Trump was right - Covid escaped from a lab

[MonsieurCopperCrutch]

1 hour ago, petetong said:

So they gave the genetic sequence to western scientists means it didn't escape from one of their labs ?  Superb logic... Given the first cases in the west occurred in January/February it made a few weeks difference at most. They made a point of stopping internal travel in China but allowing international travel to continue to the rest of the world, to ensure it wasn't just them and their economy that was screwed. How very noble of them but nice try muppet.

Chinese vaccines were crap, that was widely reported on and why they were still locking down until recently  🤡

Just because China ALLOWED internaltional travel didn't mean WE HAD TO ACCEPT THEM. Especially when the clue is in them NOT ALLOWING NATIONAL TRAVEL WITHIN THEIR OWN BORDERS. FFS. 

[Goat]

11 hours ago, Quiet Guy said:

I'd say this is where we have to agree to disagree. There should be lessons learned and consequences for playing God with pathogens.

Don't do gain of function research in labs with crappy biosecurity standards, one would hope that was obvious anyway, but regardless of the true source of Covid, I think that message has been hammered home loud and clear.

[Riedquat]

14 hours ago, Flat Bear said:

Yes.

It was and is so bl###dy obvious. There was no-one with any real intelligence who didn't think this was by far the most probable source.

I would have been very surprised if it was proven to come from a wet food market or similar.

There are a lot of extremely gullible people out there (it is frightening) who believe anything someone in power tells them. Look at the evidence, where did it come from? what are the facts I can be certain of? Come to your own conclusion.

Why is it "so bloody obvious"? Because there happened to be a lab nearby? See a coincidence and insist that's right? Would you have  said the same if it wasn't that lab but a university with a biology department that might also have been looking at disease? Why is that all "so bloody obvious" that it didn't appear in the same way diseases have got in to humanity throughout history and beyond?

It's certainly not impossible that that's where it came from but neither is it "so bloody obvious;" Covid certainly doesn't require the presence of a lab to have emerged. So whilst it's possible that it came out of the lab the insistence that it did still mostly gives the impression of people unwilling to accept sh1t happens naturally, that we're not in complete, full control of nature, and that someone must be to blame.

[Bob8]

14 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Why is it "so bloody obvious"? Because there happened to be a lab nearby? See a coincidence and insist that's right? Would you have  said the same if it wasn't that lab but a university with a biology department that might also have been looking at disease? Why is that all "so bloody obvious" that it didn't appear in the same way diseases have got in to humanity throughout history and beyond?

It's certainly not impossible that that's where it came from but neither is it "so bloody obvious;" Covid certainly doesn't require the presence of a lab to have emerged. So whilst it's possible that it came out of the lab the insistence that it did still mostly gives the impression of people unwilling to accept sh1t happens naturally, that we're not in complete, full control of nature, and that someone must be to blame.

Yes. He has learnt a few things from the media, mixes it with political prejudice and his feelings and mistakes it for intellectual insight.

We are not going to know for certain, nature is not like that. The bulk of informed people think a natural origin is far more likely.

[FallingAwake]

2 hours ago, Riedquat said:

Why is it "so bloody obvious"? Because there happened to be a lab nearby? See a coincidence and insist that's right? Would you have  said the same if it wasn't that lab but a university with a biology department that might also have been looking at disease? Why is that all "so bloody obvious" that it didn't appear in the same way diseases have got in to humanity throughout history and beyond?

It's certainly not impossible that that's where it came from but neither is it "so bloody obvious;" Covid certainly doesn't require the presence of a lab to have emerged. So whilst it's possible that it came out of the lab the insistence that it did still mostly gives the impression of people unwilling to accept sh1t happens naturally, that we're not in complete, full control of nature, and that someone must be to blame.

Because the lab in Wuhan was studying coronavirus gain of function...

Compared to your generic "university with a biology department that might also have been looking at disease".

Can you see the difference?

[FallingAwake]

12 hours ago, Arpeggio said:

Yes. The Trump injection was so.

"On the 10th January, when we received the genetic sequence from the Chinese authority, we immediately started manufacturing....."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-vaccines-idUSKBN1ZN2J8 Quote: "Chinese scientists were able to quickly identify the genetic sequence of the new coronavirus and officials posted it publicly within a few days, allowing scientific research teams to get to work right away.  With the genetic code in hand, scientists can start vaccine development work without needing a sample of the virus."  🤡

I don't think this is the "smoking gun" you think it is.

