it as some sort of crackpot theory. The serious questions raised in this article have been around since last April but it’s only now it’s even allowed to talk about them on digital forums.
The way I remember it was that people conflated the lab leak theory with it being engineered in a lab. Those are very different things but easy to mix up in a headline.
It being engineered as a bioweapon is in the realm of a crackpot theory, but it being just a poorly contained natural research project was fairly reasonable. Some prominent people mixed the two up on purpose and eventually the whole thing - both ideas - got labeled a crackpot theory by people who just saw some headlines.
> The way I remember it was that people conflated the lab leak theory with it being engineered in a lab. Those are very different things but easy to mix up in a headline.
This is kind of how I remember things too I think, I feel like I'm being gaslit by the internet lately reading how certain some people are.
I've seen this so many times, yet 9 times out of ten, even in this thread, when people are claiming it originated in a lab, they also include claims that it was created in a lab.
To be fair it does not sound like many people doubt that they were conducting gain of function experiments at the Wuhan lab, which makes it not unlikely that a lab leak as successful as covid was one of those engineered strains. If it was a lab leak at all.
Certain right wing China hawks were pushing the bioweapon theory to stoke fears, and since the loudest and most outrageous talking points are what spreads on the internet, that became the default idea for a lot of people when they heard "lab origins".
Kevin Drum had a good summary of this a couple of weeks ago, much shorter. His take? There's no more evidence for the lab leak theory now than there was a year ago, BUT what has changed is that the cross-over theory implied that we would find certain evidence for the vectors, and that evidence has not shown up. KD's take was that it's not so much that the lab leak theory has become more likely, it's the that biological origin theory has become less likely.
We’ve been trying to find the zoonotic origin of Ebola for decades without any success. We don’t have anywhere near a complete catalog of animal diseases, and of those only a fraction have been sequenced.
I think the release that three scientists fell ill in November 2019, who were working on gain of function research at the Wuhan lab with Covid-like symptoms, may have made the lab leak theory more probable, at least in my opinion, since a year ago. Note that doesn't say they definitely had Covid or that anything conclusive about the theory was settled.
Haha. No. It’s because of politics and TDS. People were taught that this was a Trump theory. That’s all the media needs to say to ensure that nobody will take it seriously and nobody will tolerate anyone else who takes it seriously.
It's so bizarre to me to view him in this way. "Trump thinks something; therefore I must be against it".
I understand not taking his word for anything. But it's such an important issue. To just dismiss it and not try to investigate it, even at the highest levels of our government and public health bureaucracies, strikes me as negligent at best.
> To just dismiss it and not try to investigate it, even at the highest levels of our government and public health bureaucracies, strikes me as negligent at best.
No, it is not. Judge ideas on their own merits please.
These same people ridicule the Space Force, for example, despite it being a reorganization of US Space Command that had bipartisan approval years before Trump even ran for office.
Here I have a little bit of experience. When a person has shown themselves to be a pathological liar, you can't judge their ideas on their own merits because the cost of judging far outweighs the cost of producing garbage ideas. That is why attention is so valuable, there are plenty of people out there who do not make it their trade to espouse nonsense.
This is a good point in general but I don’t think it actually applies here. I don’t know why people keep acting like taking this seriously required believing a word of anything out of Trumps mouth. That isn’t how it went.
Some folks who never supported Trump had their own reasons to examine this. They talked about it, and everyone assumed they got the idea from Trump, and therefore not only did they deserve no attention, but they also deserve no respect, and outright career sabotage by folks like Peter Daszak and to a lesser extent, Anthony Fauci. Many had to work on this in secret because the hyper partisans wouldn’t listen to them, and instead tried to attack them just for talking about it. Take a look at Yuri Deigin and Alina Chan on twitter and go back in their timelines to see how long they have been digging into this.
My hope is not that anyone acknowledges that Trump was correct, although I would view it as a sign of integrity if they did. But whether he was or wasn’t, and whether he got lucky or actually knew something, I don’t care. The real issue comes not from Trump, but their own prejudice, which many are still trying to make excuses for, made them so blind to what, in hindsight, is actually extremely obvious as the most likely explanation. Then they took it further and let their blind hate for Trump also caused them to hate half of their fellow citizens, and they extended that hate to anyone who they even perceived as having thoughts tangentially related to something Trump said.
