Covid 'fuse' may have been lit weeks or months before the 'bomb' in Wuhan market(cbc.ca)
cbc.ca
Covid 'fuse' may have been lit weeks or months before the 'bomb' in Wuhan market
https://www.cbc.ca/radio/quirks/mar-27-covid-pandemic-origins-nature-sounds-good-why-humans-have-such-big-brains-and-more-1.5965083/covid-fuse-may-have-been-lit-weeks-or-months-before-the-bomb-in-wuhan-market-researcher-1.5965090
79 comments
There was the Wuhan ophthalmologist[1] who pulled the alarm but got a visit by police and eventually succumbed to the disease.
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Wenliang
[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Wenliang
He was the first that publicly recognised the original outbreak as something new, but that's not the sort of preventive surveillance we're interested in.
Of course it would have been great if the Chinese were more transparent during those early days (and in general honestly), but it's pretty clear that the original outbreak was just the first smoke escaping from inside the burning roof: by late December it was already an uncontained epidemic that had spread far outside Wuhan.
We'd like something that would pick up the disease before it makes it to the epidemic status.
Of course it would have been great if the Chinese were more transparent during those early days (and in general honestly), but it's pretty clear that the original outbreak was just the first smoke escaping from inside the burning roof: by late December it was already an uncontained epidemic that had spread far outside Wuhan.
We'd like something that would pick up the disease before it makes it to the epidemic status.
Which is weird in itself -
The probability of death for a healthy 30-something year old is lower than their probability to die in a car crash (1/10 to 1/100 of all cause mortality for that age group).
It’s a game of probability, of course, but it turns out that whistle blowers often suffer from “coincidences” and “low probability events”, and whenever that happens, I try to take note.
The probability of death for a healthy 30-something year old is lower than their probability to die in a car crash (1/10 to 1/100 of all cause mortality for that age group).
It’s a game of probability, of course, but it turns out that whistle blowers often suffer from “coincidences” and “low probability events”, and whenever that happens, I try to take note.
I think doctors at outbreaks like this are at much higher risk of death than the average person due to stress and a much higher viral load than normal. Medical professionals only start to use protective gear after they realized how dangerous a disease is. Before that their spending significant time around highly infectious people in inclosed spaces while under extreme stress.
Wuhan lost a significant number of medical professionals presumably due to this.
Wuhan lost a significant number of medical professionals presumably due to this.
I assume that's the average death rate for healthy 30 year olds over the whole pandemic, I don't think it applies to how things were in the beginning with overrun hospitals and overworked health professionals.
If you look at the SARS epidemic you see plenty of cases like these.
Not only that, but no known effective medications or treatments. They were flying totally blind at the beginning.
It is unlikely, but unlikely events happen. It does not have to be a conspiracy.
Think about this: If he hadn't died, he probably would have received much less attention.
There were a few other eloquent Chinese whistle-blowers from the early days, Jan-Feb 2020, who have been silenced by government threats or by being detained, who do not have the public recognition of Dr Li - probably because they didn't die.
Think about this: If he hadn't died, he probably would have received much less attention.
There were a few other eloquent Chinese whistle-blowers from the early days, Jan-Feb 2020, who have been silenced by government threats or by being detained, who do not have the public recognition of Dr Li - probably because they didn't die.
With regards to the car crash probability: those are the odds that if something were to kill you that it would be a car crash, not the odds of actually dying in a car crash. In reality the odds of any specific 30 year old male in the US dying in a car crash over the course of a year is 0.02% (I don't have data for driving fatalities for china, but I presume they are not substantially higher). This is about 50 times less likely than a 30 year old who has tested positive for covid dying from covid, or equivalently getting covid at 30 raises your risk of death as much as a second lifetime worth of driving.
No, the IFR for a 30 year old is approximately 0.02%, remarkably similar to dying in a car crash according to recent CDC update:
https://www.nbc26.com/news/coronavirus/cdc-estimates-covid-1...
The 0.02% number covers 20-49; It is lopsided, so it's likely that 30 is much less and 49 is much more ... ; So, it's not 1/100 or 1/1000 as I claimed, likely 1/10.
Your numbers are off by a factor of at least 50.
https://www.nbc26.com/news/coronavirus/cdc-estimates-covid-1...
The 0.02% number covers 20-49; It is lopsided, so it's likely that 30 is much less and 49 is much more ... ; So, it's not 1/100 or 1/1000 as I claimed, likely 1/10.
Your numbers are off by a factor of at least 50.
There are already long term studies (in France for instance there is the constance cohorte https://www.constances.fr/cohorte/presentation-constances.ph...) that ask volunteers to come and get tested for a lot of things.
This data is being looked at and it seems there were already covid cases months before reports of cases in Wuhan https://www.francetvinfo.fr/replay-radio/samedi-investigatio....
