Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11268
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 23 Dec 2021, 10:18 am

Why would you put much credence in a group like DRASTIC when more than 2/3 are anonymous? (There are some very credible scientists that are members. They don't seem to be afraid of using their real identities, why would the others require anonymity?)

And Members of DRASTIC have engaged in personal attacks against virologists and epidemiologists on Twitter, falsely accusing some of working for the Chinese Communist Party.[1].

A more credible investigation into the origins of the virus would look like something like the examination of the University of Sienna's early research in Italy
.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/di ... 021-07-23/

The DRASTIC project seems just a little too much like a Project Veritas... And stuff like fuzzy :PDFs of murkily sourced "research grant applications" has that kind of smell.

I very much doubt that China will fully cooperate in researching the origins of Covid 19. Why?
Because it was and is a political football for Trump and the republican party.

In recent months, our nation and the world has been hit by the once-in-a-century pandemic that China allowed to spread around the globe. They could have stopped it, but they allowed it to come out,” Trump said as he accepted the Republican Party’s nomination in August 2020.
“It’s China’s fault. It should have never happened,” he said at a presidential debate with Joe Biden in September 2020
“We built the greatest economy in the world; it was horribly interrupted by something that should have never happened, came in from China—the plague. The plague from China,” he said on Fox & Friends on the morning of Election Day 2020. There are hundreds of similar examples from the president and his inner circle.


Why would the national government of China want to cooperate when they had already been scapegoated?

Remember that the scientific community for the most part continued to emphatically reject the lab-origin theory. Past pandemics had started when a virus leaped from animals or birds to people, so why should this new coronavirus be any different? U.S. scientists were perhaps also influenced by their respect for their Chinese counterparts. While Chinese officials had tried to stifle the flow of information to the rest of the world, Chinese scientists had generally proved highly cooperative with their Western counterparts. When Chinese scientists cracked the virus’s genetic code early in January 2020, they promptly posted full results for all to read. That did not seem to most Western scientists to be the behavior of conspirator


I've quoted from an article in the Atlantic by David Frum, who draws this comparison.

Republicans in the House and Senate are now demanding formal investigations not only of the virus’s origin, but of the American scientific community’s role as well.
In many ways, what is happening is highly reminiscent of the anti-Communist battles of the late 1940s and early 1950s. In those days, the United States faced a dangerous external challenge from Soviet Communism. Isolationist Republicans had little interest in meeting that challenge: It would cost money and implied foreign commitments. They opposed the Marshall Plan, NATO, everything that really mattered. Instead, they used the foreign threat to justify launching a purge against an enemy within: domestic ideological opponents.


Conspiracies are rarely real. But for some, battling a conspiracy serves a great political purpose. When a significant portion of the republican base are anti vaxxers, you can see how this serves their political aims?
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archi ... ry/618911/
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3494
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 24 Dec 2021, 8:07 am

The ad hominem and "conspiracy theory!" are Ricky's go-to arguments when faced with arguments he doesn't like...

US Intelligence agencies' report order by Biden:

"After examining all available intelligence reporting and other information, though, the IC
remains divided on the most likely origin of COVID-19. All agencies assess that two hypotheses
are plausible: natural exposure to an infected animal and a laboratory-associated incident.
 Four IC elements and the National Intelligence Council assess with low confidence
that the initial SARS-CoV-2 infection was most likely caused by natural exposure to
an animal infected with it or a close progenitor virus—a virus that probably would be
more than 99 percent similar to SARS-CoV-2. These analysts give weight to China’s
officials’ lack of foreknowledge, the numerous vectors for natural exposure, and other
factors.
 One IC element assesses with moderate confidence that the first human infection with
SARS-CoV-2 most likely was the result of a laboratory-associated incident, probably
involving experimentation, animal handling, or sampling by the Wuhan Institute of
Virology. These analysts give weight to the inherently risky nature of work on
coronaviruses.
 Analysts at three IC elements remain unable to coalesce around either explanation
without additional information, with some analysts favoring natural origin, others a
laboratory origin, and some seeing the hypotheses as equally likely.
 Variations in analytic views largely stem from differences in how agencies weigh
intelligence reporting and scientific publications, and intelligence and scientific gaps."

So it is not a conspiracy theory.

Stories outlining China's lack of cooperation and its effect on the investigation...

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politi ... ion-511898
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnew ... cna1222246
https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.reu ... SKBN2AD090
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3494
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 24 Dec 2021, 8:25 am

And with regard to DRASTIC what matters is that the grant proposal was made. I am not relying on them. The journalist investigating contacted the agency that processes grant proposals...and they didn't say oh that's fake. And you had nothing to counter why Covid just showed up with a key ACE2 protein better able to bond with human cells as opposed to bat or Pangolin cells...