I could easily come up with probably 5 more examples of something very similar that happened in his orbit that people who only follow left leaning mainstream news have no idea about, or that were spun into complete anti-trump lies by the media and are still believed by people today.
The media are absolutely full of shit. All of them. Real journalism died, hyper partisan “woke” activists have been graduating and taking writing jobs, groupthink and cult-like behavior has amplified, and the executives loved the sky high ratings and revenue they got for being anti-trump. Cancel culture further reinforced this culty groupthink and forced moderate voices out. Hell, people actually try to say Glenn Greenwald went right-wing crazy. Glenn Greenwald! They don’t even realize that it wasn’t him who changed, it was them.
It’s pervasive in tech. People are actually pro-censorship now. And they have convinced themselves that they are the good guys. It’s hard to believe how far we have fallen from rationality in such a short time.
That doesn't mean it cannot be true. It does mean that after 3 years and several thousand fully documented outright lies, the presumption of truth was no longer being granted.
Except he was proven right yet again that social media and old media orgs will censor others and lie to the public when it fits their political agenda.
We've banned this account for using HN primarily for political/ideological battle. That's against the HN guidelines because it destroys the intended purpose of the site—and for that reason, we ban accounts that do it, regardless of which politics/ideology they're battling for.
Crossing into personal attack is also egregious and not allowed here.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Your "politics" are antagonism and scapegoating of The Other. If you were actually conservative, you should be appalled and distancing yourself as much as possible from the MAGA cult.
Antagonism and scapegoating of The Other was, and is, currently the playbook of the democrats at the moment. They don’t have a monopoly on it, but they’re way more guilty of this. It just doesn’t seem like it, because you haven’t heard the other side of the story, and haven’t realized how much has been a total lie from the left. Everyone believes it all, uncritically, for the same reason they dismissed the lab leak.
Folks reflecting on this and saying, what else did we have completely wrong are asking the right question. Folks who think this was a one off, well, it absolutely wasn’t.
I doubt there is even a single “MAGA” person on HN, but you folks like to throw that epithet around to shut down dialog. It’s shameful.
And nobody needs to distance themselves from anyone. If you make a false association, that’s your fault, not theirs. Judge them on what they actually do and say, not on what you (incorrectly) assume they might think.
> Antagonism and scapegoating of The Other was, and is, currently the playbook of the democrats at the moment. They don’t have a monopoly on it, but they’re way more guilty of this. It just doesn’t seem like it, because you haven’t heard the other side of the story, and haven’t realized how much has been a total lie from the left.
I go out of my way to try to understand what conservative punditry has to say on a given subject.
You might be conflating the terminally online left with the much larger and more diverse Democrat party as a whole. Contrast with the GOP, whom with very few exceptions has fully signed on with Trumpism & embraced the sort of ignorant, economically illiterate and frankly insane beliefs that entails. Maybe it's survivorship bias, because anyone with a principled conservative bone in their body has already distanced themselves from the GOP over the last 4 years.
There are absolutely "MAGA" people on HN, in this case salivating over the opportunity to claim Trump was right about something, anything at all(as though it vindicates them or proves something in general, let alone in this case).
We've banned this account for using HN primarily for political/ideological battle. That's against the HN guidelines because it destroys the intended purpose of the site—and for that reason, we ban accounts that do it, regardless of which politics/ideology they're battling for. We already asked you not to do this once, and as far as I can tell you've done nothing but flamewar ever since. Not cool.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
We've banned this account for using HN primarily for political/ideological battle. That's against the HN guidelines because it destroys the intended purpose of the site—and for that reason, we ban accounts that do it, regardless of which politics/ideology they're battling for. We've asked you not to do this many times and you've ignored our requests. Not cool.
If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
Right - instead of trying to debate the veracity of the argument, it was immediately cast as a political battle, and being on the same side as Trump in most urban and most media circles was asking to be ostracized. It’s absolutely poisonous.
How as anybody going to "debate the veracity of the argument"? What information was anybody going to use?
