TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

How I learned to stop worrying and love the lab-leak theory

136 pointsby themgtabout 4 years ago

31 comments

InTheArenaabout 4 years ago
Just so people know who is posting this - Donald McNeil Jr was the chief voice at NYT focusing on covid. He was ousted earlier because of some remarks that he allegedly made to a school group a few years ago, but before that, the NYT was pushing for him to get a Pulitzer for his reporting on COVID. Him starting legitimize the lab-leak theory as possible is reflective of the people more generally taking the lab-leak hypothesis seriously.<p>That&#x27;s never to legitimize violence, or score political points, but maybe to get us a bit closer to what sparked the pandemic.
评论 #27191679 未加载
eloffabout 4 years ago
There&#x27;s basically no evidence either way, although the outbreak being in a city with a class 4 bio lab actively studying sars viruses does on the surface seem to make the lab leak more probable. Bit of a coincidence.<p>What really makes me think though is the way China is being uncooperative. You&#x27;d think if they were innocent they wouldn&#x27;t need to limit access to data and prevent investigation of the Wuhan lab. Maybe that&#x27;s just in their nature as a totalitarian regime, but it&#x27;s not doing them any favors here.
评论 #27192063 未加载
评论 #27191097 未加载
评论 #27194760 未加载
评论 #27192275 未加载
评论 #27191413 未加载
评论 #27191188 未加载
评论 #27191607 未加载
评论 #27193116 未加载
divbzeroabout 4 years ago
McNeil Jr also references this letter from epidemiologists and biologists in <i>Science</i> [1] calling for a new investigation.<p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;science.sciencemag.org&#x2F;content&#x2F;372&#x2F;6543&#x2F;694.1" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;science.sciencemag.org&#x2F;content&#x2F;372&#x2F;6543&#x2F;694.1</a>
评论 #27191766 未加载
评论 #27191322 未加载
dangabout 4 years ago
There&#x27;s another ongoing thread on the same topic, with a different root article, but perhaps a similar impetus (the recent letter to <i>Science</i>):<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=27160898" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=27160898</a>
cm2012about 4 years ago
This is a great, in depth fact filled article. Really explores the subject completely.
me_me_meabout 4 years ago
Suppose there was a leak, or an employee sold a test animal to the wet market make extra cash.<p>Seems that cov2 was going to jump to humans eventually, given the state of the wet markets.<p>My question is, so what? China is not going to ever agree nor allow an investigation. They will deny any allegations.<p>So it there is no evidence for human tinkering with the virus what can be done?<p>I mean, we have account of alive human organs harvest, slave labour, forced assimilation of minorities... nothing was done
Rapzidabout 4 years ago
I think this ignores why the &quot;lab leak&quot; theory was being squashed in public:<p>1. There was no evidence<p>2. The conspiracies going around in early days prompting the response was that China manufactured the virus as a weapons and&#x2F;or released it on purpose.<p>3. There was no evidence<p>People were reading the WHO reports as information was coming in and they were talking about no transmission outside familial groups and saying &quot;Ahah! The WHO is in China&#x27;s pocket, they were lying about the virus!&quot; or &quot;They are incompetent and don&#x27;t know what they are doing!&quot;. Zero understanding that the reports were pretty much just raw information and analysis on what was known at the time.<p>This was just over a year ago peeps, but people were forgetting like 2 months on haha.
评论 #27203812 未加载
nickysielickiabout 4 years ago
The problem I have with the lab leak theory is that if it was a lab leak, what do we make of SARS? Was SARS a lab leak, too?<p>If it was reasonable for SARS to naturally jump from bats to humans, why couldn’t COVID, too?