All this evidence and your invariable response iscit's a political witch hunt, it's a conspiracy theory, scientists questioning China are biased, and China doesn't cooperate because it's political...without critiquing the evidence except to claim it's from.biased sources.

But actually trying to grapple with the evidence for the lab leak theory...nah.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4946
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 25 Dec 2021, 9:13 am

freeman3 wrote:And with regard to DRASTIC what matters is that the grant proposal was made. I am not relying on them. The journalist investigating contacted the agency that processes grant proposals...and they didn't say oh that's fake. And you had nothing to counter why Covid just showed up with a key ACE2 protein better able to bond with human cells as opposed to bat or Pangolin cells...

All this evidence and your invariable response iscit's a political witch hunt, it's a conspiracy theory, scientists questioning China are biased, and China doesn't cooperate because it's political...without critiquing the evidence except to claim it's from.biased sources.

But actually trying to grapple with the evidence for the lab leak theory...nah.


Yeah, and the genocide of the Uyghurs and the persecution of the Tibetans, the saber rattling against Taiwan, the ending of Hong Kong Democracy, etc., etc., that's all Trump's fault too. And Stalin's starving of the Ukrainians was the fault of the west. That sort of thinking never ends. Western micro aggressions are the evidence that totalitarian macro aggressions didn't even happen or are justified.

He went off topic first ...
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3494
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 26 Dec 2021, 12:37 pm

Yeah, I just don't understand being an apologist for the Chinese regime. ..

For those who think America is the problem in world affairs...you're in for a bad surprise if we become more isolationist due to the internal problems we're having right now.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7161
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 26 Dec 2021, 8:10 pm

Again???

Freeman and I are agreeing again?

I like where this is going...
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11268
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 31 Dec 2021, 10:43 am

"The journalist investigating contacted the agency that processes grant proposals...and they didn't say oh that's fake"
Did they confirm that it was real? Did they confirm that such research occurred?

1. There's nothing definitive in what the US Intelligence reported.
2. There are many that do not trust the CIA...And certainly there is nothing about the report that can be said to be transparent can there? we have no real idea on what they based their report. Those of us who remember the origins of the Iraq war, and the Vietnam war, still recall how things can be manipulated by US intelligence for political reasons.

The only way for the origins to be definitively found (perhaps and that outcome would even then be doubtful), is for an open and transparent scientific investigation to occur.
The possibility for that kind of event ended with the politicization of the outbreak by Trump and the attempt at making Trumps statements credible by Pompeo.

The right in the US has no real desire to see a result, as the use of the lab origins theories serve their political aims. Seems to serve Bidens interests too right now.

China has no real interest in cooperating as soon as they were blamed by Trump and Pompeo. And because they are China...(I've never denied their various crimes) Which any competent US government would have understood... If they had continued praising China and prodding them into an investigation, China might have looked upon it as an opportunity to show leadership and gain credibility. Instead, they are blamed and predictably are offended and shut down. You do understand that the way they reacted to being blamed by Trump was going to happen as a response no matter what the origin? That shutting down access has nothing to do with anything but saving face.

That doesn't mean I'm apologizing for China. All I'm doing is pointing out that your (US) political masters aren't always interested in the kind of out come a neutral citizen of earth might want...

It would have taken mature, prudent leadership to ensure that the scientific community continued its investigations into Covid. in Chian after the outbreak. Please don't ignore the response by the Chinese Scientific Community thru January and February of 2020. (Why it was even praised by Trump at the time. Occassionally with validity) )
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/1 ... rus-188736

Its only when the US began to be hit, and Trump needed a scapegoat that things turned and the hopes of a transparent cooperative investigation disappeared.

Whether you recognize it as such or not ... it still looks smells and walks like a conspiracy theory.

And do remember, we still don't know where SARS2003 came from.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3747529/


freeman3
without critiquing the evidence except to claim it's from. Biased sources.

That depends. When the "evidence" is reviewed by an independent, qualified panel of virologists and other scientist ... then I'll buy in.
When its a vaguely reported and sourced US Intelligence report... - yeah - could be some bias involved. But then I'm only going by past events...
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7161
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 31 Dec 2021, 11:10 am

From RickyP: "When the "evidence" is reviewed by an independent, qualified panel of virologists and other scientist ... then I'll buy in."