This data is being looked at and it seems there were already covid cases months before reports of cases in Wuhan https://www.francetvinfo.fr/replay-radio/samedi-investigatio....
This is very interesting, do you have a translated article?
xyzzy21(5)
The more we learn the more it points to a lab leak, but Chinese commenters will deny it, claim racism, many on the left will say it’s simply not true, and yet here we are. Something caused it and it came from China. With a government that 100% cannot be trusted to tell the truth let alone defend human life, it’s more likely than not this was an accidental leak.
> Something caused it
Yes
> and it came from China.
Yes, it seems that way.
>With a government that 100% cannot be trusted to tell the truth let alone defend human life,
Sure.
> it’s more likely than not this was an accidental leak.
This does not follow your other points. Just because it's within the realm of possibility that someone could have done it doesn't mean they did it. Just because someone is a bad guy doesn't mean you can attribute everything bad that happens in their house to them. Sometimes bad stuff happens and it's not anyone's fault.
Yes
> and it came from China.
Yes, it seems that way.
>With a government that 100% cannot be trusted to tell the truth let alone defend human life,
Sure.
> it’s more likely than not this was an accidental leak.
This does not follow your other points. Just because it's within the realm of possibility that someone could have done it doesn't mean they did it. Just because someone is a bad guy doesn't mean you can attribute everything bad that happens in their house to them. Sometimes bad stuff happens and it's not anyone's fault.
There’s no evidence that it’s a deliberate leak, and it’s highly doubtful we will ever learn what exactly happened, but I think it’s highly likely that this came from a Chinese lab and the apologists for China decry this line of inquiry
That's fine, but you're treating your beliefs as facts and assuming that because you find it convincing that must be the reality of the situation. I was trying to explain how that's not necessarily the case.
Was with you until this "many on the left" nonsense. Been "left" all my life and I don't recognize myself in your comment nor do many others.
It's not team sports, it's world issues.
It's not team sports, it's world issues.
Many on the right will say the lab leak theory is definitely true and has been 'proved'. So yep, we're in this together. I'm on the right, have been all my life, but nonsense is nonsense whoever is saying it.
Thats why he said many not all.
And the maximal delta between all 7 billion humans and the minimal version of many, let's say 3, makes such a statement unhelpfully limited in scope, while implying a controversy of thin air
[deleted]
Nothing in that article suggests a leak. If maybe your own personal theory, but this article doesn’t support it.
Nothing in the article talks about how the virus first got into humans, beyond assuming an animal (not lab) source. It simply focuses on how unlikely it was, according to simulations, to survive the chain of initial infections long enough to fully develop into a pandemic.
The researchers discussed in the article believe the virus was present in a small number of people before the spread at the Wuhan market and view the spread there as among large numbers of people, not between the animals at the market and people there. So it's the crowds that were important there, not the seafood. Many countries around the world have densely crowded areas.
In order words, this was probably an unlikely event that could have happened in any country worldwide with densely crowded areas. It happened to be China this time, but that's coincidence and should not lead to anti-Chinese or anti-Asian hate.
Criticizing governments in China, the US, etc for aspects of their early pandemic handling is of course perfectly valid, as opposed to generalizing to the populations or ethnicities as a whole. But one should not discriminatorily focus on what China did wrong early on while ignoring the early mistakes of Western countries like the US, nor praise the US's mediocre pandemic results throughout most of 2020 while overlooking China's fast recovery through strict (albeit quite authoritarian) lockdowns.
For reference, I am American and not Chinese, but I still don't blame Chinese people generally for their government's bad handling of the early containment stage of the pandemic, nor for the coincidence that this virus spread from China.
The researchers discussed in the article believe the virus was present in a small number of people before the spread at the Wuhan market and view the spread there as among large numbers of people, not between the animals at the market and people there. So it's the crowds that were important there, not the seafood. Many countries around the world have densely crowded areas.
In order words, this was probably an unlikely event that could have happened in any country worldwide with densely crowded areas. It happened to be China this time, but that's coincidence and should not lead to anti-Chinese or anti-Asian hate.
Criticizing governments in China, the US, etc for aspects of their early pandemic handling is of course perfectly valid, as opposed to generalizing to the populations or ethnicities as a whole. But one should not discriminatorily focus on what China did wrong early on while ignoring the early mistakes of Western countries like the US, nor praise the US's mediocre pandemic results throughout most of 2020 while overlooking China's fast recovery through strict (albeit quite authoritarian) lockdowns.
For reference, I am American and not Chinese, but I still don't blame Chinese people generally for their government's bad handling of the early containment stage of the pandemic, nor for the coincidence that this virus spread from China.
