• The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Coronavirus: How dangerous a threat?

Page 406 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
In this case it is that simple. Unfortunately, you don't want to see this because you have been actively contributing to the conspiracy theorizing. (Unwittingly or otherwise)
Are lab accidents (and theorising that they may be the cause of an outbreak) in general to be dismissed as conspiracy theories? That no matter the details, entertaining the possibility that humans in laboratories caused an outbreak is always a conspiracy theory?

Or is it only if one actually theorises of a conspiracy to intentionally cause death and destruction that such a label is warranted?

Is the 1977 flu pandemic likewise such a simple case?
 
Are lab accidents (and theorising that they may be the cause of an outbreak) in general to be dismissed as conspiracy theories? That no matter the details, entertaining the possibility that humans in laboratories caused an outbreak is always a conspiracy theory?

Or is it only if one actually theorises of a conspiracy to intentionally cause death and destruction that such a label is warranted?

Is the 1977 flu pandemic likewise such a simple case?
Did I say that?

My comments are about this one. But nice attempt at deflection.
 
Can't you simplify it further? Either one follows The Science™ or one believes in conspiracy theories. It's absolutely one or the other.
I would say that people who look to science for answers are willing to consider other input if there is evidence, while people who look to theories are never willing to look at science.

Speaking for myself, I am still on the 'natural' cause side, but I certainly haven't ruled out 'lab leak' because, well, humans.

One of the 'theorists' who was pushing the lab leak theory in the summer of 2020, has now shifted to saying that China started spreading covid in Europe in 2018. Which is one of the puzzling things about many theorists: when their theory doesn't pan out, they just shift. Another example: we've gone past two or three of the dates when all vaccinated people were supposed to die...
 
I think that Covid has caused, is causing myopic medical mayhem. World wide there are a number of things that have pandemic potential.. and people who take spinning classes or get a bike fit are at more risk than sofa surfers..flesh eating bacteria and other super strains already exist but have through blind luck not taken a huge body count. Recently young kid died shortly after touching contaminated equipment.
Covid is a vast treasure trove of not only medical science, but equal to or greater social science outcomes.
In the US there is dramatic increase in anti vax,anti medicine, anti information, to the extent that a measurable part of the population, does not believe anything, and clearly states that they will not act on or accept any information from the standard sources. That needs immediate attention by officials that design emergency response for the general public. What do you do when large segment doesn't even move when they hear or see a fire alarm in a theater, school, or major sports or music venue? We are there.
 
I think that Covid has caused, is causing myopic medical mayhem. World wide there are a number of things that have pandemic potential.. and people who take spinning classes or get a bike fit are at more risk than sofa surfers..flesh eating bacteria and other super strains already exist but have through blind luck not taken a huge body count. Recently young kid died shortly after touching contaminated equipment.
Covid is a vast treasure trove of not only medical science, but equal to or greater social science outcomes.
In the US there is dramatic increase in anti vax,anti medicine, anti information, to the extent that a measurable part of the population, does not believe anything, and clearly states that they will not act on or accept any information from the standard sources. That needs immediate attention by officials that design emergency response for the general public. What do you do when large segment doesn't even move when they hear or see a fire alarm in a theater, school, or major sports or music venue? We are there.
According to those in the know, drug resistant bacteria and the lessening of the effectiveness of the current antibiotics is going to be a huge problem unless more money and research is thrown at it. Even drug manufacture seems to be a problem at the moment with many countries unable to get the amount of drugs they require for the usual chronic illnesses let alone the more exotic ones. The pandemic problems are multi layered. The physical illness is just part of it. The economic fall out and changes to the world economy and previous lifestyle is ongoing.
 
are they doing so because they followed the evidence or are they so because they got all hysterical about china in 2020 before any actual evidence came to light?

Are they demanding china pay damages to the rest of the world?

Even if it were 100% proven to come from a lab - so what? You can't control what other countries do, but you can control what you do.

and don't get me started on those lab leakers who insist its only ukraine and the US who fund these biolabs all over the world as though no-one has ever operated such labs before. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
It is worth noting that they can't even agree which lab it came from, indicating that the information can't be that compelling. Maybe they should release it so we can all see for ourselves?
Hence the "low confidence" and "moderate confidence". Also as I've asked several times, are other countries' intelligence pointing to labs in China?

The political hearings in congress going on now might provide some insight, but probably not much due to the focus.
 