Even so, in the intervening period, even when Trump was still president, several US agency reports concluded that the virus likely did not originate from a lab, and one assumes that they had more information than anybody else.
Do you believe in anything else considered a "conspiracy theory" by the scientific or academic community? This is roughly the level of reasoning people use when arguing that 9/11 was an inside job.
Not really. I believe Armstrong walked on the moon, Oswald shot Kennedy and 911 was a bunch of mostly Saudis flying planes into buildings. I question the attribution of hacks to Russia that often happens, not because I trust Russia or anything but because I'm capable of pulling off some of those attacks myself and I can do so without leaving evidence of what nation I'm in. I assume a team of elite Russian hackers would be more capable than me and could do the same.
Why did you say “anything else”? This isn’t a conspiracy theory. They only detail that is even in question is whether or not one of their samples leaked. Nothing else about what that lab is, or what that lab does, is even in question. They go 1000 miles away to get bats and bat poop and bring it to the WIV to study bat coronaviruses and they modify them to be more transmissible. This is basic virology in 2021 and they have been proudly telling the world that they do this for years. None of that is speculation.
The question of whether one of their viruses leaked out again (yes, again!) that was a bat coronavirus found right by the bat coronavirus lab, or whether it was a remarkable cascade of coincidences that still has no viable complete hypothesis (the “modified” virus doesn’t infect bats anymore), is not one of “conspiracy”.
> Except he was proven right yet again that social media and old media orgs will censor others and lie to the public when it fits their political agenda.
And this differs from "new media" how? You don't like what certain social media and "old media orgs" did? Fine, no problem. There's no media on the planet that doesn't do this to some extent, least of all contemporary conservative US media outlets.
Whether you consider what was done to Trump and others regarding their posts/speeches about COVID and cures for it as censorship depends a lot on how you see the world. Your mileage may vary (because mine certainly does).
I keep seeing this and it just doesn’t make sense. What is more likely, a global conspiracy theory amongst all the tech giants who normally try to outcompete each other into the ground as quickly and with as much humiliation as possible and the Federal government, which they try to evade and subvert at every opportunity?
Or the idea that when COVID first hit it was the conspiracy theorists screaming the loudest about the lab leak origin and given the sudden interest of the US in xenophobia and specifically the anti-Chinese sentiment(hint: it’s not that sudden), it would have potentially resulted in violence against Asian people. And at the same time the crossover theory was pretty much as likely if not more based on what we knew then. Now that more info has been gathered everyone is doing an about-face on covering this issue since it’s become a serious conversation and not a crackpot fringe theory shared with the intent to spread hate.
Maybe what had happened was that initially we knew little and everyone was a bit panicked. Then the crackpots started spreading FUD via the most convenient COVID origin theory to their message. The old media mostly ignored this, dismissing it swiftly without giving it more airtime. Social media was too busy with conspiracy theorist and right wing activists spreading the lab leak theory so they viewed it as false (if 99% of the time what a person says is a lie, why would this particular thing be true?). Then articles like these revived that theory with new information. Most people took in the information as just “hey new data” and left it at that. A few people who were spreading the conspiracy theory version of this story felt vindicated while simultaneously upset because their low quality memes were not really allowed while new the WSJ, the NYT, and Vanity Faire is getting front page treatment because of course excellent writing is more compelling than some guy on YouTube angrily vaping in his mother’s basement.
Nothing was revived with any new information. The Venn diagram that includes the circle of people who were following and investigating this, and the circle of conspiracy theorist Trump supporters, did not ever overlap.
One of these circles was about some bill gates funded bioweapon to implant 5G or some nonsense which they suspected was being done in WIV.
The other was scientists who have known about the work at WIV for years, not based on suspicion, but based on the papers they kept releasing, media interviews, sequencing the genome, and doing science.
But you all TDS’d so hard that you wrote the latter off as the former, and the media went along with it.
It isn’t even a conspiracy theory. It had nothing to do with collusion by tech giants. Their hyper partisan employees just fell into the same TDS trap and decided “lab = conspiracy misinformation, no ifs ands or buts” and started purging people talking about it.
