advertisement
Forums

 

AAPL stock: Click Here

You are currently viewing the 'Friendly' Political Ranting forum
About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: RgrF
Date: June 28, 2021 07:26AM
...virologist speaks out

A rising star in the virology community, Anderson, 42, says her work on Ebola in Wuhan was the realization of a life-long career goal. Her favorite movie is “Outbreak,” the 1995 film in which disease experts respond to a dangerous new virus—a job Anderson said she wanted to do. For her, that meant working on Ebola in a high-containment laboratory.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Acer
Date: June 28, 2021 09:10AM
"“It’s not that it was boring, but it was a regular lab that worked in the same way as any other high-containment lab,” Anderson said. “What people are saying is just not how it is.”

China's zeal to safe face makes them look guiltier than they may actually be.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: pdq
Date: June 28, 2021 10:13AM
One thing I get from this article is this: if the virus _did_ escape from this lab (and I think the evidence for this is slim), it almost certainly represented something like an accidental infection of a worker by a naturally occurring SARS-type coronavirus that had been brought to the lab to study, and not a bioweapon made at the lab.

That last scenario has been rejected on multiple lines of evidence; she’s just the latest to add her two bits. Yet I bet if you surveyed the wingnuts in this country, that would be their top belief.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: June 28, 2021 10:46AM
Sorry, originally posted to wrong thread...

Quote
Gain of Function
Anderson did concede that it would be theoretically possible for a scientist in the lab to be working on a gain of function technique to unknowingly infect themselves and to then unintentionally infect others in the community. But there’s no evidence that occurred and Anderson rated its likelihood as exceedingly slim.

Yes, but there are many questions that are likely to never be answered. I have not seen enough information about WIV to know if it is possible that it escaped from a lower biosafety level laboratory near that site. One of the few whistleblowers to raise the alarm about COVID-2019 died from it after being silenced. secret smiley Not the most productive environment.



In tha 360. MRF User Map
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Sarcany
Date: June 28, 2021 10:57AM
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Sorry, originally posted to wrong thread...

Quote
Gain of Function
Anderson did concede that it would be theoretically possible for a scientist in the lab to be working on a gain of function technique to unknowingly infect themselves and to then unintentionally infect others in the community. But there’s no evidence that occurred and Anderson rated its likelihood as exceedingly slim.

Yes, but there are many questions that are likely to never be answered. I have not seen enough information about WIV to know if it is possible that it escaped from a lower biosafety level laboratory near that site.

Is that a rumor or just speculation on your part that such a lab exists?



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: PeterB
Date: June 28, 2021 11:13AM
Quote
pdq
One thing I get from this article is this: if the virus _did_ escape from this lab (and I think the evidence for this is slim), it almost certainly represented something like an accidental infection of a worker by a naturally occurring SARS-type coronavirus that had been brought to the lab to study, and not a bioweapon made at the lab.

That last scenario has been rejected on multiple lines of evidence; she’s just the latest to add her two bits. Yet I bet if you surveyed the wingnuts in this country, that would be their top belief.

That last scenario has been rejected by... actual scientists/virologists, who looked at the SARS-CoV-2 genome and found no evidence that it had been bioengineered, and lots of evidence that it occurred naturally, probably starting out in a bat or pangolin: [www.nature.com]




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: June 28, 2021 12:03PM
Quote
Sarcany
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Sorry, originally posted to wrong thread...

Quote
Gain of Function
Anderson did concede that it would be theoretically possible for a scientist in the lab to be working on a gain of function technique to unknowingly infect themselves and to then unintentionally infect others in the community. But there’s no evidence that occurred and Anderson rated its likelihood as exceedingly slim.

Yes, but there are many questions that are likely to never be answered. I have not seen enough information about WIV to know if it is possible that it escaped from a lower biosafety level laboratory near that site.

Is that a rumor or just speculation on your part that such a lab exists?

Is this more than speculation?
https: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Institute_of_Virology#History
"...and also 20 BSL-2 and two BSL-3 laboratories."



In tha 360. MRF User Map
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: pdq
Date: June 28, 2021 12:39PM
Quote
PeterB
Quote
pdq
One thing I get from this article is this: if the virus _did_ escape from this lab (and I think the evidence for this is slim), it almost certainly represented something like an accidental infection of a worker by a naturally occurring SARS-type coronavirus that had been brought to the lab to study, and not a bioweapon made at the lab.