评论 #27193124 未加载
monkeycantypeabout 4 years ago
The accidental lab leak theory proven would actually be great news, as the alternative is that civilization has reached the threshold where we have a hyper connected population in contact with so many natural disease reservoirs that pandemics are emerging spontaneously. If it’s a lab leak we change pathogen containment practices, otherwise we curtain our freedom of movement and association
评论 #27191057 未加载
评论 #27191040 未加载
评论 #27191037 未加载
评论 #27191046 未加载
评论 #27191043 未加载
评论 #27191104 未加载
cletusabout 4 years ago
So I generally give like zero weight to conspiracy theories. That being said, I don&#x27;t believe anyone can reasonably claim with any degree certainty that Covid was a lab-leak BUT the WHO investigation simply hasn&#x27;t done their due diligence to a sufficient degree to eliminate this theory.<p>Unfortunately the WHO&#x27;s credibility is trained here. In the early days of the pandemic the WHO bent over backwards not to upset China. More to the point, it took China&#x27;s denials on face value.<p>So it&#x27;s more than a year after the pandemic started before the WHO investigators got any sort of access to investigate (which, incidentally is not a good look for neither China or the WHO).<p>But here are two demonstrable and known shortcomings of the WHo investigation:<p>1. In 2019 there was a database of coronaviruses that China had. In late 2019 it was taken offline. Super-weird timing. By itself that doesn&#x27;t prove anything but the WHO hasn&#x27;t investigated it. Did they ask? If not, why not?<p>2. Wuhan labs do investigate coronaviruses. The WHO has never been given access to what coronaviruses they have.<p>It is weird that 1-1.5 years later we&#x27;re still unsure of the origin (unlike, say, SARS or MErS).<p>Oh and, for the record, I don&#x27;t believe for a second this virus was in any way engineered.
评论 #27191314 未加载
评论 #27191340 未加载
评论 #27191124 未加载
评论 #27191496 未加载
评论 #27191351 未加载
评论 #27191402 未加载
评论 #27191039 未加载
评论 #27191065 未加载
评论 #27191357 未加载
评论 #27191122 未加载
评论 #27191170 未加载
cbHXBY1Dabout 4 years ago
I tend to trust Prof Shi Zhengli on this one. She has been open [1] to investigations into her lab and has the most evidence in her favor. Notably, she&#x27;s showed that miners who died 8 years ago didn&#x27;t die of Sars-Cov-2 and that none of her staff had antibodies.<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;world-asia-china-55364445" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bbc.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;world-asia-china-55364445</a>
avan1about 4 years ago
There are two things actually and sadly no one investigate both of them: 1. Is Covid a lab leak ? (which had poor investigation) 2. Could China stop it (Whether its lab-leak or not) in early stages and prevent it from spreading out of their borders ? (which they achieved successfully for other provinces)
rllearneratworkabout 4 years ago
IMHO, this is a great likelihood-based analysis of various origin theories:<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.rootclaim.com&#x2F;analysis&#x2F;What-is-the-source-of-COVID-19-SARS-CoV-2" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.rootclaim.com&#x2F;analysis&#x2F;What-is-the-source-of-COV...</a>
评论 #27192785 未加载
bredrenabout 4 years ago
What about the private cell phone data that showed the lab shut down in October?<p>Was this shown to be false?
pl-94about 4 years ago
Let&#x27;s say that a serious proof of a lab leak emerged, what would be the political consequences? Will countries ask China for compensation?
tootieabout 4 years ago
This is a very lengthy and well-researched story that basically just says &quot;we don&#x27;t know but could be&quot;. Which I think is where we&#x27;ve been for the past few months. There was a lot of whiplash early on between conspiracy theorists trying to peg this as a biological weapon attack and scientists trying to stick to the evidence. McNeil does a really thorough job dissecting the mess of nonsense and looking at evidence. But the result is still that we don&#x27;t know. And probably never will.
评论 #27193636 未加载
Wowfunhappyabout 4 years ago
I’m getting a 500 error on this story. Only me?