Qualified by whom?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11268
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 04 Jan 2022, 8:32 am

Virologist Requirements:
Bachelor’s degree in biology, chemistry, or a related field.
Doctor of Medicine (MD) degree or a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree with training in virology, molecular virology, viral oncology, or immunology.
3 to 5 years’ postdoctoral research experience in the field.
Working knowledge of scientific and medical software such as BD CellQuest, and Protein Explorer.
Experience using laboratory equipment and tools, including air samplers or collectors, infrared spectrometers, analyzing equipment, and sterilizing equipment.
Experience collecting and analyzing large volumes of data.
Meticulous attention to detail.
Exceptional problem-solving skills.
Ability to multitask and work to tight deadlines.
Excellent written and verbal communication skills.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7161
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 04 Jan 2022, 3:39 pm

rickyp wrote:Virologist Requirements:
Bachelor’s degree in biology, chemistry, or a related field.
Doctor of Medicine (MD) degree or a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) degree with training in virology, molecular virology, viral oncology, or immunology.
3 to 5 years’ postdoctoral research experience in the field.
Working knowledge of scientific and medical software such as BD CellQuest, and Protein Explorer.
Experience using laboratory equipment and tools, including air samplers or collectors, infrared spectrometers, analyzing equipment, and sterilizing equipment.
Experience collecting and analyzing large volumes of data.
Meticulous attention to detail.
Exceptional problem-solving skills.
Ability to multitask and work to tight deadlines.
Excellent written and verbal communication skills.


Thank you. 3-5 years Post Doctoral in COVID research? Is that anyone? How long has COVID been around? Couple that with 3-5 year post doctoral... Does that person exist?
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11268
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 05 Jan 2022, 3:40 pm

The older human coronaviruses were first identified in the mid-1960s, but have likely circulated in humans for centuries. These include 229E (alpha coronavirus), NL63 (alpha coronavirus), OC43 (beta coronavirus) and HKU1 (beta coronavirus).2 For the most part, these older iterations present with a mild respiratory infection, except for HKU1, which can also cause gastrointestinal infection, he notes.

Dr. Esper refers to the newer coronaviruses as “true emerging infectious diseases.” These include SARS-CoV (SARS), MERS-CoV (MERS) and, of course, SARS-CoV-2. He explains, “These are strains that have undergone recent animal-to-human transition.” This can happen when a virus either mutates directly to humans, or through a second (intermediary) species that then further mutates into a human pathogen.

“This is what we saw with SARS in 2002-2003 and MERS in 2012 and likely what just happened with SARS-CoV-2,” he says
.

https://consultqd.clevelandclinic.org/c ... 2019-ncov/

There are thousands of people with these qualifications.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4946
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 06 Jan 2022, 6:14 am

Ricky:
https://consultqd.clevelandclinic.org/c ... 2019-ncov/

There are thousands of people with these qualifications.


Note that this was written in March 2020.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11268
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 27 Feb 2022, 8:30 am

"Two preprint studies posted Saturday offer further evidence that the coronavirus originated in animals and spread to humans in late 2019 at the Huanan Seafood Market in Wuhan, China.

One of the studies – neither of which has been peer-reviewed or published in a professional journal – used spatial analysis to show that the earliest known Covid-19 cases, diagnosed in December 2019, were centered on the market. The researchers also report that environmental samples that tested positive for the virus, SARS-CoV-2, were strongly associated with live-animal vendors.

The other study says the two major viral lineages were the result of at least two events in which the virus crossed species into humans. The first transmission most likely happened in late November or early December 2019, the researchers say, and the other lineage was probably introduced within weeks of the first event.

Fresh look at pandemic origins points straight to food market in Wuhan, scientist says
Experts have roundly condemned the theory of a laboratory origin for the virus, saying that there’s no proof of such origins or of a leak. Many of the researchers behind the new studies were also participants in a review published last summer that said the pandemic almost certainly originated with an animal, probably at a wildlife market"

https://zenodo.org/record/6291628#.YhuYQ-jMJD9

https://zenodo.org/record/6299600#.YhuYNujMJD9

https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/26/health/c ... index.html
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3494
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 27 Feb 2022, 9:21 pm

Yawn. Pre-prints from scientists with an obvious agenda. They've desperately tried to go back to the market theory that was discounted early on because there were patients not connected to the market.

Let's stop discussing this please. It serves no purpose at this point.
User avatar
Statesman
 
Posts: 11268
Joined: 15 Aug 2000, 8:59 am

Post 28 Feb 2022, 8:39 am

freeman3
Yawn. Pre-prints from scientists with an obvious agenda


I'll be sure to update you when they have been peer reviewed and published.
Meanwhile, how do you know they have an "obvious bias"?


freeman3
Let's stop discussing this please. It serves no purpose at this point.


The purpose is to demonstrate how science works. The process is sometimes long, and can be frustrating for those who want quick, answers that can confirm their preconceived notions.