The theory that the COVID-19 pandemic was triggered by the Sars-CoV-2 virus being leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology in China was recently given new life following an explosive article in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) in which the authors claimed “the most compelling reason to favor the lab leak hypothesis is firmly based in science.” But does the science really support the claim that the virus was engineered in a laboratory?
Again, all this because Trump said it was. Not because of science. Not because of probabilities. Not because China's government is straight out evil but if Trump said it, we have to say the opposite even if it means giving cover to actual evil.
ReplyDeletethere is also no evidence that links the virus origins to animals in the wild or the wet market. Considering that the wet market is a relatively small area, presence of such a virus might be detectable.
ReplyDelete"But does the science really support the claim that the virus was engineered in a laboratory?"
ReplyDeleteWe are not saying it was necessarily engineered. The argument is that the virus was of natural origin. Perhaps its function was enhanced through "gain of function" manipulation in the laboratory. Perhaps it was slightly engineered.
We don't know.
We can't even say with absolute certainty the virus even originated in China.
What we are saying is that the laboratory is still in the running as one possibility to being the conduit as to how the virus entered the the human population.
It is not such a far out hypothesis especially given the reluctance of the Chinese government to allow the lab to operate by the norms of scientific research by allowing outside scientists to come and evaluate the research methodologies and data and to interview the researchers.
So we dont know the answer and are not likely going to find out either?
ReplyDeleteSo there is no proof for what the until now mainstream view was.
ReplyDeleteMaybe , maybe not. Time will tell.
We're not going to find out because China is evil. Get it? This has nothing to do with Trump and for all we know, he's totally right and frankly, this would be consistent with what China likes to do.
ReplyDeleteIt's a bit like chareidi holocaust denial. Yes. Their gedolim did tell their sheep to remain in Europe, to not accept visas etc. But when you ask rabbis about it. They prefer to tzaddik-ize the bad ideas and advice of their leaders rather than admit they were wrong.
ReplyDeleteHmm, if one was to debate the possibility of a sarscov2 lab origin based on the input of experts, should they go with David Baltimore, a Nobel prize winning Virologist: "(I)t's a hypothesis that must be taken seriously."
ReplyDeleteOr should they go with Rabbi Eidensohn: "most experts" (according to me and CNN and whom I cite often in editorials and media reports, unnamed or otherwise) "say it's conspiracy theory and misinformation!" "And some even say it's racist!"
I think sensible people will go with Dr. Baltimore on this one since his view actually makes sense and yours is merely an argument from authority in addition to being plainly false with no supporting evidence to its substantive arguments.
To determine an origin requires proof and evidence, not intuition, gut feels, hopes, preferences, opinions, and theories.
Over 80,000 animals sequenced and counting, yet no intermediate species located. Quite different from the SARS case.
ReplyDeleteNo, we know with pretty extremely high probability that the virus originated in China.
ReplyDeleteThere is a ridiculous claim China has attempted to propagate suggesting the virus originated outside China and magically transported there (including their claim of doing so in frozen fish deliveries). The first outbreak was in Wuhan. There is no evidence of prior Sarscov2 infections in people (or any other animals) anywhere else in the world prior to the earliest known cases in Wuhan. All major outbreaks in any given geography have, obviously, been preceded by the first observed cases in those geographies, with outbreaks following in due course.
If you are about to cite me Barcelona or Italy, please don't. Random false positives and absurd conclusions from those experiments do not count.
If you believe in ex-China origins, you will have to explain how the first people in human history infected by this virus, somehow managed to spread it to no one in their immediate surroundings EXCEPT to other people in Wuhan, China after traveling there somehow (And spreading it to no one on the journey too), to seed the first outbreak in the world in the only place an outbreak occurred by December 2020. And you will also have to explain why all the genomic analyses trace back to that place, and the genomes of infected samples from no other locations in the world reflect an ancestral strain to the viruses circulating in Wuhan's earliest shared case samples. And why all the viral genomes of these samples from other places in the world reflect genetic descent from the Wuhan circulating strain.
ReplyDeleteAs for the research going on in WIV, we already know it is extremely reckless and dangerous, and it produces a level of societal risk that our society cannot tolerate and should not allow. Scientists like David Relman were already talking about this before there was a 2019 coronavirus pandemic.
We already know the answer that the Huanan Seafood Market is NOT the origin of a sarscov2 human zoonotic spillover event. Ie not the origin of the virus. Even China admits that now.
ReplyDeleteThere are ways that Congress can use its subpoena power to find out and publicize many things relevant to the topic of covid origins, from related parties such as EcoHealth, regardless of how uncooperative China is. Unfortunately so far the US Govt chooses not to do so. Protecting certain big personalities with recently released eponymous documentaries about them surely is playing a role in not finding out more about this.
He did not say it likely originated from the lab but simply that he is willingly to think about it.
ReplyDeletehttps://thebulletin.org/2021/06/caltechs-david-baltimore-discusses-the-debate-over-origins-of-sars-cov-2/
June 23
Biologists have seen what evolution can create: the whole natural world around us. We believe that evolution can do anything. But the fact that evolution might have been able to generate SARS-CoV-2 doesn’t mean that that’s how it came about. I think we very much need to find out what was happening in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. I think that we can’t say for sure yet whether the SARS-CoV-2 virus came from natural origins or if it was genetically manipulated somehow.
as a fine Talmid Hacham, I am sure you well aware of the role of evidence and how it can be undermined (hazamah).
ReplyDeleteHere is a story i read in the news -
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10079461/Mother-four-26-crashed-Mercedes-four-times-drink-drive-limit-spared-jail.html
a woman crashes her car into the back of another car, and later on is found to have alcohol and drugs in her blood. But she says she took the vodka and cocaine after the crash, at her friend's house, to calm her nerves. The prosecution could not prove whether the drugs were taken before or after the crash. And she walks free.