The Vanity Fair article is actually quite poorly researched and written, and misattributes much of the source and timeline, but at least people are snapping out of their partisan blindness on this issue now.
No. It was not a Trump theory. It was commonly believed among Chinese political dissidents. Any Chinese people who don't believe the CCP have speculated this long before Trump even had any thought on this. Please stop relating everything to Trump.
I mean, fair enough right? Figuring out if it started in a lab has zero effect on the mortality rate while Trump making up new lies every day for months about how it's just about to just go away anyway led people to their deaths, plenty of whom probably weren't his followers.
Here's what I remember from that time period. My recollection is that the wet market hypothesis fell out of favor rather quickly, but nothing else really emerged in its place. The lab leak theory was circulating, but amongst people such as rank-and-file scientists, the attitude was: We aren't going to get a straight answer about this, but we've got to defeat this virus.
I don't remember dismissing the lab leak theory per se, but rather, taking it in as one of a massive spew of crackpot theories all coming from more or less one source. I'm reminded of the children's story, "The boy who cried wolf."
Looking back in hindsight, I wonder how we could have picked out the lab leak theory as being worthy of consideration, given the context. And whether a more scientifically minded public and government would have faced that dilemma.
Could be. I confess that I don't follow social media, but I participate in a handful of web forums that probably count as lightweight social media. On those forums, there are taboo topics, and my impression is that those are topics where any hope of civil discussion has long since evaporated. So, I wouldn't have high hopes for progress towards investigating this issue via a social medium if its curators have already concluded that the topic should be banned.
FYI for the past year or so you could get a lifetime ban from YouTube (and Facebook and Twitter?) for discussing the lab-leak hypothesis. It was an outrageous overreaction.
The article literally cites a statement put out by a respected medical journal on Feb. 29, 2020, and signed by 27 scientists, "roundly rejecting the lab-leak hypothesis, effectively casting it as a xenophobic cousin to climate change denialism and anti-vaxxism."
Whatever your recollection of "rank-and-file scientists" attitudes is, the narrative on record is to the contrary.
Rank-and-file scientists tend to stay out of that kind of political statement-making IME, just as when you see a statement from the student union of XZY university condemning whatever that tells you very little about what rank-and-file students of that university are thinking. So I don't see a contradiction here.
> Looking back in hindsight, I wonder how we could have picked out the lab leak theory as being worthy of consideration, given the context. And whether a more scientifically minded public and government would have faced that dilemma.
By actually considering the idea based on the information available, rather than judging solely on the messenger. Things we've known for most of the past year now:
* The wet-market was likely not the origin of the outbreak. Earliest identified positive cases predate the market outbreak and have no connection with it.
* The lab in question was very near to the wet market where the largest outbreak occurred.
* The lab in question specifically researched coronaviruses in bats.
* The closest match to the SARS-COV-2 virus we've found in bats in nature are bats that live over a 1000 kilometers away from Wuhan. However, these bats are among those being researched at the virology lab there.
* The lab in question was the subject of concern among international inspectors years before the outbreak, who stated that they believed the lab didn't meet necessary safety and containment protocols, and didn't have the staff to do so.
* US intelligence agencies have been signalling that the Chinese government has been covering up the origins of the lab.
* The CCP themselves have demonstrated that they are actively working against the discovery of the origins of the disease. Soon after the wet-market outbreak, they closed the wet-market, prevented any international scientists and experts from examining it, and over their objections, purged all animals there and sanitized the entire place, making it impossible to determine what might have led to an outbreak at the market. They also cracked down internally on whistleblowers who said the situation in Wuhan early in the pandemic was much worse than being broadcasted. Finally, they have simultaneously insisted on the natural origin of the virus, while also pushing theories that it originated from non-Chinese sources, such as China, South Asian pangolin black market traders, and the US Army.
* The CCP prevented WHO investigators from actually entering the country to look for origins of the virus for nearly a year, didn't give them full access when they arrived, and the resulting report was declared largely useless by the international community immediately upon its release.
* All people claiming that the lab-leak theory had been "debunked" were actually referring to the theory that it was genetically engineered, which is not the same thing at all.