评论 #27190836 未加载
sashavingardt2about 4 years ago
[deleted]
评论 #27191162 未加载
p1neconeabout 4 years ago
Working out the initial cause of this Covid outbreak is <i>far</i> <i>far</i> <i>far</i> less important&#x2F;actionable than working out what we should do differently when (not if) another virus starts spreading.<p>This concept should be familiar to those in tech already: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;codeascraft.com&#x2F;2012&#x2F;05&#x2F;22&#x2F;blameless-postmortems&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;codeascraft.com&#x2F;2012&#x2F;05&#x2F;22&#x2F;blameless-postmortems&#x2F;</a>
评论 #27190889 未加载
评论 #27190892 未加载
评论 #27191029 未加载
评论 #27190886 未加载
评论 #27190888 未加载
评论 #27191119 未加载
评论 #27190848 未加载
评论 #27191215 未加载
评论 #27191727 未加载
评论 #27192408 未加载
评论 #27191487 未加载
评论 #27190962 未加载
评论 #27190926 未加载
评论 #27190901 未加载
评论 #27191087 未加载
评论 #27190919 未加载
评论 #27190954 未加载
temp8964about 4 years ago
&gt; It spawned racist rumors like “Chinese labs sell their dead experimental animals in food markets.”<p>First, I don&#x27;t see how is this racist. Second, this is not rumor, there are Chinese articles about how some lab members were punished.<p>The author lost credibility here.
评论 #27191293 未加载
graderjsalmost 4 years ago
Follows are my reflections on the comments on this thread and on the article re speculation about why there have been no candidate natural viruses revealed, or a definitive origin.<p>People speculate China is concealing malicious intent and such is indicated these two facts (and many others).<p>I&#x27;d like to address these. I think that some people are misjudging why it might be in China&#x27;s interests to <i>not</i> reveal an origin, nor a candidate natural virus, even if it had concluded its internal investigation and discovered definitive answers, even if those answers exculpated China of any mal intent. I&#x27;m not saying they&#x27;re doing this, just offering another perspective with context and strategic reasoning.<p>As China has engaged with the world in the last 15 years, it has founds its soft power advances rebuffed, obstructed and aggressively countered, even as its international institutional standing, economic power and strategic dominance (at least in APAC&#x2F;MEA) has grown. Mainstream Western presses run night and day printing stories to support &quot;China bogeyman&quot; narrative staples like &quot;China virus&quot;, &quot;China debt trap diplomacy&quot;, &quot;China oppression&quot;, &quot;Foreign influence&quot;, &quot;Xinjiang genocide&quot;, &quot;HK freedom fighters&quot; to name a few currently popular ones.<p>Faced with this hostile international media environment what can China do? Domestically it must counteract and throw words-of-kind back, and diplomatically it has leant into the same. These are expected and required responses.<p>But the strange thing is, while it looks to be on the back foot, and while it may not be the sort of positive, glowing, appreciative and respectful international press coverage China might have dreamt of in its recent path of rapid growth, given that foreign presses and their audiences display an appetite for these stories, China might actually be serving its own interests by simply feeding those appetites and fanning the flames.<p>This sounds crazy. Why would China <i>want</i> the foreign press to gorge itself on anti-China stories and go off its rocker on &quot;China bad&quot;-conspiracy theories. Why would it be in China&#x27;s interests for people of other countries to receive this &quot;biased education&quot; about China? Why would China, if it had evidence, arguments, platforms and means to counter these narratives, not run its own operations night and day to paint a different picture?<p>I think there are a couple of advantages of what I&#x27;m proposing is a deliberate strategy, and there are certainly opportunities for China in the current hostile international media environment.<p>1. Controlled opposition. Once the &quot;rabid dog Western press&quot; has found its preferred China-hate narrative, it seems quite happy to continue munching on that big juicy bone and not letting it go. China could try to &quot;prize the bone from the mouth&quot;, but that will likely reinforce the rabid dog&#x27;s grip, no? Maybe a better strategy is to simply keep feeding the dog similar tasty tidbits and not reveal the &quot;tasty bone&quot; is actually rancid and expired (dog may not care, but hey), at least for now. In this way China achieves a measure of control of the anti-China stories. In this way China deftly turns the Western&#x27;s presses preferred appetite (and by some it&#x27;s perceived &quot;strength&quot;) into a vulnerability.