So statements like likelihood, precedent etc are just talk, we may intuitively feel that she is lying, and has useful best friend to help her. So it is with the SARS2 virus -we feel intuitively that a lot is wrong, but it cannto be proven with certaintly where the virus came from. We only have the court of the mind. Perhaps USA and China wish to avoid a war or cold war, and that is why the truth will not be told.
Torah thought on this week’s parsha לך לך Sodom were sinners, yet Lot chose to live there “Lot lifted up his eyes וישא לוט את עיניו, and beheld all the plain of the Jordan, that it was well watered every where כי כלה משקה, that was before the Lord had destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah, like the garden of the Lord, like the land of Egypt כארץ מצרים, all the way to Zoar באכה צער. So Lot chose for himself ויבחר לו לוט the whole plain of the Jordan את כל ככר הירדן; and Lot journeyed eastward מקדם. Thus they parted from each other ויפרדו איש מעל אחיו. Abram remained ישב in the land of Canaan, while Lot dwelt in the cities of the Plain, pitching his tents near Sodom ויאהל עד סדם. Now the inhabitants אנשי of Sodom were wicked and sinners against the Lord exceedingly רעים וחטאים ליקוק מאד.” (Genesis 13;10-13).
ReplyDeleteMy theory on Lot. He was an עם הארץ though nephew to Abram, giant Torah scholar and Prophet. Happens. Lot knew enough Torah to debate Abram Pesachim 118a
“R. Shesheth also said on the authority of R. Eleazar b. Azariah: Whoever relates slander, and whoever accepts slander, and whoever gives false testimony against his neighbor, deserve to be cast to dogs, for it is said, “You shall be holy people to Me ואנשי קדש תהיון לי; you must not eat meat torn by beasts in the field ובשר בשדה טרפה לא תאכלו; you shall cast it to the dogs לכלב תשלכון אתו” (Exodus 22:29). Which is followed by, “You must not carry false rumors לא תשא שמע שוא, You shall join hands with the guilty אל תשת ידך עם רשע to act as a malicious witness להיות עד חמס” (Exodus 23:1).”
Lot argued with Abram there was no proof that Sodomites are wicked. Lot refused to hear any talk slandering Sodom. This is like today many will not hear any talk slandering the Squad, Bernie Sanders, Warren, Biden/Harris, Taliban, China etc. The Torah says: “You must not carry false rumors לא תשא שמע שוא, You shall join hands with the guilty אל תשת ידך עם רשע to act as a malicious witness להיות עד חמס” (Exodus 23:1).”
Abraham couldn’t win over Lot because Lot would not tolerate one bad word on the people of Sodom. Today, hard to win over Jew haters because they close their ears and minds to anything contrary to their political positions, like Abram v Lot. Follow KA, Garnel, Israel Reader, BiotechObserver? Possible, what I’m saying?
In other words you can't accept that something remains unknown - that is the basis of conspiracy theories
ReplyDeletenot really, there are hard conspiracy theories, eg that 5G is conencted to covid - whcih is ridiculous - how is a hi frequency microwave connected to a biological virus? would 4G, which is slightly lower frequwencey be SArs, and Radiowaves be connected to flu?
ReplyDeleteMy position is closer to that of prof Baltimore than it is to Satmar (joke). I mean, that we do not have certainty for either claim on the virus, but whereas he leans towards wet market, I lean towards escape of virus, either from lab or from samples taken from caves - it might never have reached the lab.
who care where you lean! Do you have evidence - no just biases
ReplyDeleteOh - just 1 comment ago you wrote "In other words you can't accept that something remains unknown - that is the basis of conspiracy theories"
ReplyDeleteNow you say "who cares what you think". More Gaslighting.
Reminds me of kiruv yeshivas -
On recruitment visits - we are open minded. We welcome all questions, think like scientists, we are open , our rabbis have degrees , PhD's etc.
When you visit - "how dare you disagree. Who cares what you think? Etc etc.
Not only Kirov. Dessert on demeaning people who learned a trade...
Does Baltimore have evidence? No. Does fauci? No? ....
ReplyDeletedo you have evidence? No!
ReplyDeleteSo you seem to be saying without clear evidence all opinions are equal?
Without evidence, all opinions are opinions. Even if the virus is traced back to the batcave, that refutes the wet market story. If they collected samples from the cave and released one on the way back to the lab , that's a lab leak.
ReplyDeleteSo why is your opinion so important?
ReplyDeleteIt's not more or less important than anyone else's here
ReplyDeleteInitially he called the FCS a "smoking gun." He later backtracked on this opinion and said exactly what I quoted him as saying: "(I)t's a hypothesis that must be taken seriously."
ReplyDeleteSource: https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/the-debate-over-origins-of-sars-cov-2
You (and some others) are calling it a conspiracy theory. He clearly indicates that that is not what it is. It is a plausible origin. It MAY have been a genetically manipulated virus.
He is not "repeating a conspiracy theory" he is mentioning a legitimate scientific hypothesis, just as I am.
and you know that based om what?
ReplyDeleteActually, I'd be more somech on biotech observer as he/she is more expert in the field.
ReplyDeletealso, a lot of what the spokespeople are saying is mere chicanery. For example , I think it was Fauci who said they didn't fuse viruses to create harm to humans. Of course, that wasn't their intention, but that does not mean such meddling with dangerous viruses is harmless or risk free. The assumption that they know what each virus and each engineered virus will like in terms of behaviour , danger, lethality etc is complete nonsense. if they knew that beforehand, they wouldn't need to engineer them in the first place.
ReplyDelete