Coronavirus Outbreak

[Nelson]

What makes the hypothesis that the virus started in the WIV lab in Wuhan a conspiracy theory? Serious question. More evidence points to this than the “natural” zoonotic hypothesis. Serious question, why is it a “conspiracy theory”?

Absolutely nothing T5150. The hypothesis that the virus may have leaked from the Wuhan lab is a valid one to pursue. My comment in relation to conspiracy theories was prompted by your comment:

"... there is no “smoking gun” and there never will be because the Chinese and those in the west with skin in the game (there are many now) will not allow it."

Conspiracy theories are essentially about people conspiring to do or not to do something. In this case the suggestion seems to be that there are vested interests in the West who will conspire to ensure that the truth about a lab leak can never be proven. Maybe there are, maybe there aren't. I suspect I'm never going to know

The point that I was trying to make was that the potential for such a conspiracy can't be held up as proof in itself that a lab leak did occur.


Sorry Tigger, I missed your response and I appreciate that your response is such a detailed, balanced and reasonable response.

I understand your point on conspiracy theory and probably acknowledge that to a large extent you are correct, however I think you have actually spelled out the issue in your own words. The "hypothesis is a valid one to pursue". It very valid in fact IMO and in the opinion of many scientists, it is the most likely hypothesis based on evidence and has not been falsified at all. So if that is the case, what is the reason and the motivation that is not being pursued and in fact being suppressed and dismissed? Biden shut down the State Dept investigation into it yesterday.

I'm not certain whether that was your intention. You do appear, to me, to be coming fairly strongly from the position that a lab leak did occur. I'm firmly on the fence on that one and will remain so until the evidence is much stronger. I suspect I may even be on the fence indefinitely.

I am not strongly of an opinion that the lab leak IS the origin. I am strongly of the opinion that the scientific evidence to date makes the lab leak the null hypothesis. That doesnt remove the other hypothesis, but IMO it is the most likely. Both are still live.


My initial comments about Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon and QAnon were also not intended to suggest that the lab-leak hypothesis was a conspiracy theory. Rather that Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon, by virtue of his own track record, and the company he kept, was lacking in credibility. His "China virus" rants were treated in the same way as the little boy who cried wolf.

True, all fueled by a compliant media who have a vested interest in continuing that narrative. That is one of my big concerns in this is that this is about as obvious a global emergency that you can imagine and the global authorities and structures in place (WHO, US media, both US administrations) have been shown to be untrustworthy.

Well it is probably pretty hard to falsify it. Even if an intermediate host were found it would not necessarily mean that the virus was not manufactured in a lab, it would just present a very plausible alternative.

The "nature" hypothesis is predicated on viral evolution theory and is sought to be contradicted by what is known and/or believed as part of viral evolution theory. If an observation of the virus does not conform with that theory then that is taken to be an indicator of falsity, but it could otherwise represent less than complete accuracy in the underlying theory.

What corresponding theory underpins the "created" hypothesis that makes it falsifiable? Is it just the inverse of the "nature" hypothesis? Or are there are at least hypothesised limits on the extent to which a virus can be manufactured?

 

[Tiger5150]

What makes the hypothesis that the virus started in the WIV lab in Wuhan a conspiracy theory? Serious question. More evidence points to this than the “natural” zoonotic hypothesis. Serious question, why is it a “conspiracy theory”?

Absolutely nothing T5150. The hypothesis that the virus may have leaked from the Wuhan lab is a valid one to pursue. My comment in relation to conspiracy theories was prompted by your comment:

"... there is no “smoking gun” and there never will be because the Chinese and those in the west with skin in the game (there are many now) will not allow it."

Conspiracy theories are essentially about people conspiring to do or not to do something. In this case the suggestion seems to be that there are vested interests in the West who will conspire to ensure that the truth about a lab leak can never be proven. Maybe there are, maybe there aren't. I suspect I'm never going to know

The point that I was trying to make was that the potential for such a conspiracy can't be held up as proof in itself that a lab leak did occur.


Sorry Tigger, I missed your response and I appreciate that your response is such a detailed, balanced and reasonable response.

I understand your point on conspiracy theory and probably acknowledge that to a large extent you are correct, however I think you have actually spelled out the issue in your own words. The "hypothesis is a valid one to pursue". It very valid in fact IMO and in the opinion of many scientists, it is the most likely hypothesis based on evidence and has not been falsified at all. So if that is the case, what is the reason and the motivation that is not being pursued and in fact being suppressed and dismissed? Biden shut down the State Dept investigation into it yesterday.

I'm not certain whether that was your intention. You do appear, to me, to be coming fairly strongly from the position that a lab leak did occur. I'm firmly on the fence on that one and will remain so until the evidence is much stronger. I suspect I may even be on the fence indefinitely.