<p>2a. Domestic mileage and protection. Chinese people might come across Western anti-China articles, which will only increase their proud nationalism and support any narratives the central government might want to launch about how biased and anti-China the western countries are. This incredible power actually insulates the central government from any foreign criticism, and weakens the ability of &quot;foreign adversaries&quot; to dislodge the Chinese government from their people (an likely impossible goal anyway, but many wedges have attempted to be inserted, no doubt to the amusement of regular Chinese who see foreigners trying to get Chinese to hate Chinese as a fool&#x27;s errand), because its so easy to dismiss the chorus of Western critics by how unhinged and hypocritical they are. The risk for China here is that it can insulate itself from internal legitimate critics, by the feintest association with &quot;crazy&quot; foreign ideas. So it will need to balance that insulation with practicality.<p>2b. Useful distraction. The loader and crazier the Western press and commentariat seems, the more China can allow such insanity to pierce its information control for useful effect. Bad press from provincial officials cramping the central government&#x27;s recent achievements style? A dash of &quot;China hate&quot; from the foreign press is sure to refocus netizen&#x27;s attention and bring people together in solidarity against external opposition. Again, the risk with this is China utilizes this massive power (of foreign hatred) too liberally to tune out of useful internal dissent. Given it&#x27;s rapid progress and stellar achievements I don&#x27;t think it seriously risks a lack of introspection, but the louder the Western &quot;evil CCP&quot; commentariat grows, the bigger this power grows, and so the bigger the risk that China might go overboard in using this domestically.<p>3. Future reveal payoffs. Just say China was manipulating foreign presses into printing anti-China narratives, but had bulletproof evidence against the claims (such as endless video evidence, investigations and interviews with people in Xinjiang, or legal arguments and foreign influence proof in HK, or a closest relative natural virus that originated in Italy in 2018), why would it hold off on providing that right now? Probably because the reasons above are so compelling and useful. China is interested in domestic narrative shaping and information control, and successfully achieves these objectives through many means. The above possibilities are useful tools that assist in this. But there&#x27;s another reason. A sort of &quot;kill shot&quot; to end the credibility of the Western press and paint China itself as &quot;unfairly and racistly persecuted victim&quot; (not altogether inaccurate). Say China brought out information (but didn&#x27;t reveal it had been sitting on it) to decisively end many of the anti-China claims, it would be able to constantly play that up to convince Westerners they can&#x27;t trust their own &quot;free press&quot;. A pretty strong card to have, particularly as soft-power will become more important as China&#x27;s influence ability grows. But not a card you&#x27;d need to play right now, not only because you&#x27;d miss out on the above. China can bide its time and watch the West score own-goals and commit unforced errors in its media game against China, that it can dredge up later to reveal Western incompetence and bias.<p>4. Catalysis for change. Say some place in China or some policy was an issue for the central government, but it was having a hard time cultivating the domestic momentum and provincial political will required for a successful change, what could it do? How could it utilize the current &quot;winds of chaos&quot; to assist it in its own goals? What if the West was directly inciting HK violence (or not involved, doesn&#x27;t matter here), and China knew, and allowed that to occur, until the time was right (and the justification big enough) for it to step in and change the law? Without every firing a single shot (itself), or ever sending in the troops (to do anything but clean up the roadway after people had departed). Guiding the winds of Western obsession and hate into the sails of a ship China is steering, could be a useful strategy for particularly challenging issues. All that Western press fanned those flames, blew those winds, puffed those sails --- to sail that ship right into China&#x27;s harbor. Pretty deft &quot;covert&quot; or &quot;paradoxical&quot; soft power. I think many of these issues are simply useful for reasons 1 - 3, but what other targets might be good candidates for this strategy? Xinjiang strategy needs a change, but is resisted by the elements who benefitted from version 1.1? Maybe. Need to send more people and money to build up naval supremacy in reefs and islands? Get the West to escalate its anti-rhetoric to show China how scared they are of that, and against China doing that, to lend support to it seeming like a good thing to do to counter Western projection, in that case. GZ or SZ having issues with provincial leaders, their cliques and ambitions? Seed some &quot;political oppression&quot; stories in the Western press to create a chaos and a grassroots movement for less central intervention, allow the movement to catch fire, then tie it to the South&#x27;s irresponsible leadership (and relative economic liberalism and Western links, for good measure) and use that to oust the provincial leaders as incompetent and complicit. It&#x27;s hard to think about these hypothetical candidates, but I&#x27;m sure there&#x27;s many opportunities. Probably the flames of Western narratives can be used in some manner or another as part of larger strategies.