Ok, I doubt that’s the OP’s intention.
I’ve come across the theory that China deliberately released it, as a form of economic warfare against the West.
I think the most plausible CT is that it was being studied in a lab and escaped somehow. Either one of the field agents who was capturing the bat subjects being studied at the lab got bit before they knew there was a zoonotic coronavirus to worry about, or a lab worker did once the bat was in the lab and they’d identified the virus. Then, in a cover up by the bitee it was Captain Trips from there on out.
Blockquote
You know the Chinese CT response has been that Covid originated with some teenage vapers, who somehow second hand passed it to US Military members involved with Fort Dix and/or the Military Olympics, and said military Olypics were being held in Wuhan China. Ipso facso cogito ergo spud, Covid came from the US as tourists roaming around the Wildlife Market.
According the People’s Daily: Nothing has ruled out the above “facts.”
Are you seriously putting the above hypothesis on the same level as the lab leak or zoonotic spread hypothesis?
Nothing in what you state above rises to the level of a fact in the first place.
People can come up with crazy shit that is impossible to reasonably falsify and for which no good evidence exists. That’s one hallmark of a CT in the first place for me.
This is not the case for the explanations suggested by WHO. They are backed by a reasonable level of circumstancial or material evidence and/or past experience and that absolutely should include the lab leak hypothesis. It does not include the “teenage vaper” hypothesis.
The lab-leak hypothesis was dismissed out of hand. As time has passed its explanatory power has not been diminished and potentially is now actually stronger. There has been no further progress on tracking down a natural source.
There is no smoking gun for any hypothesis and as such they still all need full investigation. Preventing the next pandemic may depend on it.
It has just as much likelihood as the lab escape theory.
@Novelty_Bobble partial quote from your reply
“There has been no further progress on tracking down a natural source.”
Currently the CDC peer reviewed sources investigating covid like illness reported in miners in China that occured in 2012. Sorry about the pdf’s but I’m sick and tired of people always finding fault with any all links if it doesnt fit a narrative therefore I submit the latest info on the origin of Covid .
The CDC
“Lethal Pneumonia Cases in Mojiang Miners (2012) and the Mineshaft Could Provide Important Clues to the Origin of SARS-CoV-2”
If you want a source from your preferred news source feel free to google it.
The above link about:
KEY FACTS
Frontiers in Public Health publishes rigorously peer-reviewed research on key issues in the field including occupational, mental and reproductive health, medicine and social policy, epidemiology, rehabilitation, obesity, family and social issues, quality of life and public health education and promotion.
I’m aware of that paper. What about it represents “further progress” on a natural source? The mine outbreak in 2012 has been touted as a potential source of a close viral match for quite some time and nothing about it conclusively refutes the lab hypothesis or provides a definite alternative explanation. In fact reading the article we can see the Wuhan labs involvement right from the start and questions being raised about their part in it and any subsequent research being carried out.
Did you read down as far as the questions at the end? I quote
As has been stated, the miners’ samples were sent to WIV for SARS Ab testing (7, 9), the same institute that also conducted surveillance of the bat coronaviruses in the Mojiang mineshaft (10). The link between the SARS-like CoV (4991/RaTG13) from mine where lethal pneumonia cases occurred, has not yet been discussed in scientific papers by the WIV laboratory before February 2020
We are curious to know what kind of samples the WIV received from the Mojiang miners, along with other questions, such as whether the samples are still stored in WIV, and whether they are available for study by other researchers. It would also be of particular value to know whether any viruses were isolated and if there is any DNA/RNA available from these samples
Why is this information not available in any of the seroprevalence studies by WIV? Why were the severe pneumonia cases in 2012 not mentioned in any of the WIV publications before 2020? Were any SARS-like CoV isolated from the bat fecal samples collected in 2012–13? Why were the Mojiang miners pneumonia cases in 2012 not reported to any public health agency like the WHO? Why did programs like PREDICT not mention the lethal pneumonia cases as a mini-outbreak?
Questions also remain as to why Dr. Shi attributed the outbreak in Mojiang to a fungus in the interview with Scientific American. Was the mine open for researchers and were any samples brought after 2014? Did any of the researchers who visited the Mojiang mineshaft get infected by any coronavirus between 2012 and 2019? Are there any whole genome sequences available for SARS-like CoV originating from this mine? Why is the pathogen database (http://www.viruses.nsdc.cn/chinavpi/) associated with the project (2013FY113500) (10) not accessible anymore?
