The covid-19 lab leak hypothesis: did the media fall victim to a misinformation campaign?

[intrepidity]

https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n1656

The theory that SARS-CoV-2 may have originated in a lab was considered a debunked conspiracy theory, but some experts are revisiting it amid calls for a new, more thorough investigation. Paul Thacker explains the dramatic U turn and the role of contemporary science journalism

Those who are interested should read the whole article at the link. Excerpting a few paragraphs won't really help much.

My question is: what role did DU play?

[Kingofalldems]

1. RWers posing.

[intrepidity]

14. Meaning?

Did you read the article? If not, why are you posting?

[Scrivener7]

2. And yet STILL there was covid floating around Italy in September, two months

before the outbreak in China.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33176598/

And PS: Answer to your question - DU didn't pose any role at all. We're not that influential.

And PSS: do you post other things besides the "Gyna sent us Covid" stuff?

[intrepidity]

15. Did you read the article? If not, why are you posting? nt

[Scrivener7]

21. Yes I did. Why do you ask? And I'm posting because this is a place where people post.

Strangely, your permission is not required. You might want to take that up with EarlG.

[intrepidity]

23. Because your reply has nothing to do with the article nt

[Scrivener7]

25. Well... I would say that none of YOUR replies have anything to do with the article.

AND they're all just a repeat of the same silly question.

And yes, my reply had plenty to do with both your post and the article. Did you read your OP? If so, why are you asking these questions?

And really, DO you ever post on any subject other than China giving us the Covid? If so, I'd love to see it.

[Sewa]

27. More spam

Did you read this💀

[uponit7771]

35. +1

[Phoenix61]

3. No, it did not. There is exactly zero evidence

the virus leaked from the lab in Wuhan.

[FBaggins]

8. There's plenty of evidence

What’s lacking is proof.

[intrepidity]

13. Ironically, that's exactly how much proof of market-spillover exists: zero nt

[intrepidity]

16. Did you read the article? If not, why are you posting? nt

[Scrivener7]

22. Lol! You have nothing better? You're just going to say this to anyone who doesn't fall in your line?

[intrepidity]

24. People start threads on topics they wish to discuss

Disrupters post replies intended to derail that discussion.

[Scrivener7]

28. What do you call the guys who tell everyone that replies to their OP that they shouldn't

be replying to their OP?

[intrepidity]

33. Frustrated nt

[Scrivener7]

37. Poor thing. Everyone is a disruptor in your thread. And you brought such salient

points and new information, and you were so welcoming!

[Phoenix61]

46. But you don't wish to discuss.

You wish to have people agree with you that the virus leaked from the lab and there’s a huge covert attempt to prevent the public from learning that because you’ve been pushing that for months.

[Piasladic]

40. sounds like a bot?

you keep assuming people had the audacity to post before reading your link. Then, you post over and over the same line - like a copy and paste. Are you okay?

[Phoenix61]

42. Yes, I did read it. nt

[DarthDem]

4. Sigh

As many have pointed out, the issue wasn't that the potential lab origin was "considered a debunked conspiracy theory." It's that GOPers tried to draw a wildly meandering line between the lab leak theory and some sort of vague idea that the libs were to blame, and/or the virus could safely be ignored, or something, because maybe it came from a lab. None of that ever made any sense. I recall the ridiculous Tom Cotton attempting to explain it all to us, with predictable results.

The point of getting to the bottom of the origin - which I believe the President has already taken steps to investigate - is not to own the libs, but to prevent future pandemics. But most GOPers haven't seemed overly interested in that. Go figure.

[Caliman73]

5. What role did DU play?

None. DU is a tiny member driven website with limited reach. We do no original research and reporting. We discuss news topics, politics, and our points of view.

Could the virus have come from a lab in China? Yes, certainly.

Could the virus have come from a natural source in China? Yes, certainly.

Did China fail to stop the spread out of their country? Yes, certainly.

Does the Chinese government bear responsibility for the pandemic in some ways? Yes, certainly.


This is a public health and an academic issue. What many if not most people on DU seemed to be arguing against is the knee jerk reaction and politics of blame and diversion that Trump was engaging in.

If there is credible evidence that the virus came from a lab, then good. It tells us what we need to be careful about to avoid future problems. If there is credible evidence that the virus came from a natural source and how that source came to spread the virus to humans, then good. It tells us what we need to do to be careful to avoid future pandemics.

Also, the media consistently falls victim to misinformation campaigns, and in the case of conservative media CREATES misinformation campaigns. This is the reason that we have a large segment of the population that believe that Trump won the 2020 election.

[intrepidity]

19. Did you read the article? nt

[Sewa]

30. More spam

Did you read this💀

[Caliman73]

41. Yes I read the article.

What is your point.

The author thinks that the media was sucked in by misinformation. That is likely as the media is prone to that sort of thing.

You asked what part DU played. I said None in the scheme of things. We are a discussion forum, not a media outlet.

"Did you read the article?" is a fairly lame response to a response answering the questions you posed.

