Interesting levelheaded "lab leak" discussion

Homepage Forums Science Interesting levelheaded "lab leak" discussion

This topic contains 26 replies, has 7 voices, and was last updated by  TheEncogitationer 11 months, 1 week ago.

Viewing 12 posts - 16 through 27 (of 27 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #49629

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Reg,

    Ah, but as Penn & Teller pointed out on Bullshit, Andrew Wakefield published his notorious sham article claiming that vaccines cause autism in The Lancet.

    Even peer-reviewed scientific journals can be at risk for Woo and groupthink and every other irrational failing of human beings who lack Omniscience and who can volitionally evade undesirable thoughts.

    We humans all have to be each others Watchmen.

    The “Bat Soup from the wet market” Hypothesis lost out with me because no one was calling for masking up dogs, cats, hamsters, goldfish, livestock, or any other non-human vectors of infection. (And if you think human anti-maskers are vicious, just try to put anything on a cat. 🐈‍⬛ 🪤 😷)

    And while the Lab Leak Hypothesis could use more fleshing out, the Chinese Doctors who revealed the outbreak were forcibly suppressed and effectively murdered by Emperor Xi’s Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and People’s Liberation Army (PLA) before outbreak spread further, so there is that in favor of the Lab Leak Hypothesis. Both pre-Red and Red China’s rulers have never had a problem with murdering tens of millions of their own people for wars and social engineering schemes.

    I never understood why the Lab Leak Hypothesis was called “racist,” since the CCP and PLA are not “races” and Chinese people were the first victims of COVID-19.

    Yet the Bat Soup Hypothesis was somehow not considered “racist,” even though it plays into deep-seated stereotypes about Chinese cuisine (“Anything with legs but a table, anything with wings but an airplane, anything under the sea but a submarine.”)

    As always, must investigate further…

    #49630

    Unseen
    Participant

    When the government decides dogs and/or cats are the vector for the spread of a pandemic and that rounding them up for extermination and incineration is the solution, mask and shutdown resistance will seem like a day at the beach by comparison. It’s one thing to kill off myriad nameless cattle or chickens. Something else to be rounding up Buster and Patches for extermination.

    I was one of the ones shaming those who resisted vaccination, masking up or staying home in the first year or so. In retrospect, I don’t think that those solutions will have saved more lives ultimately if we ever have the courage to total up the side effects, the economic losses, the losses in terms of the education and socialization of our kids, the losses in personal wealth, the homelessness it caused, and the damage to our public health all of that may have done to our society. Not to mention the divisiveness.

    #49632

    jakelafort
    Participant

    Lets give the chickens and cattle names. Frank, Big E. Pecker, Dispshit, Lipshitz, Shuttlecock, Anthony. That is just off the top of my head! If we personalize the cattle and chickens and they make us feel cozy and warm then we can insulate them from grievous human aggression. Similarly, the dogs that are slaughtered in Asian countries can find succor by licking, wagging and brown-nosing.

    By extension if the exterminators in genocides and the rapists, murderers in wars could see the OTHERS as human they might have pause in executing orders. Just sit around and smoke some dope, sing songs, tell stories and find common ground.

    And how about we elect the most qualified experts in relevant fields to advise us? Stop politicizing the response to pandemics. It is fucking insane. The opposition to minor sacrifices is disgusting. Make it an issue of patriotism to follow the advice. Keep politicians out of it. There ought to be general unanimity among ALL citizens. Then i woke. Same old world…

    #49633

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    Jake,

    Take it from an old curmudgeon, The Late Burgess Meredith, and from this here younger curmudgeon whose Rhabdomyolytis gave him a unique perspective on the crabby, cussed, meanness of the elderly
    🧑‍🦯🧑‍🦼 🤬:

    On a somewhat more cheerful note, my affliction has given me added resolve to never again be this damn weak and sick!

    Statins are what did it in my case, so they had to take me off of them after 7 years. So I am now checking blood pressure with a home monitor on the regular along with the usual blood sugars to see what lowers the blood pressure and I’m incorporating more exercise in my health regimen as I build back strength. I may get a FitBit or similar device if the budget permits.

    Today, my numbers on blood pressure were the lowest since my hospital stay, the blood sugar is the lowest ever and weight is going even lower!
    😁

    If Statins are on your list of prescriptions, always check with your Doctor to see if Rhabdomyolytis may be an issue for you. Weakened thighs and upper body weakness were my sign. There are other signs of Rhabdomyolytis too and other causes besides Statins as well.

    Just taking another baby-step to The Singularity. 🌌🦾🏃🦍🦧🐒

    • This reply was modified 11 months, 1 week ago by  TheEncogitationer. Reason: Spelling
    #49635

    Simon Paynton
    Participant

    Finally, does it imply other areas for exploration?

    This last one seems to be somewhat optional, but all of the great discoveries that have advanced science and expanded our reservoir of knowledge have done this.