That last scenario has been rejected on multiple lines of evidence; she’s just the latest to add her two bits. Yet I bet if you surveyed the wingnuts in this country, that would be their top belief.

That last scenario has been rejected by... actual scientists/virologists, who looked at the SARS-CoV-2 genome and found no evidence that it had been bioengineered, and lots of evidence that it occurred naturally, probably starting out in a bat or pangolin: [www.nature.com]

Thank you - I appreciate your knowledge in this.
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Sarcany
Date: June 28, 2021 12:58PM
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Quote
Sarcany
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Sorry, originally posted to wrong thread...

Quote
Gain of Function
Anderson did concede that it would be theoretically possible for a scientist in the lab to be working on a gain of function technique to unknowingly infect themselves and to then unintentionally infect others in the community. But there’s no evidence that occurred and Anderson rated its likelihood as exceedingly slim.

Yes, but there are many questions that are likely to never be answered. I have not seen enough information about WIV to know if it is possible that it escaped from a lower biosafety level laboratory near that site.

Is that a rumor or just speculation on your part that such a lab exists?

Is this more than speculation?
https: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Institute_of_Virology#History
"...and also 20 BSL-2 and two BSL-3 laboratories."

Same lab, different building/wing.

Why would level-2 or level-3 techs be working on a level-4 pathogen? Seems even more far-fetched than pretending that it escaped from a level-4 lab.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: PeterB
Date: June 28, 2021 01:55PM
Quote
pdq
Quote
PeterB
Quote
pdq
One thing I get from this article is this: if the virus _did_ escape from this lab (and I think the evidence for this is slim), it almost certainly represented something like an accidental infection of a worker by a naturally occurring SARS-type coronavirus that had been brought to the lab to study, and not a bioweapon made at the lab.

That last scenario has been rejected on multiple lines of evidence; she’s just the latest to add her two bits. Yet I bet if you surveyed the wingnuts in this country, that would be their top belief.

That last scenario has been rejected by... actual scientists/virologists, who looked at the SARS-CoV-2 genome and found no evidence that it had been bioengineered, and lots of evidence that it occurred naturally, probably starting out in a bat or pangolin: [www.nature.com]

Thank you - I appreciate your knowledge in this.

Here's some more info of interest:

[www.sfchronicle.com]
[www.bloomberg.com]




Freya says, 'Hello from NOLA, baby!' (Laissez bon temps rouler!)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: June 28, 2021 02:23PM
Quote
Sarcany
Why would level-2 or level-3 techs be working on a level-4 pathogen?

The long incubation time for this virus is unusual. Maybe it was misidentified when collected and/or hadn't been identified as a level-4 pathogen yet. What was the de facto process in place for evaluating collected samples and research for Gain of Function, until the level-4 lab opened? The chance is very slim but China's history and lack of openness keeps it alive.



In tha 360. MRF User Map
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Sarcany
Date: June 28, 2021 02:59PM
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Quote
Sarcany
Why would level-2 or level-3 techs be working on a level-4 pathogen?

The long incubation time for this virus is unusual. Maybe it was misidentified when collected and/or hadn't been identified as a level-4 pathogen yet. What was the de facto process in place for evaluating collected samples and research for Gain of Function, until the level-4 lab opened? The chance is very slim but China's history and lack of openness keeps it alive.

The level-4 lab opened before the level 2/3 labs opened. It was constructed (in partnership with a US university) as a level-4 lab.

The process has been well-publicized.

They'd collect swabs from blood, urine, feces and saliva and test for antibodies in the field. Any samples brought in would have been cooked or frozen or freeze-dried. They wouldn't have a live SARS virus to work on, but would instead sequence deactivated virus or pieces of virus, never a living specimen.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: June 28, 2021 03:34PM
Quote
Sarcany
The level-4 lab opened before the level 2/3 labs opened. It was constructed (in partnership with a US university) as a level-4 lab.

The process has been well-publicized.

My comments were based on information published in 2015. I seem to have missed the data stating that no level-2 or level-3 labs were in operation there until after the level-4 lab was accredited in 2017. Do you have a link?



In tha 360. MRF User Map
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Sarcany
Date: June 28, 2021 03:40PM
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Quote
Sarcany
The level-4 lab opened before the level 2/3 labs opened. It was constructed (in partnership with a US university) as a level-4 lab.