I didn't imply you did, nor did I ask you if you did. I asked you how much your stance on this one generalises. Does it? If not, why not?
Almost no one believes that 1977 was a natural flu reemergence. And I have no reason to dispute that based on what I know.

And lab outbreaks happen frequently. But almost all of them are due to extant pathogens. Unlike you, I have worked with human pathogens, so I know the dangers involved. And I know enough to spot Wade's BS. His main source was someone who has wanted to shutdown viral research for decades. This is his leverage and he hates Fauci. Pure motivated reasoning.

It should be a clue that the lab leak contingent think Omicron was another lab leak. That Ebola was a lab leak. That Hiv was from polio vaccines. I follow the data. And the data is unambiguous and it all points to a natural zoonosis.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
So pandemics can be caused naturally independent of lab activities and they can be caused by lab outbreaks. Most have a natural/non-lab origin.

Say that of the 10 most recent significant pandemics, 9 have a non-lab origin and 1 has a lab origin. I'm sure you know the relevant distribution better, but the argument is the same with different numbers.

From an outside perspective, conditional on the origins for this pandemic still being undetermined, going by the base-rate would imply a 10 % chance of lab origin.

Can we agree that such an argument is not based on a conspiracy theory, in fact that it makes no specific claims about the origins of this pandemic?
 
So pandemics can be caused naturally independent of lab activities and they can be caused by lab outbreaks. Most have a natural/non-lab origin.

Say that of the 10 most recent significant pandemics, 9 have a non-lab origin and 1 has a lab origin. I'm sure you know the relevant distribution better, but the argument is the same with different numbers.

From an outside perspective, conditional on the origins for this pandemic still being undetermined, going by the base-rate would imply a 10 % chance of lab origin.

Can we agree that such an argument is not based on a conspiracy theory, in fact that it makes no specific claims about the origins of this pandemic?
BUT, people who really want it to be a lab leak use that 10% as 'proof' that it was a lab leak.

Its much like other science denying discussions where 999 scientist generally agree on something, but one scientist (who doesn't specialize in that area) throws out an 'alternative theory', and science deniers run with "scientists are split".
 
  • Like
Reactions: djpbaltimore
BUT, people who really want it to be a lab leak use that 10% as 'proof' that it was a lab leak.

Its much like other science denying discussions where 999 scientist generally agree on something, but one scientist (who doesn't specialize in that area) throws out an 'alternative theory', and science deniers run with "scientists are split".
10 % is pretty far from the two alternatives you presented. If I met a stranger on the street and I had to make an uninformed guess, I'd think there would be about 90/10 % for him to be right/left handed. It's quite obvious to common intuition how that is different to being absolutely sure one way or the other, while still thinking one predicate is more likely than the other.

It's quite plausible that a stranger on the street is left-handed, but it's more likely that he is right-handed.

It's quite plausible that a pandemic is caused by a lab accident, but it's more likely to not have been caused by lab activities.
 
10 % is pretty far from the two alternatives you presented. If I met a stranger on the street and I had to make an uninformed guess, I'd think there would be about 90/10 % for him to be right/left handed. It's quite obvious to common intuition how that is different to being absolutely sure one way or the other, while still thinking one predicate is more likely than the other.
Wait, what? You said "base-rate would imply a 10 % chance of lab origin. " That's the 10% I'm talking about. I didn't present any alternatives. Assuming that your assumption is correct, people who want it to be a lab leak will use that 10% chance as proof that it was a lab leak. Many of them don't even need 10% to run with it.

Your dominant hand comparison is not how the numbers are being viewed/used.

If you are referring to my example about science denying, I only shared that to show how little science deniers need, it isn't an 'alternative' to the discussion.

EDIT: Let's be clear, science must be part of proving a lab leak too.
 
Last edited:
If you are referring to my example about science denying, I only shared that to show how little science deniers need, it isn't an 'alternative' to the discussion.
How are bad arguments made by no one here relevant?

My point is that some interpretations of numbers are more correct than others. Stupid interpretations are a waste of time and energy, they are just noise. By using a common example (dominant hand), I hoped to make it easier to correctly interpret what 10 % means.
 
Last edited:
How are bad arguments made by no one here relevant?

My point is that some interpretations of numbers are more correct than others. Stupid interpretations are a waste of time and energy, they are just noise. By using a common example (dominant hand), I hoped to make it easier to correctly interpret what 10 % means.
I know what 10% means. That is irrelevant to how 10% is used by some.