I am not strongly of an opinion that the lab leak IS the origin. I am strongly of the opinion that the scientific evidence to date makes the lab leak the null hypothesis. That doesnt remove the other hypothesis, but IMO it is the most likely. Both are still live.


My initial comments about Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon and QAnon were also not intended to suggest that the lab-leak hypothesis was a conspiracy theory. Rather that Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon, by virtue of his own track record, and the company he kept, was lacking in credibility. His "China virus" rants were treated in the same way as the little boy who cried wolf.

True, all fueled by a compliant media who have a vested interest in continuing that narrative. That is one of my big concerns in this is that this is about as obvious a global emergency that you can imagine and the global authorities and structures in place (WHO, US media, both US administrations) have been shown to be untrustworthy.

Well it is probably pretty hard to falsify it. Even if an intermediate host were found it would not necessarily mean that the virus was not manufactured in a lab, it would just present a very plausible alternative.

I agree it is hard to falsify, and generally when something can not be falsified, however competing hypothesis are falsified, the non falsified hypothesis becomes the theory. The fact that it is hard to falsify and the competing "nature" hypothesis can be to at least some extent is why the lab leak hypothesis should be considered the null hypothesis.

The "nature" hypothesis is predicated on viral evolution theory and is sought to be contradicted by what is known and/or believed as part of viral evolution theory. If an observation of the virus does not conform with that theory then that is taken to be an indicator of falsity, but it could otherwise represent less than complete accuracy in the underlying theory.

the advanced viral evolution of COVID and the apparent lack of apparent suitable population for this evolution does provide falsification for the "Nature" hypothesis. You are correct, this falsification does not exclude the nature hypothesis, as I think you are aware, that is not how the scientific method works, but it does make the lab leak the null hypothesis.


What corresponding theory underpins the "created" hypothesis that makes it falsifiable? Is it just the inverse of the "nature" hypothesis? Or are there are at least hypothesised limits on the extent to which a virus can be manufactured?

Im not sure of your question here? Im not sure what would falsify the lab leak hypothesis (and its probably impossible without complete transparency from the CCP). IMO if the lab leak hypothesis was ruled out it would be because more compelling evidence was found for the nature hypothesis (intermiadry animal, hidden population of humans living in a cave for 20 years).

 

[Nelson]

Im not sure of your question here? Im not sure what would falsify the lab leak hypothesis (and its probably impossible without complete transparency from the CCP). IMO if the lab leak hypothesis was ruled out it would be because more compelling evidence was found for the nature hypothesis (intermiadry animal, hidden population of humans living in a cave for 20 years).

I think you did answer it as just being the inverse of the "nature" theory. I was asking whether there were, to your knowledge, any additional theoretical flags that might tend to indicate that the virus was not created (such as limits on the technology to create new viruses).

 

[tigger]

Biden shut down the State Dept investigation into it yesterday.

I read somewhere (sorry, I can't remember where) that Biden was shutting down an enquiry established by Pompeo because the terms of the enquiry were not open ended in regarded to establishing the source of the virus. The enquiry was established specifically to investigate whether the source of the virus was the Wuhan Lab.

CNN (yes, yes, I know) reports today that Biden has instructed the intelligence community to redouble their efforts in investigating the source. My initial thoughts were that the intelligence community was a strange vehicle to conduct such an enquiry, but, in the absence of Chinese cooperation, it is perhaps the only option.

This is the article:
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/05/27/politics/intelligence-community-covid-19-originated-theories/index.html

 

[Tiger5150]

Im not sure of your question here? Im not sure what would falsify the lab leak hypothesis (and its probably impossible without complete transparency from the CCP). IMO if the lab leak hypothesis was ruled out it would be because more compelling evidence was found for the nature hypothesis (intermiadry animal, hidden population of humans living in a cave for 20 years).

I think you did answer it as just being the inverse of the "nature" theory. I was asking whether there were, to your knowledge, any additional theoretical flags that might tend to indicate that the virus was not created (such as limits on the technology to create new viruses).

I am not aware of anything theoretically that would *falsify* the lab leak hypothesis. On the contrary, in November 2015 the BSL4 WIV lab (Zhengli-Li Shi & Ralph S Baric) published in Nature the findings of their experiments where they manufactured a chimeric, gain of function Coronavirus made from bat coronavirus and mouse SARS-CoV with the ***specific purpose*** to determine if they could make this virus so that it would ***more effectively replicate in human airways cells.*** This is not conspiracy theory stuff, they are not hiding the ball, they are publishing it Nature.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nm.3985
https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/lab-made-coronavirus-triggers-debate-34502

So no, Im not aware of anything theoretically that would falsify the hypothesis that they were doing exactly what they have been publishing to the workd that they were doing. The only step missing (the"smoking gun") would be how it got from inside the lab to outside and there are plenty of options there.