All geneticists need, I suspect, is the genetic code... at least to understand how it works, and how to disable it.

Your issue about "isolation" is more interesting, but using the genetic sequence to understand the virus seems pretty reasonable to me.

[nightowl]

4 hours ago, Riedquat said:

So whilst it's possible that it came out of the lab the insistence that it did still mostly gives the impression of people unwilling to accept sh1t happens naturally, that we're not in complete, full control of nature, and that someone must be to blame.

Plenty of viruses have appeared without any lab involvement before and will again. This one is is curious given the bizzare coincidence of timing and location, plus we know from Chernobyl mistakes do happen even if very rare.

On the not wanting to believe nature could produce such a virus, there was equally a very vocal school of thought that the problem could only be solved by human lab intervention and nature would never 'solve' itself naturally.   Omicron appears and notably changes the game and it took a while to accept this new twist.

[Riedquat]

2 hours ago, FallingAwake said:

Because the lab in Wuhan was studying coronavirus gain of function...

Compared to your generic "university with a biology department that might also have been looking at disease".

Can you see the difference?

Yet all the people saying "too much of a coincidence" would be saying exactly the same thing had there been any sort of facility in the area that had been studying viruses.

Without any actual evidence to the contrary I'll remain leaning towards the "same as has always happened" explanation being the most probable. As I've said can't rule it out coming from that lab but being so determined to insist that it's that very much strikes me as being obsessed with finding someone to blame and to misunderstanding the nature of coincidence.

[Riedquat]

33 minutes ago, nightowl said:

Plenty of viruses have appeared without any lab involvement before and will again. This one is is curious given the bizzare coincidence of timing and location, plus we know from Chernobyl mistakes do happen even if very rare.

That's why it's a possibility, but the nature of coincidence is that it's actually very easy to find them. If it wasn't this it would've been something else that people say "must be due to that." Each coincidence is pretty unlikely but there are billions of possible coincidences.

[Goat]

3 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Yet all the people saying "too much of a coincidence" would be saying exactly the same thing had there been any sort of facility in the area that had been studying viruses.

Nope, it's the fact that they were studying the same virus and performing "gain of function" experiments that looks suspicious.

[nightowl]

9 minutes ago, Goat said:

Nope, it's the fact that they were studying the same virus and performing "gain of function" experiments that looks suspicious.

It may not have to have been as part of that research. If they say had a sample of the original wild virus and leaked that, would that count as a lab leak?

The makeup of this released virus would have no biological markers to identify it as anything but natural.

[petetong]

15 hours ago, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

Just because China ALLOWED internaltional travel didn't mean WE HAD TO ACCEPT THEM. Especially when the clue is in them NOT ALLOWING NATIONAL TRAVEL WITHIN THEIR OWN BORDERS. FFS. 

Obviously we shouldn't have accepted them but that was Johnson for you and wasn't the point being made was it, they should have stopped it at source but didn't ...

[Goat]

17 hours ago, MonsieurCopperCrutch said:

Just because China ALLOWED internaltional travel didn't mean WE HAD TO ACCEPT THEM. Especially when the clue is in them NOT ALLOWING NATIONAL TRAVEL WITHIN THEIR OWN BORDERS. FFS. 

It's a bit tricky to "shut the borders" when the Chinese don't tell you what's going on.

I mean it's not as if they rang up No. 10, or anywhere and said "hey guys, we've got this weird new pathogen that's killing people in Wuhan, we've shut down internal travel there but is it okay if we keep the international departures going" is it

1 hour ago, petetong said:

Obviously we shouldn't have accepted them but that was Johnson for you and wasn't the point being made was it, they should have stopped it at source but didn't ...

I hardly think we can blame Mr Johnson for not acting on Chinese state secrets that he wasn't in possession of.

Can you give me a list of countries comparable to the UK, which enacted border measures that, if copied by the UK at the same time, would've had a material effect on the pandemic in this country?  Half a dozen or so should do.