    I believe it was Stephen Hawking who said that a good theory can generate other good theories.  I think that all facts exist within a larger environmental ecosystem of other facts – a big picture.  If you can explain the big picture, you can explain other, smaller pictures that exist within it.

    #49638

    Unseen
    Participant

    @jake

    Naming pets is not the cause of our love of them, it’s an effect. I would think that to be obvious. Apparently not, because one hears the “If we named (species), we wouldn’t eat it.”

    It’s the role we let our pets assume in our lives that has us loving them and wanting to protect other’s pets and pet species as well through an unconscious argument by analogy.

    #49646

    jakelafort
    Participant

    “Naming pets is not the cause of our love of them, it’s an effect. I would think that to be obvious. Apparently not, because one hears the “If we named (species), we wouldn’t eat it.”

    It’s the role we let our pets assume in our lives that has us loving them and wanting to protect other’s pets and pet species as well through an unconscious argument by analogy.”

    Unseen, my tongue was mostly in cheek. But as i’ve indicated how we come to perceive cats and dogs is mostly cultural. In other words it is arbitrary. And i aint saying cats and dogs aint dope as all get out. They damn sure are. But we can as easily fall in love with other critters. I betya the Maasai tribe are as in love with their cows as we are with cats and dogs. Probably more. And any time you have a relationship with an animal you see the personality, emotion and intelligence shine through, causing us to regard their welfare as being right up there with our own and those we love.

    #49647

    PopeBeanie
    Moderator

    If Statins are on your list of prescriptions, always check with your Doctor to see if Rhabdomyolytis may be an issue for you. Weakened thighs and upper body weakness were my sign. There are other signs of Rhabdomyolytis too and other causes besides Statins as well.

    Wow, thank you, this is one of the most helpful off-topic posts I’ve seen in a long time. I’m on a statin and am dealing on my own with what is likely this side-effect. Thank you! As medically educated and self-educated as I am, and as I’ve learned how to reduce most of the rhabdomyolysis (before I even talk to my doctor), I didn’t even realize the medical terms that were used for it. (Side-note, the “lysis” in that word means “breakdown” at the complex molecule or cellular level.)

    Still, even if that level of medical detail makes some eyes glaze over, at least some people, like myself, can learn from it. What a mess we ex-cave dwellers are in, these days. Right, @unseen?

    #49648

    Unseen
    Participant

    @jake

    We revere our pets because we have a relationship with them. I may name my cat or dog on the way home from the shelter where I adopted them. Even so, the name is incidental. You can certainly have and love a cat or dog or any other pet without bothering to even give them a name.

    I call my cat “Squeaky” and I talk to her frequently but never use that word when I’m interacting with her. The word “Squeaky” is for when I’m talking to others so that I don’t have to say something oblique and impersonal like “my cat.” When talking to her, I’m somewhat ashamed to reveal, it’s a form of what most people would call “baby talk.” She’s my “cutie cat” or my “good girl” or my “sweetie cat” or whatever else comes out of my mouth in the moment.

    • This reply was modified 11 months, 1 week ago by  Unseen.
    #49650

    I adopt stray animals……wait a minute…..stray animals adopt me. There are 2 cats hanging out in the back garden. It took a few weeks for them to cop that they don’t need to compete. I baptize them in the name of FSM. One of them is named ‘The couch shredder” and the other “Let-me-in-no-out-no-in-no-out-again”. The next jet black one will be called “You-are-one-of-them”, a name that gets reused every few years. I wonder what my neighbors think when they hear me late at night in the garden calling out “Come in, You-are-one-of-them”.

    #49651

    PopeBeanie
    Moderator

    So, let me understand you here.

    Jeebus, here we go. I’ll try, but sometimes I feel I can’t get through, and I don’t usually know if both or which of us are being the most obscure or stubborn. While I grant that you’re the more accomplished wordsmith and writer, but sometimes also an avid presumption-smith. I’ll take the long time necessary to respond as completely as I can to this single post. Seriously, this could take ME over an hour. And I hate that.

    Are you saying it’s good for people who know (or assume they know) what’s good for us to hear to curate what goes into the conversation? And if we allow the “good” people to assume that role this time, who might it be next time? Especially considering I’m not so sure the results were good this time.

    Well yeah, sometimes. The hard part is learning which people have the most knowledge and experience, and seem to have the most unselfish motives in their presentations. A museum’s curators have to chose how to fill the limited space they have. While youtube “curators/creators” don’t have that limitation except on their own channel and with limited time to produce their presentations. While we all have limited time to watch and read what we choose.

    How we choose what to watch and read is what matters, along with how well we can adapt to the choices over time. I also learn which sources can correct themselves… like Lancet, Nature, and other peer reviewed journals that operate knowing they’re not infallible. Science is about self-correction over time, in spite of obstinate opinionators and bloviators. I also strive for delayed gratification on 99% of “breaking stories” and premature conclusions, not to mention finger-pointing as any kind of long term solution, except at the obvious maliciousness of Bannon/Trump era politics and pandering to malcontents.

