my Indian — ArguingWAristotleTiff
And that evidence, assuming there would be that, likely isn't coming out from the Chinese authorities.Sure, the point being that without actual evidence making 1 more likely we should award it a very low probability. — Benkei
Parents still use the genitive when talking about their children, I guess.I assumed this was a typo or autocorrect the first time, but do you somehow own an “Indian” person or something? — Pfhorrest
There is no circumstantial evidence, only a hypothesis which is not supported by any type of evidence. — Benkei
The virus was not engineered. This possibility was explicitly debunked by the science.
That certainly leaves the possibility it might have accidentally come from the lab but lets look at the possibilities here.
1. It escaped a lab that has at least some measures in place to avoid the escape and spread of a virus.
2. It spread at one of those live markets, which have been considered a brewery for new viruses for years, which markets have exactly 0 measures in place to avoid this.
3. The PRC did it on purpose for vague and uncertain politics goals in exchange for predictable economic damage.
I'll give 1 a .9% chance, 2 a 99% chance and the last .1%. — Benkei
The fact this lab had measures in place to avoid this and live markets don't, the likelihood of it starting in the latter is many times higher. — Benkei
So you hang your hat on that argument. It could be a coincidence that the virus started in a the wet market in the same city as a virus lab studying the virus. I agree. Or it could have been a coronavirus that leaked from the virus lab studying this virus. There are many other wet markets. But it coincidentally started from this one. Also, the first known case cannot be traced back to the wet market itself. — schopenhauer1
Here the "evidence" doesn't even rise to that level. Even if every lab in the past had leaked a virus at some point in time then you still have exactly 0 evidence for it having happened this time. — Benkei
I am saying that there is a higher likelihood based on circumstances of the case, not that there is right now any direct evidence. — schopenhauer1
Sigh. No, I'm not. I'm not going to condense months of criminal law study in a single post to explain this to you. Look it up. — Benkei
Evidence, broadly construed, is anything presented in support of an assertion[1], because evident things are undoubted. There are two kind of evidence: intellectual evidence (the obvious, the evident) and empirical evidence (proofs).
The mentioned support may be strong or weak. The strongest type of evidence is that which provides direct proof of the truth of an assertion. At the other extreme is evidence that is merely consistent with an assertion but does not rule out other, contradictory assertions, as in circumstantial evidence. — evidence
However, as far as I know there is no hard evidence that it is lab origin, only circumstantial evidence. The problem with circumstantial evidence is that it's difficult to calculate probabilities because it's difficult to identify independent variables, dependent variables, cause and effect (without which calculations are nonsensical). — boethius
I am saying that there is a higher likelihood based on circumstances of the case, not that there is right now any direct evidence. — schopenhauer1
Dr Lentzos said the issue of the virus' origin was a "very difficult question", and added that "there have been quiet, behind-the-scene discussions... in the biosecurity expert community, questioning the seafood market origin that has come out very strongly from China". — BBC
We were talking about evidence all the time since that's what I replied to (the idea of circumstantial evidence being available). If you want to talk probabilities this is a different discussion altogether. Like the example of the used car salesman, the other victims make the likelihood of intent much higher in your particular case. But it's still not evidence though. — Benkei
Circumstantial evidence is not strong evidence, but it is still in the category of "evidence" that can participate in the "facts of the case" (such as a insurance payout for a fire participating to establish motive for setting the fire; if there was no evidence of an insurance payout, it becomes much more difficult to argue there was motivation to achieve such thing). — boethius
What experiments with bat coronaviruses took place at WIV? This is the mother of all questions for those who suspect SARS-CoV-2 came out of the facility. Accidental releases do happen, and one even triggered a pandemic: An influenza strain that surfaced in 1977 was linked to strains in Russian labs collected 2 decades earlier. Is it possible that somebody at WIV became infected with the virus and then passed it on to others outside the lab? It’s unknown which bat viruses WIV has in its collection of samples and whether any of them infect humans. And a controversy surrounds the closest bat virus to SARS-CoV-2, which is called RaTG13. As Shi and co-workers reported, they only fully sequenced this virus after SARS-CoV-2 surfaced and they looked through their database for potential relatives. (The group often sequences only one small region of bat coronaviruses genomes that mutates infrequently, so changes indicate distinct viruses.) A great deal of speculation has circled around the naming of the partial sequence: Shi’s group earlier had reported a virus named BtCoV/4991 that exactly matches RaTG13 in that small region, but are they one and the same? Or could it be, as some assert, that BtCoV/4991 is SARS-CoV-2 itself? What other bat coronaviruses has the lab yet to fully sequence? Could any of them offer clues?
Another outstanding question is whether Shi’s team or other researchers in Wuhan manipulated bat viruses in “gain-of-function” experiments that can make a virus more transmissible between humans. In 2015, Shi co-authored a paper that made a chimeric SARS virus by combining one from bats with a strain that had been adapted to mice. But that work was done at the University of North Carolina, not in Wuhan, and in collaboration with Ralph Baric. Did Shi’s group later carry out other gain-of-function studies in Wuhan—and if so, what did they find?