In any event, the vast, vast majority of our cases, certainly the ones that resulted in community transmission, came in from Italy, Spain and France, I'm not sure if we ever had any cases that came in directly from China.

Edited March 5, 2023 by Goat

[petetong]

29 minutes ago, Goat said:

It's a bit tricky to "shut the borders" when the Chinese don't tell you what's going on.

I mean it's not as if they rang up No. 10, or anywhere and said "hey guys, we've got this weird new pathogen that's killing people in Wuhan, we've shut down internal travel there but is it okay if we keep the international departures going" is it

I hardly think we can blame Mr Johnson for not acting on Chinese state secrets that he wasn't in possession of.

Can you give me a list of countries comparable to the UK, which enacted border measures that, if copied by the UK at the same time, would've had a material effect on the pandemic in this country?  Half a dozen or so should do.

In any event, the vast, vast majority of our cases, certainly the ones that resulted in community transmission, came in from Italy, Spain and France, I'm not sure if we ever had any cases that came in directly from China.

There were some that did, I am pretty certain of it as people were saying if they can do it why can't we at the time, and i ain't going to go searching the internet for you 🤪

[Goat]

19 minutes ago, petetong said:

There were some that did, I am pretty certain of it as people were saying if they can do it why can't we at the time, and i ain't going to go searching the internet for you 🤪

Well, I've looked into the matter closely, and I am fairly sure no country acted in a way that would've had an effect if the UK had copied it at the same time.

To be clear, for the UK to have had effective border measures would've meant action in January, maybe the first week of February at the latest, and even then it's doubtful that would've done anything more than delay matters rather than keep the virus out completely.

[Bob8]

4 minutes ago, Goat said:

Well, I've looked into the matter closely, and I am fairly sure no country acted in a way that would've had an effect if the UK had copied it at the same time.

To be clear, for the UK to have had effective border measures would've meant action in January, maybe the first week of February at the latest, and even then it's doubtful that would've done anything more than delay matters rather than keep the virus out completely.

I must disagree here.

I live in Denmark and the restrictions were moderate, but earlier even with less notice. It worked better. To a large extent, it was a lucky best guess, which is why it is not condemnation.

[Goat]

11 hours ago, Bob8 said:

I must disagree here.

I live in Denmark and the restrictions were moderate, but earlier even with less notice. It worked better. To a large extent, it was a lucky best guess, which is why it is not condemnation.

13 March, according to Wikipedia, border closures from 14 March, although Danish citizens were exempt, the UK introduced similar measures on 16 March, at the time the UK was reporting similar case numbers as Denmark but from 10x the population, possibly this was partly down to testing.

There were earlier restrictions related to specific regions, (China, S. Korea, N. Italy), I think the UK implemented broadly similar measures at about the same time.

The important point, that I was responding to, is that by 13 March, or even by 1 March, the die was already cast, we already had a significant number of cases imported from Italy etc, and many hundreds of thousands of tourists overseas who needed to come back, there was no way we could avoid a significant Covid outbreak in March 2020.

To repeat, AFAIK no country introduced measures that, if replicated in the UK at the same time, would've had a material effect on the UK's outcome.

[Bob8]

39 minutes ago, Goat said:

13 March, according to Wikipedia, border closures from 14 March, although Danish citizens were exempt, the UK introduced similar measures on 16 March, at the time the UK was reporting similar case numbers as Denmark but from 10x the population, possibly this was partly down to testing.

There were earlier restrictions related to specific regions, (China, S. Korea, N. Italy), I think the UK implemented broadly similar measures at about the same time.

The important point, that I was responding to, is that by 13 March, or even by 1 March, the die was already cast, we already had a significant number of cases imported from Italy etc, and many hundreds of thousands of tourists overseas who needed to come back, there was no way we could avoid a significant Covid outbreak in March 2020.

To repeat, AFAIK no country introduced measures that, if replicated in the UK at the same time, would've had a material effect on the UK's outcome.

My point was more concerning the domestic regulations. Of course, there is much speculation, but in hindsight, Cheltenham looks an error (with hindsight)

[nightowl]

40 minutes ago, Goat said:

13 March, according to Wikipedia, border closures from 14 March, although Danish citizens were exempt, the UK introduced similar measures on 16 March, at the time the UK was reporting similar case numbers as Denmark but from 10x the population, possibly this was partly down to testing.