> But one should not discriminatorily focus on what China did wrong early on while ignoring the early mistakes of Western countries like the US
this is wildly inaccurate. china single-handedly delayed world response by at least a month by jailing journalists, destroying samples, and lying to the WHO. comparing that to some degree of ineptitude in the US or anywhere else is nonsensical.
this is wildly inaccurate. china single-handedly delayed world response by at least a month by jailing journalists, destroying samples, and lying to the WHO. comparing that to some degree of ineptitude in the US or anywhere else is nonsensical.
I agree the Chinese government did all of that. Meanwhile the US handling of it has caused hundreds of thousands of unnecessary deaths within the US alone, according to an interview given to CNN recently by Trump's own White House coronavirus task force coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx where she said everything beyond the first ~100,000 could have been "mitigated or decreased substantially": https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/mar/28/dr-deborah-b... To that statistic one must add the many consequences within the US other than deaths, the consequences across the rest of the world of US-led decisions like politicization of mask-wearing, and the many consequences of decisions taken by many other governments from outside of Asia (such as the COVID-denialist/anti-science presidents in Brazil and Mexico) that get overlooked when people hate on China regarding COVID-19.
My point is not to defend the Chinese government's horrible early misdeeds, but rather that the current global pandemic situation is not uniquely or even primarily China's fault. Sure, perfect handling by the Chinese government would have had a chance of containing this pandemic within their borders. And clearly the bad-faith actions of the Chinese government early on were far from that perfect handling. But even perfect handling would still have relied on luck, and success would not have been guaranteed. In any case no country should be measured against perfection. Most of the consequences over the pandemic taken as a whole are truly the result of attitudes and policy decisions from countries other than China, very much including the US.
[Edited to replace most references to "China" to "the Chinese government", to emphasize the differentiation between the government and the people. I am just as opposed to hate against the Chinese people as I am to the early pandemic handling of the Chinese government.]
My point is not to defend the Chinese government's horrible early misdeeds, but rather that the current global pandemic situation is not uniquely or even primarily China's fault. Sure, perfect handling by the Chinese government would have had a chance of containing this pandemic within their borders. And clearly the bad-faith actions of the Chinese government early on were far from that perfect handling. But even perfect handling would still have relied on luck, and success would not have been guaranteed. In any case no country should be measured against perfection. Most of the consequences over the pandemic taken as a whole are truly the result of attitudes and policy decisions from countries other than China, very much including the US.
[Edited to replace most references to "China" to "the Chinese government", to emphasize the differentiation between the government and the people. I am just as opposed to hate against the Chinese people as I am to the early pandemic handling of the Chinese government.]
CCP is hiding some raw data.
Most likely they tried to cover it up and that led to it spreading more and around the world. If there was a true investigation, it would go up to upper/mid levels in the CCP and show how corrupt they were. In Asian cultures, saving face is everything.
Most likely they tried to cover it up and that led to it spreading more and around the world. If there was a true investigation, it would go up to upper/mid levels in the CCP and show how corrupt they were. In Asian cultures, saving face is everything.
Aren't all exponential processed like this? Fragile in the beginning, unstoppable past some point?
I don't think we were unlucky at all. If there was a 70% chance of this petering out it doesn't take a lot of tries to get one that doesn't.
I don't think we were unlucky at all. If there was a 70% chance of this petering out it doesn't take a lot of tries to get one that doesn't.
Or, to quote Ernest Hemingway, "Gradually, then suddenly."
If this was flu, say, with a smaller k then you'd see a more normal exponential increase. With this it probably looked more like 1 person, 1 person, 1 person, 1 person, 1 person, 2 people, 30 people. Even absent protective measures most people who get Covid transmit to 1 person or nobody. But some spread it to dozens of others and a small number to hundreds.
I'd guess this is mostly driven by the orders of magnitude difference in peak viral load we see with SARS-CoV-2? But that's really something that needs research.
I'd guess this is mostly driven by the orders of magnitude difference in peak viral load we see with SARS-CoV-2? But that's really something that needs research.
The 70% is my issue with the article as well. That seems to indicate a 30% chance for the pandemic that actually happened, but that seems awfully high.
Even if the outcome isn't particularly rare, I still think any bad outcome from a random process counts as unlucky.
I suppose you're right, but if you're paying Russian Roulette with 5 out of 6 bullets loaded I'm going to be more predisposed to thinking you were playing a really stupid game. I don't consider my lottery losses every time I buy a ticket unlucky, I just consider them the expected result.
Next question y'all should be thinking about: how many other fuses are smouldering right now?
Zoonotic coronavirus infections from bats are pretty common in south east Asia when scientists have done antibody surveys of villagers. Most of those probably aren't well suited to human to human transmission. And if a virus spreads to infect everybody in a village and herd immunity is reached that's the end of that. But as commerce increases we're going to have to worry about taking more preventative measures.
Seems like it wouldn't be that expensive to do routine genetic surveillance of symptomatic infections in regions of concern.
And of people that work with livestock.