None of this proves a lab leak, but its strong enough circumstantial evidence that it is at least as plausible as any other origin. Virtually the only new information to have come out is that some of the workers in the lab got sick with Covid-like symptoms in November.
If you swapped China with the US and this lab with the CDC, people would have taken it far more seriously. Imagine a worldwide pandemic started down the street from the CDC in Atlanta, Georgia, AND no one could find the origin of the virus but the closest match was in an animal native to Northern Ohio, AND that animal also happened to be at the CDC for studying the type of virus in question, AND whistleblowers had mentioned concerns about procedures there previously, AND the US government did everything in their power to prevent people from investigating. People would have zeroed in on the theory from day 1.
There was always plenty of reason to see it as worthy of consideration, and for those who weren't judging solely based on "Does Trump think this is true or not", they did. The biggest reason it wasn't was solely due to the fact that our media/social media can't function outside the scope of our current political/cultural wars. Information is being judged less and less on its own merits, and more and more on who is providing it.
I too am disappointed at how politicized this is. That includes the Vanity Fair article, which was mostly about press coverage, funding, memos, and circumstantial evidence.
Here's some good science sources:
- Comprehensive reddit post [0] from a virologist (table of contents, also linked as a 34 page pdf), referencing over 150 sources, with several sections going into the details of the genetic evidence, also interesting to read the comments.
- Here's an article [1] talking about different origin theories and the related genetic evidence, having a section I was interested in about the cleavage site and o-linked glycan, something apparently that has to develop in an animal with an immune system (this is something I haven't seen any lab-made proponents speak to yet).
- Lastly, here is an article [2], much more scientific than the Vanify Fair article, in favor of a lab connection (unfortunately, for me, this article doesn't mention the o-linked glycan, nor the genetic evidence that covid-19 may have originated hundreds of miles from Wuhan [3])
That's as far as I've gotten so far following the science. I'm hoping there will be more virologist commentary as more data comes out, perhaps something based on the full WHO report/data that I heard was released last week. I'd like to think that science will give us more definite answers eventually. It could take years.
I'm not so much interested in conjecture from politicians and journalists. I'm really taken back by all the inaccuracies, half-truth's, innuendo, and conspiracy theories floating around. Are we all led so easily by the headlines they feed us?
I am going through all the documents you referenced but let me tell you about the reason why I believe that you can’t trust the scientists directly involved in the research: the Reddit posting PhD uses this statement to tell why the lab couldn’t have just leaked a sample they collected (so not engineered just being absolutely sloppy):
“The WIV, and Dr. Zhengli-Li Shi’s lab group, are extremely well-respected in the virology community. As well respected as many US scientists.”
In fact this person does jackshit to methodologically prove that this lab was not run sloppily, just throws pedigree and “trust us we know she’s legit” crap. Let me tell you the majority of scientists anywhere should not be trusted in their ability maintain sterile techniques or keeping their lab secure. You can look at the vials that floated out of Galveston utmb in a flood, or the cdc shipping precontaminated Covid test kits because their techs didn’t use filter tips.
This is not just this PhD, it’s basically 97% of all scientists. Any statement that undermines the image that they don’t know what they are doing is taken personally with great prejudice.
The Reddit resource is great to suggest that no one deliberately engineered or even grew this virus. But it does nothing to disprove that they just leaked a sample they excavated in a cave and brought to the lab. And by combining both and collectively arguing against any malice or stupidity from these researchers they are not doing anyone a favor in trusting them. Also a real scientist would never categorically disregard a hypothesis without incontrovertible proof, which this and every other kiss-ass scientist does defending this wuhan cabal.
I agree, that's why I pay the most attention to the genetic evidence. Other sections of his post, and the references he pulled together, go into great detail on that.
Whether or not I agree with everything you wrote and sourced here, let me offer some enthusiastic praise for such a comprehensive and well-informed writeup. We should all aspire to be able to post something as substantive as this.
That’s because “lab leak” origin isn’t consistently defined. Is it that it was engineered? Was it just being studied? Were the first cases just workers at the lab workers who were doing collections?
I’ve always said, focusing on the origins of “who was responsible” rather than dealing with containment first is counterproductive.
Excellent write up by Vanity Fair.