<p>As China&#x27;s control and stability (and success) increases, its ability to deploy these strategies will diminish. But now seems like a good time and many opportunities, as the West eagerly lurches from one &quot;China-hate&quot; to the next. One risk is the West might wise up to this, and start trying to &quot;counter manipulate&quot; China, by feigning outrage at a non-issue or trying to force a Chinese concession by successfully cultivating an irrational populist narrative in a Chinese area that&#x27;s to drive a change that&#x27;s against Chinese interests. Time will tell if the West develops this strategic narrative sophistication. They&#x27;ve been on top for so long, they may have grown soft and uncritical, while China has had to grow clever in the hostile climate it found itself emerging in internationally. Of the West, in this, perhaps it&#x27;s like Bane says, &quot;Victory has defeated them.&quot; In the soft power sense, in these aspects, I think that&#x27;s partly true.
YeBanKoabout 4 years ago
Deleted
评论 #27191386 未加载
jb775about 4 years ago
So if the lab leak theory turns out to be true, how will people deal with the fact that they&#x27;ve been vehemently disregarding it as a &quot;Q-anon conspiracy theory&quot;?<p>And would it be worth questioning if any other recent topics labeled as &quot;conspiracy theories&quot; may in fact also be true?
评论 #27191417 未加载
评论 #27203821 未加载
kstenerudabout 4 years ago
<i>edit</i> Changed &quot;character&quot; to &quot;structure&quot; because my intent is being misunderstood. This is ultimately about human psychology (as in homo sapiens), not particular nations or peoples. Each of us could very well have but for chance been placed in any of these boats, and our behavior would change to match because we&#x27;re not morally special.<p>There are a number of things at play here that stoke up distrust, mainly due to China&#x27;s current national structure. The world won&#x27;t get China&#x27;s cooperation on this, and there will be no smoking gun evidence one way or the other. But we can stop and think about it rationally.<p>In fact, someone already has, and I recommend reading it if you haven&#x27;t already, putting the lab leak theory to rest: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;science&#x2F;comments&#x2F;gk6y95&#x2F;covid19_did_not_come_from_the_wuhan_institute_of&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;old.reddit.com&#x2F;r&#x2F;science&#x2F;comments&#x2F;gk6y95&#x2F;covid19_did...</a><p>So what&#x27;s going on with China then? Well first off, they&#x27;re an autocratic nation, which makes them EXTREMELY sensitive to criticism and dissent. An autocratic nation deals with criticism by dismissing it, dodging it, blocking it, and crushing it. You&#x27;re not going to get cooperation on something negative like a pandemic outbreak because they don&#x27;t know where it came from either, and it&#x27;s better for them to just block everyone than to allow any potential negativity to stick to them. Again, this behavior is nothing new for autocratic nations.<p>Secondly, they&#x27;re an up-and-comer nation. They&#x27;ve finally reached the big leagues (again), and that means that they expect big league treatment. It means that they can push back against anyone they choose and punish those who step on their toes. They&#x27;ve been doing this for years now, buying or bullying compliance like their more established brethren from smaller nations and organizations, even to the point of cowing the WHO (who, for the record, have always deferred somewhat to the powerful because they have no actual teeth and would lose access to that nation otherwise).<p>Third, they have a legacy to uphold as the Kingdom of Heaven. Xi&#x27;s mission for the nation is a moral one to once again become the shining beacon of civilization, the center of the Earth. For a nation on such a mission, minor things like a pandemic are merely a distraction that could potentially be used by the other nations to disrupt their sacred task of purifying their people and seating themselves at their rightful place as THE representatives of humanity&#x27;s best.<p>So no, the lab leak theory holds no water. And no, there will be no investigation. And unless you want to invade China or something equally drastic, that&#x27;s how things will stand.