 

[Tiger5150]

Biden shut down the State Dept investigation into it yesterday.

I read somewhere (sorry, I can't remember where) that Biden was shutting down an enquiry established by Pompeo because the terms of the enquiry were not open ended in regarded to establishing the source of the virus. The enquiry was established specifically to investigate whether the source of the virus was the Wuhan Lab.

CNN (yes, yes, I know) reports today that Biden has instructed the intelligence community to redouble their efforts in investigating the source. My initial thoughts were that the intelligence community was a strange vehicle to conduct such an enquiry, but, in the absence of Chinese cooperation, it is perhaps the only option.

This is the article:
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/05/27/politics/intelligence-community-covid-19-originated-theories/index.html

Im aware of that, and I'm sceptical. I cant see the point in closing down that investigation. Why not have both?

I would think it is a pretty big thing the US Govt needs to work out for many reasons, not the least of which being that the US Govt banned gain of function virus research for this very reason until the ban was overturned after lobbying by Dr Fauci in 2017. There are of course other reasons why the US Govt need to know how this happened.

 

[Tiger5150]

I'm pretty surprised more isnt being made about Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective).

Just like the lab leak hypothesis has been actively suppressed by throwing it in the "Trump, who is a convicted Rapist and Felon lunacy" box, Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is getting lumped in with Hydrochloroquin in order to suppress it.


Australian research shows that Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is effective in stopping CoVid from replicating. Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is very cheap (out of patent), easy to make with no side effects and has been safely given to people of all ages routinely in African countries for over 50 years.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166354220302011

As former director of Intellectual Property at Gilead Sciences says, "Its a no brainer" to use Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective).

https://twitter.com/JoyceKamen/status/1397875368493731841/photo/1

If you go and google Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective), you will get a heap of pages saying it is not recommended because there has been insufficient studies into it, and I agree with this, which prompts the bigger question. If there is a strong possibility that there is a cheap, convenient safe drug available that works well as a therapeutic as well has showing as good preventative results as the vaccines (which are expensive, hard to make and not proven safe longitudinally) why the hell wouldnt you be trialling it?

 

[Tim Sheens]

Australian research shows that Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is effective in stopping CoVid from replicating.

We certainly should be taking notice, especially of our own science. But hey, the stock markets are peaking and gas is the go to for leading our economic recovery out if this.

 

[Tiger5150]

Australian research shows that Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective) is effective in stopping CoVid from replicating.

We certainly should be taking notice, especially of our own science. But hey, the stock markets are peaking and gas is the go to for leading our economic recovery out if this.

Im being careful trying to keep the Coronavirus and Politics threads separate but there is a lot of overlap.

More info on the ongoing review of scientific evidence of Ivermectins efficacy to keep it out of the "Conspiracy Theory" category.

https://covid19criticalcare.com/Ivermectin (a drug which the clinical evidence shows is not statistically effective)-in-covid-19/
https://c19ivermectin.com/

 

[TheDaBoss]

Learnt the other day that VIC dont have the scan in stuff that we do for covid down here...imo it does work quite well...


Myself dont do it everytime i go into a shop etc mostly when im prompted to by a clerk i will, or if mandatory i opt for the paper sign in if available

 

[mike]

I think some authorities in VIC are telling porkies to justify the VIC lockdown. New form of Covid transmission, oh really.

 

[mike]

I think some authorities in VIC are telling porkies to justify the VIC lockdown. New form of Covid transmission, oh really.

How about you justify your opinion that authorities are telling lies?

Why? Do you think anything is unique in VIC and that there is a new form of transmission or that the incubation time is now less than one day? Because that’s what the VIC govt is saying. I say porkies.

 

[mike]

I think some authorities in VIC are telling porkies to justify the VIC lockdown. New form of Covid transmission, oh really.

How about you justify your opinion that authorities are telling lies?

Why? Do you think anything is unique in VIC and that there is a new form of transmission or that the incubation time is now less than one day? Because that’s what the VIC govt is saying. I say porkies.

Sure, ok. Yeh. Fine. That's your interpretation. But, why would they be "telling porkies"? How about you give your interpretation of that?

Not telling the truth to justify their actions. ie look how bad this is we had to lock down. It’s different, incubation less than a day, now supposed new form of transmission. Not we stuffed up again, that’s why we have to lock down.

 

[tigger]

I think some authorities in VIC are telling porkies to justify the VIC lockdown. New form of Covid transmission, oh really.