Tell me what you agreed with or disagreed with in my response, or skip it.

[PSPS]

6. The "leaked from a lab" conspiracy theory still has legs only to mollify the MAGA crowd.

They will follow their Dear Leader all the way to their ICU, ventilator and grave.

[intrepidity]

17. Did you read the article? If not, why are you posting? nt

[PSPS]

26. Yes, I read it. Like I said, it's just to mollify the MAGA.

Because the conspiracy theory has legs, we may as well "investigate" because, without doing so, the legs will continue. That's what I mean when I say "mollify the MAGA." However, like the election "audits," any investigation that contradicts the MAGA belief system is doomed to being dismissed by the MAGA as "fake news." But, that's the way things go these days.

[The Magistrate]

29. Do You Think Anyone Needs Your Permission to Post, Sir?

I've lost count of the times you've slugged in this boiler-plate nonesense in this thread, and expect as I continue down it I will find more instances.

It's a public forum, and your article is not holy writ that will drop the scales off the eyes of anyone who reads it, nor is it something essential for persons commenting on the subject to have read.

[blm]

7. DU controls media narrative on Covid-19. Q told me so.

[Scrivener7]

11. I sent out messages from a pizzaria basement.

[intrepidity]

18. Did you read the article? If not, why are you posting? nt

[Sewa]

31. More spam

Did you read this💀

[FSogol]

9. LOL: My question is: what role did DU play?

Oh noes, I hope Trumpy doesn't call for us to be executed!

[intrepidity]

12. The replies in this thread illustrate the point perfectly nt

[blm]

50. 😬

[FBaggins]

10. The media didn't fall for a disinformation campaign

What they did was assume that if Trump’s lips were moving he had to be lying.

They forgot the blind squirrel rule.

[intrepidity]

20. Did you read the article? nt

[The Magistrate]

43. And It Shouldn't Matter In Any Case, Sir

Whether the virus leaked from a laboratory or a market, or was even deliberately contrived and loosed as a weapon, has no bearing at all on whether the response to it was sane, sound, and effective.

It was not.

Which is even more egregious if the darkest hopes of the white-right here, that it was a weapon deployed against poor Lil' Donnie Two-Scoops, were actually true. Failure to mount a competent defense against attack is wicked stuff....

[Scrivener7]

32. This is FASCINATING! Post an OP, and then tell EVERYONE who replies to it that they

should not be replying to the OP.

If we are all so unworthy, why would you post in the first place?

[ProfessorGAC]

34. Worst Thread Nominee For July

And, no I didn't read the whole article because of the OP's off-putting tone.

[Scrivener7]

36. There's very little in it that you haven't read elsewhere. But I feel bad that we at DU are

ruling the world so irresponsibly.

[intrepidity]

38. Well, if you'd've bothered to read the article

you would recognize how this very thread is illustrating exactly what is described in that article: how early statements set the tone for how (the covid-origins story) would play out over time.

This thread was derailed in exactly the same manner (or at least, to the same effect) as the covid-origins story.

[Scrivener7]

39. No, dear. The thread was derailed by your behavior.

[Phoenix61]

44. +1,000 nt

[Phoenix61]

45. No, this thread shows what happens when someone

consistently, over a fairly long period of time, attempts to push a narrative with little to no factual date to support it.

[blm]

48. The question is, What role did you play in this

as a DU member?

In Q we trust.

[Scrivener7]

49. It's an awesome responsibility.

[Azathoth]

47. Canceling discussion of the lab is the same thing as vax denial

It's unscientific political posturing elevated to dangerous, near-religious dogma. The person I hate said something, therefore I believe the opposite axiomatically.

At this point, it's unlikely we'll ever get a conclusive answer to the question of what role if any the lab played. But hopefully, enough people have been rattled to 1) take serious action in the future to ensure independent international monitoring of BSL4 labs; 2) shine lasting public light on gain-of-function research; and 3) prevent people with ulterior motives and conflicts of interest, including cliques of researchers, from weaponizing political sentiments as a tool to delegitimize and cancel scrutiny into what they are doing.

[Johonny]

51. The answer: none.

DU ha zero power to influence major media. There's less evidence of DU media control than the origin of covid.

[treestar]

52. If President Obama's pandemic team and the

in-person China official had been there, we might know more, but the Dotard closed that.

How does it matter to Daszak's funding where the virus came from?

A leader in this campaign has been Peter Daszak, president of EcoHealth Alliance, a non-profit organisation given millions of dollars in grants by the US federal government to research viruses for pandemic preparedness.

How does it matter to his funding what virus origin is true?

And then later:

24 April (2020) NIH abruptly cuts funding to EcoHealth Alliance, allegedly on President Trump’s order

So his being against the CT had the Dotard cutting his funding, not increasing it.

Maybe all of the people involved have researched and just have different ideas? And the CT is the one that needs proof, as what is normal is likely the default. Also, if it originated in the lab, it could have been an accident - some were claiming the Chinese did it on purpose (though they were losing people, but I guess they would sacrifice people in the interests of world domination).