Finally, diplomatic cables from the U.S. Embassy in Beijing in 2018 warned that a new, ultra-high security lab at WIV had “a serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators.” Did Shi’s team ever work with coronaviruses in that lab, and, if so, why? — https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/07/who-led-mission-may-investigate-pandemic-s-origin-here-are-key-questions-ask
If there is an HIV gene in coronavirus that is evidence, — boethius
However, you should try to disprove it nonetheless to avoid confirmation bias. — Benkei
The Chinese government, meanwhile, has put a total lockdown on information related to the virus origins. Beijing has yet to provide U.S. experts with samples of the novel coronavirus collected from the earliest cases. The Shanghai lab that published the novel coronavirus genome on Jan. 11 was quickly shut down by authorities for “rectification.” Several of the doctors and journalists who reported on the spread early on have disappeared.
On Feb. 14, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for a new biosecurity law to be accelerated. On Wednesday, CNN reported the Chinese government has placed severe restrictions requiring approval before any research institution publishes anything on the origin of the novel coronavirus.
The origin story is not just about blame. It’s crucial to understanding how the novel coronavirus pandemic started because that informs how to prevent the next one. The Chinese government must be transparent and answer the questions about the Wuhan labs because they are vital to our scientific understanding of the virus, said Xiao. — https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/04/14/state-department-cables-warned-safety-issues-wuhan-lab-studying-bat-coronaviruses/
You mean those who formerly voted labour that didn't get excited about Jeremy Corbyn last time? :snicker:their voter base has become fundamentalist, so it doesn't matter how crazy they behave. — Punshhh
No not them, they only "lent their vote", I mean the true Tory voter. I heard a group of them being interviewed on the BBC lastnight. They are very happy with Boris, he's doing a "great job" and he'll get Brexit done too. You can tell them all about the reality and it will just wash over them, they won't change their view come hell, or high water.You mean those who formerly voted labour that didn't get excited about Jeremy Corbyn last time?
reduced potential exposure risk from infected persons before they develop symptoms;
• reduced potential stigmatization of individuals wearing masks to prevent infecting others (source control) or of people caring for COVID-19 patients in non-clinical settings;(70)
• making people feel they can play a role in contributing to stopping spread of the virus;
• reminding people to be compliant with other measures (e.g., hand hygiene, not touching nose and mouth). However, this can also have the reverse effect (see below);
• potential social and economic benefits. Amidst the global shortage of surgical masks and PPE, encouraging the public to create their own fabric masks may promote individual enterprise and community integration. Moreover, the production of non-medical masks may offer a source of income for those able to manufacture masks within their communities. Fabric masks can also be a form of cultural expression, encouraging public acceptance of protection measures in general. The safe re-use of fabric masks will also reduce costs and waste and contribute to sustainability.
• potential increased risk of self-contamination due to the manipulation of a face mask and subsequently touching eyes with contaminated hands;(48, 49)
• potential self-contamination that can occur if non- medical masks are not changed when wet or soiled. This can create favourable conditions for microorganism to amplify;
• potential headache and/or breathing difficulties, depending on type of mask used;
• potential development of facial skin lesions, irritant dermatitis or worsening acne, when used frequently for long hours;(50)
• difficulty with communicating clearly;
• potential discomfort;(41, 51)
• a false sense of security, leading to potentially lower adherence to other critical preventive measures such as physical distancing and hand hygiene;
• poor compliance with mask wearing, in particular by young children;
• waste management issues; improper mask disposal leading to increased litter in public places, risk of contamination to street cleaners and environment hazard;
• difficulty communicating for deaf persons who rely on lip reading;
• disadvantages for or difficulty wearing them, especially for children, developmentally challenged persons, those with mental illness, elderly persons with cognitive impairment, those with asthma or chronic respiratory or breathing problems, those who have had facial trauma or recent oral maxillofacial surgery, and those living in hot and humid environments.
However, taking into account the available studies evaluating pre- and asymptomatic transmission, a growing compendium of observational evidence on the use of masks by the general public in several countries, individual values and preferences, as well as the difficulty of physical distancing in many contexts, WHO has updated its guidance to advise that to prevent COVID-19 transmission effectively in areas of community transmission, governments should encourage the general public to wear masks in specific situations and settings as part of a comprehensive approach to suppress SARS-CoV-2 transmission (Table 2).
Risk of exposure to the COVID-19 virus... due to epidemiology and intensity of transmission in
the population: if there is community transmission and there is limited or no capacity to implement other containment measures such as contact tracing, ability to carry out testing and isolate and care for suspected and confirmed cases.[/quote]
and
settings where individuals are unable to keep a physical distance
of at least 1 metre (3.3 feet) (e.g. public transportation).
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.