How about you justify your opinion that authorities are telling lies?

Why? Do you think anything is unique in VIC and that there is a new form of transmission or that the incubation time is now less than one day? Because that’s what the VIC govt is saying. I say porkies.

Sure, ok. Yeh. Fine. That's your interpretation. But, why would they be "telling porkies"? How about you give your interpretation of that?

Not telling the truth to justify their actions. ie look how bad this is we had to lock down. It’s different, incubation less than a day, now supposed new form of transmission. Not we stuffed up again, that’s why we have to lock down.

They are saying that it is the Indian variant which is more infectious than other variants.

We know for certain that it is the Indian variant. I thought that it was broadly accepted that that variant was more contagious than previous variants such as the Wuhan and British ones.

 

[mike]

I think some authorities in VIC are telling porkies to justify the VIC lockdown. New form of Covid transmission, oh really.

How about you justify your opinion that authorities are telling lies?

Why? Do you think anything is unique in VIC and that there is a new form of transmission or that the incubation time is now less than one day? Because that’s what the VIC govt is saying. I say porkies.

Sure, ok. Yeh. Fine. That's your interpretation. But, why would they be "telling porkies"? How about you give your interpretation of that?

Not telling the truth to justify their actions. ie look how bad this is we had to lock down. It’s different, incubation less than a day, now supposed new form of transmission. Not we stuffed up again, that’s why we have to lock down.

They are saying that it is the Indian variant which is more infectious than other variants.

We know for certain that it is the Indian variant. I thought that it was broadly accepted that that variant was more highly than previous variants such as the Wuhan and British ones.

They are saying much more than that. The VIC institutions have failed Victorians once again.

Anyway stay safe champ.

 

[tigger]

I think some authorities in VIC are telling porkies to justify the VIC lockdown. New form of Covid transmission, oh really.

How about you justify your opinion that authorities are telling lies?

Why? Do you think anything is unique in VIC and that there is a new form of transmission or that the incubation time is now less than one day? Because that’s what the VIC govt is saying. I say porkies.

Sure, ok. Yeh. Fine. That's your interpretation. But, why would they be "telling porkies"? How about you give your interpretation of that?

Not telling the truth to justify their actions. ie look how bad this is we had to lock down. It’s different, incubation less than a day, now supposed new form of transmission. Not we stuffed up again, that’s why we have to lock down.

They are saying that it is the Indian variant which is more infectious than other variants.

We know for certain that it is the Indian variant. I thought that it was broadly accepted that that variant was more highly than previous variants such as the Wuhan and British ones.

They are saying much more than that. The VIC institutions have failed Victorians once again.

Anyway stay safe champ.

Yeah, thanks mate. No active sites yet in my part of Melbourne, but still keeping my head down.

A good time to do some home brewing. :grin:

 

[tigger]

I think some authorities in VIC are telling porkies to justify the VIC lockdown. New form of Covid transmission, oh really.

How about you justify your opinion that authorities are telling lies?

Why? Do you think anything is unique in VIC and that there is a new form of transmission or that the incubation time is now less than one day? Because that’s what the VIC govt is saying. I say porkies.

Sure, ok. Yeh. Fine. That's your interpretation. But, why would they be "telling porkies"? How about you give your interpretation of that?

Not telling the truth to justify their actions. ie look how bad this is we had to lock down. It’s different, incubation less than a day, now supposed new form of transmission. Not we stuffed up again, that’s why we have to lock down.

They are saying that it is the Indian variant which is more infectious than other variants.

We know for certain that it is the Indian variant. I thought that it was broadly accepted that that variant was more highly than previous variants such as the Wuhan and British ones.

They are saying much more than that. The VIC institutions have failed Victorians once again.

Anyway stay safe champ.

So, this is what we are being told.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-06-01/victorian-talks-underway-to-extend-covid-lockdown/100183038

 

[tigertye]

These outbreaks are going to just go on and on until they stop the planes.

I’ve got a pretty strong opinion that we need to set a deadline to return home from abroad. The bandaid effect of slowly allowing people to return is crazy.

There’s military capability to set final flights home from each country in the world. Return travellers “stuck” overseas should have an option to contact the embassy, sign up for a final return flight and be able to ship out. Otherwise, enjoy your travels and we hope the country you’re travelling in can manage the virus effectively.

I’ve got family and friends struggling to keep their businesses and jobs afloat because of this virus and I just find it astonishing that we are just continually letting this virus and its variants back in time and time again with the every possible chance of major breakouts and potential loss of life.

When is enough enough? Can anyone actually see an end to this without virtually complete border closure?

Every new breakout is a heavier burden on the economy and risk to everything we’ve all worked so hard to prevent.