    It’s more constructive to understand human nature, motives, and then propose solutions that don’t evilize or dehumanize others, and that can be understood by humans who might actually be able to make a difference. Today that comes down to trying to fix systems and institutions at large, transcending the bickering and evilization at the single issue/controversy and political identity levels that viralize and take over social and other mass media. Stop promoting the outrage machines, and help people make better judgements with real evidence and smoking guns.

    I have never heard any intelligent person saying that the free flow of ideas is bad. At least, not until Covid came along. I’m not ready to give up on it.

    You can watch anything you want on YouTube, as long as Google allows you to search for it to get around their “what to watch” algorithms. That kind of limiting what you can watch is a different kind of censorship of ideas that’s based on “what the masses choose to click on the most”. So the masses are unwittingly informing google what to present as options, vs what to “censor”. So any working solution toward promoting respectful, well sourced, credible presentations based on fact and valid expertise comes down to helping the masses make better choices. How can we help? I really don’t know, except maybe at primary and middle school level, and by exposing how most of today’s “free flow of information” (as you put it) is of the most-popularized, cesspool quality.

    That it can’t have been a lab leak is an insupportable position because I’ve heard many times from a variety of sources that “lab leaks happen all the time.” Some of the people who believe it was a lab leak are as qualified to express that opinion as those who feel it had to be zoonotic.

    Insupportable positions bother me greatly, too. In a whinefest of what’s hurting credibility in science, doubling down on insupportable positions is more destructive than helpful. While I agree, I’m seeing too many scientists doing this, too. It just feeds the mass’s outrage machines. While “zoonotic spillovers” and crowded venues (like cities, and so on) have been the largest threat for centuries, at least up to recently, and they’re going to keep happening until we can focus more on preventing them. Let’s focus on preventing all possible pandemics, the best we can.

    Consider that one reason for wanting to pooh-pooh the lab leak theory is due to the government not wanting to further complicate the sore relations between China and the U.S.

    I agree. While most microbe researchers also pooh-pooh the lab leak theory, and decry how “gain of function” research, after decades of successes in furthering disease prevention and treatment, has become yet another political football and outrage machine issue in the hands of the masses. The world, including WHO demand competent oversight of all risky research, while this is yet another modern issue that unlearned people and politicians cannot fully comprehend, much less propose solutions for that won’t stifle medical progress.

    This may seem off-topic, but remember Boko Haram? The more advance science gets, the more humans simply cannot comprehend the positives and negatives of it. Which “facts” and experts can they rely on? Especially while social media and popular “news” outlets care more about clicks than competent curation, and modern curation itself is increasingly complicated or unfathomable. Boko Haram: Just stop high level education altogether, while evilizing the progressives.

    #49657

    TheEncogitationer
    Participant

    PopeBeanie,

    Wow, thank you, this is one of the most helpful off-topic posts I’ve seen in a long time. I’m on a statin and am dealing on my own with what is likely this side-effect. Thank you! As medically educated and self-educated as I am, and as I’ve learned how to reduce most of the rhabdomyolysis (before I even talk to my doctor), I didn’t even realize the medical terms that were used for it. (Side-note, the “lysis” in that word means “breakdown” at the complex molecule or cellular level.)

    Still, even if that level of medical detail makes some eyes glaze over, at least some people, like myself, can learn from it. What a mess we ex-cave dwellers are in, these days. Right, @unseen?

    Being off-topic was unintentional on my part. I simply had to address Jake’s pipe dreams in a humorous manner. 😁

    To bring it back on-topic, the most key part of rationally dealing with health problems is acknowledge that each of our bodies are physiologically unique and to each be aware of what that body reveals.

    Take a hand in the health of your own body and don’t leave it entirely to the experts to find out what may be wrong. As well trained and practiced as they are, Physicians can only act upon the data you know and reveal about your body.

    And make no mistake, Dr. Roger Williams, pioneer of discoveries of B-Complex Vitamins and nutritional acids, found decades ago that individuality is the doom and pride of human beings, right down to the cellular level.

    ROGER J. WILLIAMS
    Pioneer in Biochemistry, Nutrition, Biochemical Individuality, and Public Education
    Professor at The University of Texas at Austin, 1939 to 1986
    Founded and directed the Clayton Foundation Biochemical Institute, 1941 to 1963
    Discovered the B-vitamin, Pantothenic Acid, and concentrated and named Folic Acid
    http://bioinst.cm.utexas.edu/williams/

    Some, such as my half-Sister, can take Statins for 18 years with no bad side-effects, others such as myself, not so much, and some can’t take them at all.

    To really tie this back to the topic, dealing with a pandemic should include being receptive to data from all sources derived, something that is made impossible when elites with knowledge as limited as the rest of us can coercively censor and suppress things they deem as “Misinformation/Disinformation/Malinformation.” (MDM *GROWL!* 🦁)

    The way to deal with MDM is to identify it and share with the public how to identify it, so we can all route around it and act more informed.

Viewing 12 posts - 16 through 27 (of 27 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.