So it is clear that the authors of this piece think there are substantial questions remaining about that mine outbreak and the part the Wuhan Lab played in it right through to 2020.
I don’t have a “preferred” news source nor a preferred hypothesis and I’ll not be ruling out anything until the evidence forces me to. I’ll take the solid facts where I find them and I’m happy to live in a state of uncertainty in the meantime. That’s the best way to avoid being wrong.
Good grief @Exapno_Mapcase is it really that important to you that you “understand” the op so you can “participate”?
Or is there something else going on here? I had zero problem understanding the op.
The OP is talking about conspiracy theories, not actual fact… It’s clear that for whatever reason, there were plenty of actions and statements made that were directly opposed to those by the CDC and other public health authorities (Fauci, et al.). That isn’t a conspiracy theory. What could be a CT is WHY they were saying things that were opposed to the health authorities.
There are really only 3 theories:
-
Trump and his cronies downplayed COVID, its dangers and even went so far as to politicize mitigation measures for their own political advantage. This seems to be the most likely, considering how things actually went down.
-
Trump was deliberately misled as to the danger of COVID by his advisors, and was too stupid to realize he was being misled, and then went down the path of political expediency.
-
Trump was told the right information and was just too stupid/ignorant to do the right thing, and chose the path of political expediency. (this is the “never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by stupidity” version of the first theory).
How are 1 and 3 different? In what way is “political advantage” at odds with from “political expediency”?
Does “some state and national governments intentionally chose to understate the effects” qualify as a conspiracy theory? Because that’s pretty well established. Did they do so because who was being principally affected?
I didn’t explain it so well, but 1 is Trump doing it deliberately in cahoots with his advisers. 2 is Trump being unaware of the danger and being led along by his advisers.
If @Novelty_Bobble had suggesed that it’s plausible that this was a deliberately engineered bioweapon deliberately released by the Chinese in their path to world domination, it would be a reasonable response.
But as a reply to what @Novelty_Bobble actually wrote, it is utterly ridiculous.
The first major outbreak occurred in close proximity to the preeminent research lab working on this type of virus. That specific location within a very large area where a natural event could potentially have occurred is strong circumstantial evidence that significantly increases the probability the lab is somehow implicated. And there are many ways the Wuhan lab could be causally connected to the outbreak without requiring any implausible conspiracy.
I think it’s important to be clear what possibilities we’re talking about here, and juxtaposing “lab leak” with “natural event” is the wrong way to look at it. The proximity of the outbreak to the Wuhan lab could be explained by any kind of causal connection to the lab, which would include an entirely natural recombination/mutation event first giving rise to this virus, but (say) a worker associated with the Wuhan lab becoming infected while collecting virus samples in the field or working with samples in the lab, then spreading the disease to other people in Wuhan. If the infection occurred from a sample in the lab, that does imply some degree of cover-up, especially so if any recombination/mutation events occurred in cell culture passage in the lab, since this kind of thing has been denied. But that kind of cover-up hardly reaches the level of some implausible global conspiracy. And if infection occurred because a Wuhan-based researcher was exposed in the field, there may be no cover-up at all - they may not even know themselves that it happened.
This really isn’t a QZ topic. We are trying to avoid weird conspiracy theories and stuff there. So I’ve moved it to IMHO, which is a more amenable place to shooting the bull about weird conspiracy theories.
Most plausible to me is that a legion of antivaxers, libertarians, conspiracy theorists and generalized nutbags with the critical thinking capacity of a centipede are conspiring to prolong the pandemic for as long as possible, so that they can continue to scatter their mental feces all over social media.
I recommend this:
a blog by Zeynep Tufecki. Here is the first paragraph, but the whole thing is interesting:
Within the space of a week, a cluster of theories called “lab leak” went from being considered misinformation and a mountain of conspiracy theories to, essentially, the mainstream. I’m not going to get into the details of the process here because it’s genuinely complicated. I have a lot of thoughts on this, but it deserves its own considered essay. Still, even at first glance, there are important lessons.
Suddenly lab leak has become plausible. The strongest evidence seems to be that the Chinese authorities are not allowing independent investigations.
The strongest evidence is that the Chinese authorities aren’t allowing their geo-political rivals to snoop around their research labs.
Would the US permit Chinese experts to snoop around Fort Detrick?
No, the strongest evidence for the lab being implicated is that the first outbreak happened near the lab. It’s quite possible that the Chinese authorities don’t know any more than we do exactly what happened. There may be nothing sinister here, no cover-up, but still some causal connection to the lab.
The lab is something like 30 km from the wet market.