The process has been well-publicized.

My comments were based on information published in 2015. I seem to have missed the data stating that no level-2 or level-3 labs were in operation there until after the level-4 lab was accredited in 2017. Do you have a link?

Accredited and put into operation in January 2018 per your Wikipedia link.

Per the citation in that section, from the WHO meeting report in December 2017, they had no BSL-2/3 facilities in operation at that time, although they had some BSL-3 workspaces prepared to go online with the BSL-4 facility.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: June 28, 2021 04:38PM
Quote
Sarcany
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Quote
Sarcany
The level-4 lab opened before the level 2/3 labs opened. It was constructed (in partnership with a US university) as a level-4 lab.

The process has been well-publicized.

My comments were based on information published in 2015. I seem to have missed the data stating that no level-2 or level-3 labs were in operation there until after the level-4 lab was accredited in 2017. Do you have a link?

Accredited and put into operation in January 2018 per your Wikipedia link.

Per the citation in that section, from the WHO meeting report in December 2017, they had no BSL-2/3 facilities in operation at that time, although they had some BSL-3 workspaces prepared to go online with the BSL-4 facility.

I used that Wikipedia page to identify that there were BSL-2/3 facilities at WIV. I think it is reading between the lines that no other BSL-2/3 facilities were operational in Wuhan until after the BSL-4 lab. HeLa cells require a BSL-2 lab. Where was the Wuhan research done if not at the WIV site?



In tha 360. MRF User Map
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Sarcany
Date: June 28, 2021 05:59PM
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Quote
Sarcany
Quote
Filliam H. Muffman
Quote
Sarcany
The level-4 lab opened before the level 2/3 labs opened. It was constructed (in partnership with a US university) as a level-4 lab.

The process has been well-publicized.

My comments were based on information published in 2015. I seem to have missed the data stating that no level-2 or level-3 labs were in operation there until after the level-4 lab was accredited in 2017. Do you have a link?

Accredited and put into operation in January 2018 per your Wikipedia link.

Per the citation in that section, from the WHO meeting report in December 2017, they had no BSL-2/3 facilities in operation at that time, although they had some BSL-3 workspaces prepared to go online with the BSL-4 facility.

I used that Wikipedia page to identify that there were BSL-2/3 facilities at WIV. I think it is reading between the lines that no other BSL-2/3 facilities were operational in Wuhan until after the BSL-4 lab. HeLa cells require a BSL-2 lab. Where was the Wuhan research done if not at the WIV site?

You didn't "identify" anything. You're creatively interpreting it.

This is stupid.

The facilities include BSL-1/2/3/4 labs. While some preliminaries certainly occurred prior to it, they opened the institute properly in January of 2018 after receiving accreditation. This is not the slightest bit meaningful in respect of COVID.

The conspiracy theories about Wuhan have no basis in fact.

Done with this.



Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Filliam H. Muffman
Date: June 28, 2021 06:46PM
Quote
Sarcany
This is not the slightest bit meaningful in respect of COVID.

Difference of opinion. I think that not identifying a close strain from the meat market in 2020 makes the Gain of Function research published in 2015 at least a tiny bit meaningful.



In tha 360. MRF User Map
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: steve...
Date: June 28, 2021 10:40PM
Quote
RgrF
Her favorite movie is “Outbreak,” the 1995 film in which disease experts respond to a dangerous new virus—a job Anderson said she wanted to do. For her, that meant working on Ebola in a high-containment laboratory.

A little forum trivia: The movie Outbreak was filmed in Ferndale CA, in Humboldt County — a few miles south of my hometown (and forumite Paul F.) of Eureka, CA.




Northern California Coast
Options:  Reply • Quote
Re: About that Wuhan escape theory...
Posted by: Racer X
Date: June 29, 2021 01:10AM
And the monkey was also Marcel from "Friends"



********************************************
The police have no duty to respond. See Castle Rock v. Gonzales, 545 U.S. 748 (2005) or Warren v. District of Columbia[1] (444 A.2d. 1, D.C. Ct. of Ap. 1981)
Options:  Reply • Quote
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login

Online Users

Guests: 117
Record Number of Users: 186 on February 20, 2020
Record Number of Guests: 5122 on October 03, 2020