Setting it up would be hard, and pulling the interesting data out of the firehouse would likely be hard.
And of people that work with livestock.
Setting it up would be hard, and pulling the interesting data out of the firehouse would likely be hard.
Sewage sampling can look for a specific germ, and has been used to track Covid and its variants.
We aren't realistically yet at a tech level where we DNA sequence everyone's minor sniffle just in case it's something new. But not too terribly far off it.
There evidently already are mechanisms in place to respond to alerts of new notable breakout diseases by DNA sequencing them, that happened to Covid very early.
We aren't realistically yet at a tech level where we DNA sequence everyone's minor sniffle just in case it's something new. But not too terribly far off it.
There evidently already are mechanisms in place to respond to alerts of new notable breakout diseases by DNA sequencing them, that happened to Covid very early.
I think we have the tech, we are just bad at figuring out how much it would be worth to spend (underestimating the value by a lot).
Probably most “research” labs are fuses, the smoldering part is tougher.
The way HN comes down so hard against the lab leak hypothesis is spooky. Opinion about this is thrown around so heavily. Credentials: NPR listener AKA elite understander of things? The tide of understanding the origin of this virus is turning as Chinese propaganda wears thin. Many of you may recieve your comeuppance and I hope you're embarassed by your sheepishness.
Most posts which are critical of China get a lot of downvotes. The reason for that is speculation as HN does not publish statistics or transparency, but the issue of lab leak versus occurring outside of the lab has become so political that it has divided rational people who might otherwise question more honestly.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, is the problem.
Animal to human transmission is a thing that exists and is known. Much less extraordinary, much more mundane, but much more plausible.
Until there is extraordinary proof of your claim, and not just 'I feel it' type of arguments, I will steadfastly believe it started from a bat, as originally claimed.
If you have proof of your claim, and I have missed it, please provide it. I would appreciate it.
Animal to human transmission is a thing that exists and is known. Much less extraordinary, much more mundane, but much more plausible.
Until there is extraordinary proof of your claim, and not just 'I feel it' type of arguments, I will steadfastly believe it started from a bat, as originally claimed.
If you have proof of your claim, and I have missed it, please provide it. I would appreciate it.
You speak on the virus as if you have expertise, or have studied the subject. Yet I suspect you, and so many posters here, are mere podcast listeners. The arrogance is almost a virus in spirit.
No, I don't speak as if I have expertise. I speak as someone who has been alive to experience various diseases that started from animals.
I'm not being arrogant, and I don't understand your attitude. You are making an absolutely extraordinary claim. This absolutely requires extraordinary proof.
Again, I would be really excited to read about any proof you have of your claims. Please link to something, I would appreciate it.
I'm not being arrogant, and I don't understand your attitude. You are making an absolutely extraordinary claim. This absolutely requires extraordinary proof.
Again, I would be really excited to read about any proof you have of your claims. Please link to something, I would appreciate it.
I sort of think the most likely origin is that some pangolin farmer from the back end of rural Yunnan was the first host but the virus couldn't explode until someone went to bring the pangolins to market in a city with real crowds.
Not impossible, but how plausible is that a farmer sells his animals in a single location in a big city more than 1000 km away? More likely the animals would be sold closer to his farm or sold in multiple big cities igniting separate outbreaks with distinct lineages.
In my experience, it is relatively plausible that the animals are sold in a single location, that far away. Granted, this is absolutely anecdata, but it does prove a point.
My experience: For decades, my father, my grandfather, and my great grandfather sold cattle via the Chicago markets. This is a trip of around 1000 km. This also originally started when our part of the US would have been no different than a very backwater part of a developing nation. No roads, no rail, no infrastructure, really, until you got to within 400-500 km of Chicago from where we live. And yet, they moved cattle that far to one single marketplace.
My experience: For decades, my father, my grandfather, and my great grandfather sold cattle via the Chicago markets. This is a trip of around 1000 km. This also originally started when our part of the US would have been no different than a very backwater part of a developing nation. No roads, no rail, no infrastructure, really, until you got to within 400-500 km of Chicago from where we live. And yet, they moved cattle that far to one single marketplace.
I highly doubt this. Lab leak while unpopular is hard to disprove. While these fictions are easy to do so.
I’m curious what people make of coronavirus antibodies being detected in Italy in September 2019:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/11/coronavirus-italy-cov...
The paper has earned an expression of concern regarding its peer review process, I don't think many scientists rely on it at the moment:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0300891620987756
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0300891620987756
https://www.livescience.com/coronavirus-circulating-italy-ea...
There's some good points about jumping to conclusions in this article.
There's some good points about jumping to conclusions in this article.
Interesting, thanks for the link. The livescience article mentions the possibility of false positives and doing different types of antibody testing to confirm, not only with potential WHO involvement. Do you know if there was any further testing? A quick search didn’t yield helpful results.
[1] https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32937679/