评论 #27191395 未加载
评论 #27191299 未加载
sashavingardt2about 4 years ago
[deleted]
评论 #27191246 未加载
pussyfart69about 4 years ago
So in essence, the lab leak theory got scrapped right off the bat b&#x2F;c we as a society have developed an aversion to Trump?
99_00about 4 years ago
They are easing you into the revelation of the virus being a lab leak and the CCP being maliciously irresponsible costing millions of lives from the initial leak and holding back information after the fact.<p>Revealing it all at once would cause economic and social chaos. The racist assaults alone would be horrendous. Not to mention the political and economic consiquences.<p>It&#x27;s no coincidence that the Uygar genocide is being talked about now despite going on for several years.
skwbabout 4 years ago
FWIW I&#x27;m going to defer to the virology experts on this one. I know when I am out of my depth, and when to seek expert advise.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;angie_rasmussen&#x2F;status&#x2F;1394257028558639108?s=21" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;angie_rasmussen&#x2F;status&#x2F;13942570285586391...</a>
评论 #27192487 未加载
h0l0cubeabout 4 years ago
We may never know for 100% certain if it truly was a lab leak, but what we <i>can</i> be certain of is the denialism and withholding of information in the crucial first 2 months of the emergence of the virus. In at least this, China is culpable for devastating millions of lives and disrupting the global economy, all for the Chinese government to save face.<p>Edit: Removed claim about Chinese new year
评论 #27191399 未加载
Johnny555about 4 years ago
<i>And China’s lack of candor is disturbing. It denies access to the institute’s lab logs and whatever messages were swapped during its own investigations, took down 2018 statements critical of lab biosecurity protocols, retaliated against Australia for advocating an open investigation and sharply restricted the W.H.O. investigators.</i><p>Would the USA have been any more open if an American government lab was suspected as the source of an outbreak? Especially under the former administration which outright lied to the American people about the severity of the pandemic.
评论 #27191578 未加载
wokwokwokabout 4 years ago
&gt; The whole world, China included, needs a hard answer, whoever is to blame — so we can prevent this from happening again.<p>Really?<p>Is that what will happen if someone confirms the lab leak theory?<p>We just tighten bio security in labs and off we go, back to normal?<p>Don’t make me laugh.<p>This isn’t about science any more, it’s about playing the blame game and deflecting responsibility for a massive public health disaster by an administration that lacked competence to deal with it.<p>It would be economically catastrophic for China to admit any evidence that implicated them.<p>So... given the overwhelming cost of releasing evidence, what the hell benefit is there from pinpointing blame?<p>Restore trust? It’ll only cost you trillions of dollars in blame and finger pointing... yeah right.<p>That is never going to happen.<p>So... we’ll never know.<p>Attempts to resolve this haven’t convinced me that the effort is not better spent trying resolve the current situation, rather than blame someone else for it.<p>Am I missing something?<p>Seriously, given how plausible <i>either</i> animal or lab leak scenarios are, we are <i>required</i> to address both to prevent future pandemics.<p>How does knowing one way or another help?