There were earlier restrictions related to specific regions, (China, S. Korea, N. Italy), I think the UK implemented broadly similar measures at about the same time.

The important point, that I was responding to, is that by 13 March, or even by 1 March, the die was already cast, we already had a significant number of cases imported from Italy etc, and many hundreds of thousands of tourists overseas who needed to come back, there was no way we could avoid a significant Covid outbreak in March 2020.

To repeat, AFAIK no country introduced measures that, if replicated in the UK at the same time, would've had a material effect on the UK's outcome.

To add to that there's a big difference to the UK and Denmark (well London vs Copenhagen at least)....international visitors and those transitting through.

[Goat]

17 minutes ago, nightowl said:

To add to that there's a big difference to the UK and Denmark (well London vs Copenhagen at least)....international visitors and those transitting through.

Also, I imagine much less tourism to the likes of Italy, France, Spain, although maybe @Bob8 can expand on that.

[Bob8]

2 minutes ago, Goat said:

Also, I imagine much less tourism to the likes of Italy, France, Spain, although maybe @Bob8 can expand on that.

The comparisons that makes sense are with Sweden and Norway. They are tricky, as Sweden was late and then did a voluntary lockdown (but they are Swedes, so they did it to a large extent). Certainly Denmark and Norway came out of it a lot better.

[Goat]

29 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

My point was more concerning the domestic regulations. Of course, there is much speculation, but in hindsight, Cheltenham looks an error (with hindsight)

The main restrictions came in on 13 March, 3 days before the UK, I doubt that would've made much of a difference either way.

With Cheltenham, the question is what would people have done instead?  If by cancelling it we ended up driving people from an outdoor event into bookies and pubs, or even just shopping malls instead, we'd have likely made matters worse.

Even with 3 years hindsight, it's impossible to give a clear answer either way, although that won't of course stop some people who are more interested in grinding axes than getting to the truth.

 

6 minutes ago, Bob8 said:

The comparisons that makes sense are with Sweden and Norway. They are tricky, as Sweden was late and then did a voluntary lockdown (but they are Swedes, so they did it to a large extent). Certainly Denmark and Norway came out of it a lot better.

The truth seems to be, that a lot of the outcomes in different countries, especially in the first wave, seems to be as much about geography as it is to do with what the government did at the time.

Edited March 6, 2023 by Goat

[Bob8]

11 minutes ago, Goat said:

The main restrictions came in on 13 March, 3 days before the UK, I doubt that would've made much of a difference either way.

With Cheltenham, the question is what would people have done instead?  If by cancelling it we ended up driving people from an outdoor event into bookies and pubs, or even just shopping malls instead, we'd have likely made matters worse.

Even with 3 years hindsight, it's impossible to give a clear answer either way, although that won't of course stop some people who are more interested in grinding axes than getting to the truth.

The truth seems to be, that a lot of the outcomes in different countries, especially in the first wave, seems to be as much about geography as it is to do with what the government did at the time.

This is interpretation, but there are trends and certainly comparing Sweden, Denmark and Norway does bear them out. 

[nightowl]

16 minutes ago, Goat said:

Also, I imagine much less tourism to the likes of Italy, France, Spain, although maybe @Bob8 can expand on that.

Uk, France, Italy and Spain all have huge numbers of visitors coming and going (and in Londons case a lot extra transitting through Heathrow), so the number of potential carriers in these countries in notably higher even before anyone seriously though about sars 2 coming. Whilst in reality it was no doubt well seeded. East Europe and Scandinavia don't have that level of passengers. 

The waves of infections did seem to eminate from London/se outwards suggesting it was the main portal sars2 entering.

[Locke]

On 05/03/2023 at 09:57, Riedquat said:

Why is it "so bloody obvious"?

Illegal & unethical gain of function research taking place in that lab with this virus

Research assistants made $5milion+ selling test animals to the wet market. $5 per animal = 1 million test subjects sold for human consumption

Research assistants taken to hospital with SARS like illness late in 2019

Chinese government scrubbed its public research databases on coronaviruses at the beginning of the pandemic

Spike protein sequence very similar to HIV

No bat caves within 1000km of Wuhan

Bats don't migrate in Winter