"How are bad arguments made by no one here relevant?" :eek:

It's relevant, because its part of the discussion. We wouldn't even be discussing this if it wasn't for the bad arguments made by 'others'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: djpbaltimore
So pandemics can be caused naturally independent of lab activities and they can be caused by lab outbreaks. Most have a natural/non-lab origin.

Say that of the 10 most recent significant pandemics, 9 have a non-lab origin and 1 has a lab origin. I'm sure you know the relevant distribution better, but the argument is the same with different numbers.

From an outside perspective, conditional on the origins for this pandemic still being undetermined, going by the base-rate would imply a 10 % chance of lab origin.

Can we agree that such an argument is not based on a conspiracy theory, in fact that it makes no specific claims about the origins of this pandemic?
I agree with the last part. Suggesting the possibility of a lab origin and the need for an investigation is not conspiratorial. However, that isn't representative of what the lab leak contingent are saying. Most of their arguments are based in conspiracy theories. And like Qanon, it has caught on among conspiracy theorists.

Reminder that Wade's argument is that Fauci has bribed virologists with grant money to keep quiet about his complicity in creating Sars2. That is a conspiracy theory by any definition. And it has taken root because Fauci is a convenient scapegoat for the biosecurity zealots and one political party in this country. And all of that has poisoned any chance for a useful investigation from the US.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
For people interested in the actual science, this is a great place to start.

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/GurusPod/status/1634489182843437056


Dr. Redfield's testimony this week, while not offering any evidence, points to a lab leak. He is precisely the person who should provide 'proof' of why believes that. If he has a smoking gun, a gun, a bullet, show it please.
It was also riddled with fundamental errors about factual matters. It should be noted that he was a clinician, so really doesn't know much about virology. None of the witnesses do and that was by design.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
For people interested in the actual science, this is a great place to start.

View: https://mobile.twitter.com/GurusPod/status/1634489182843437056



It was also riddled with fundamental errors about factual matters. It should be noted that he was a clinician, so really doesn't know much about virology. None of the witnesses do and that was by design.
He has access to information and people who know, that is why he should be able to present solid evidence. My boss can't do what my team does, but he can present what we do, though when he does, he usually has one of us with him. Redfield should explain, with evidence, why he has come to his conclusion.
 
Sort of off by the overall objective.. So everything points to a lab leak.. and lets say that it could ever be proven, given Chinese cooperation level, would say that there is a 1000% chance of them never admitting to anything..
Any possible outcome..
The straight forward answer is.. Hey everyone be more careful and let's knock off all this laboratory accident nonsense!! I mean it!! Or else!!
Years into multiple millions dead and sick,suffering, scared. What is the overall benefit to define the place of origin?
And no matter where you fall.. in the US, through widespread vaccine, behavior modification and natural immunity, we have flattened the curve enough for almost every aspect of life,for young and old to return to normal or a slightly modified lifestyle to pre pandemic.
And ground zero was airline industry, the most effective method for virus spread and cross contamination.. Back up near,sometimes passed pre pandemic levels and disease transmission and transportation look to be solved or at best stable.
I am not saying that I don't see the necessity and utility in hearings.. I am saying that in my opinion the same mechanisms used for the hearings, didn't lay out realistic expectations for the public, at the beginning of the pandemic and now what is looking like a forensic phase of Covid..again my opinion.. gotta kind of have an objective.. What do you want to get? And if answers from China is part of anyone's list..no pony for Christmas
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmdirt
Anecdotal sample of one:
One of the bosses here tested positive on Friday, March 3rd. She spent the entire weekend sleeping. She felt a little better on Monday, but spent Tuesday-Friday sleeping again. She felt a little better last weekend, but still tested positive on Sunday evening. She spent yesterday sleeping most of the day again. She did a telehealth appointment with a doc, but they felt that it was too late to do anti-viral treatments (I don't know what day the appt was). I know this many details because her daughter works here too. She also said that these are the first sick days that her mom has taken since the early 2000s when she had a lady issue, so she must have a decent immune system.

She is a 45 year old life-long runner and yoga person in overall fit health who had her first two shots in early 2021, but no additional shots.

This SC2 thing can be an ars kicker, and you never know who is going to get kicked.

EDIT: Follow up: she came to work Wednesday, and then was out Thursday and Friday.
 
Last edited: