I'm actually going to flag this, since basically it seems to be working quite hard to pretend that the US was funding Gain of Function research in Wuhan, when that doesn't seem to actually be the case. There has been joint research about outbreaks in the wild - which is where the funding link seems to come from, and also the claim that there was a moratorium on GOF research is horribly misrepresented.<p>I spent some time looking at where the factual claims come from and I've sort of come to the conclusion that what we have here is an eco-system of sites that are publishing more and more articles, citing each other slowly moving further and further away from the core facts each time. Until you're entirely removed the facts and the whole thing is just a web of speculation. The closest I could get to any real claims about the lab was this Daily Mail article[1], but again, it's things like<p>>The news that COVID-19 bats were under research there means that a leak from the Wuhan laboratory can no longer be completely ruled out.<p>and<p>> According to one unverified claim, scientists at the institute could have become infected<p>You see, its this reporting of completely unverified speculation, that gets laundered through site after site until you end up with<p>>The Wuhan lab is now at the center of scrutiny for possibly releasing the SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus and causing the global Covid-19 pandemic.<p>Well, yeah, it's the center of scrutiny because you and your buddies decided to make it the centre of scrutiny with no evidence. Here's a wild thought: Maybe it's necessary to do research on diseases near to the source of the disease. It's not a conspiracy when the lab studying mad cow disease is located in the UK either.<p>[1]:<a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8211291/U-S-government-gave-3-7million-grant-Wuhan-lab-experimented-coronavirus-source-bats.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8211291/U-S-governm...</a>
> It is understandable that the Chinese lab likely struggled with safety issues given the fact US labs share similar problems<p>This line is what makes me think I am reading propoganda. It starts as a news story but continues as a opinion piece.<p>It is never understandable that a lab of this nature, regardless of country, has safety issues. I don't think Chinese authorities nor US authorities would agree it is understandable. Or at least I hope they wouldn't.
"The virus is created in a lab" is a conspiracy theory that is being kept alive because of the way American politics work.<p>People asume that all this writing is "organic". It is not. It is orchestrated and coordinated. Basically the current US administration gains politically by keeping war rhetorics; the "maybe the virus is created in lab, maybe released by accident, maybe on purpose, we don't know, China is not being transparent" is a key part.<p>Accepting the virus as a natural phenomenon puts the focus on the actual policy response and that is much less of a winner.
I like the following two paragraphs appearing exactly in this order in the text:<p>"If evidence is found that Covid-19 is a biological weapon, some pundits such as Fox News host Lou Dobbs have called for the US to declare war on China.<p>Nonetheless, it is unclear what the legal ramifications would be if the virus was indeed leaked from a Chinese lab, but as a result of a research project that was outsourced and funded by the US government."
What is the point of doing actual GOF research? We already know viruses can gain function. We already know that bat viruses can infect humans. Is this backdoor bioweapon research framed to avoid breaking the letter of treaties banning it? But if that's the case, outsourcing it seems totally insane.
> Republican lawmakers such as Senator Tom Cotton and Representative Dan Crenshaw have also introduced legislation that would allow Americans to sue China in federal court over the deaths and economic damage wrought by the virus.<p>Does the notion of ex-post-facto not apply to foreigners? (Although the concept of a domestic lawsuit against foreigners is itself weird to me.)
The first time this article was posted, it was flagged (I might dispute its content and sourcing, but not the free-speech aspect to discussing it.) My earlier comment:<p>So what is the source of this info? Turns out it is the Daily Mail, a right-wing UK rag of highly questionable quality and history of economy with the truth. In the referenced DM article, the only attribution we hear about are "documents obtained by the Mail"... Fake FB news are also documents obtainable by the Mail. Post originals or it didn't happen.