Does anyone still believe Covid came from a wet market?

[Aerialis]

Even the sainted New York Times has now confirmed, 5 years too late, that those dangerous 'conspiracy theorists' were right all along, and that Covid did not come from a bat crossed with a pangolin at a wet market in Wuhan, but unbelievably from a lab leak at the Wuhan institute of virology next door, who had been conducting gain of function research on coronaviruses. Surprise, surprise and who would have thought!

thespectator.com/topic/new-york-times-comes-clean-about-covid-zeynep-tufekci-apoorva-mandavilli/

Makes you think what else the 'conspiracy theorists' got right, and what else our governments and media are still lying to us about.

But anyone actually still actually think it came from a wet market rather than a lab leak?

I would find it easier to believe that he was right if he had, for instance, taken Susan Oliver along with him. I'm sure he does have some sincere concerns, but he's still not properly qualified in this area and just because his audience loves certain lines of argument doesn't mean they're right. You can be sincere and still wrong (or theorising way beyond your data).

I don't know who Susan Oliver is but didn't you just say they had very different ideas after a while regarding what was happening?
Sounds like she did her thing and he did his?
I don't really understand why he would "take her along" with him and why that would make him more credible?
Not being properly qualified never stopped eg, BBC journalists spouting their opinions on injections and other public health measures.

Sorry, by "take her along" I meant "persuade her of the validity of his arguments". You'd think, if his newer arguments were sound, she'd have been one of the first people supporting him in them. The fact that he couldn't persuade her (and she now feels she has to post videos actively debunking his) is a bad sign for his scientific credibility these days. Like I said, I used to watch all his videos, and I'd like to feel I could trust what he posts now, but I can't.

fair enough but there are lots of opinions ( well, there are now the censorship has mostly stopped) and they obviously had different ones so i don't see how or why he needed to persuade her?

No doubt he is not 100% correct and no doubt she is not 100% correct.
What is good is the level of discussion is increasing after years of absolute suppression in the media.
Unfortunately the misinformation given out by main stream media was so constant and ubiquitous that many peopke still think conspiracy theory when an alternative view is given

At the time I would happily go along with that.
Looking back though an awful lot of people didn’t speak out on these themes because they were criticised for it.

I watched JC’s videos from the start up until things got weird, and mainly backed out because I needed a break from constant Covid info. He was always very good at showing his sources, encouraging others to look to the sources, and explained them in a human way.

Knowing that plenty of other drs and scientists are still basically cancelled for their views doesn’t make the credible side more credible. It’s a big mess, and it’s still very difficult to know who to believe. I no longer wholly believe the “trust the science” direction (and given the string of cover ups from big businesses using science to bamboozle people over the last 100+ years I don’t really understand anyone putting their faith 100% in it), but I also don’t automatically believe conspiracy theories like some do.

it is relevant to the OP where she says:

"Makes you think what else the 'conspiracy theorists' got right, and what else our governments and media are still lying to us about."

Assuming you aren't "up to speed" with the debate, the whole world including NHS, and our government are pretending that:

• sex doesnt matter
• sex can be changed
• sex is unimportant
• a child/adult can choose their sex
• medical mutilation of bodies "changes sex"
• etc

All of the above are lies with the intention/effect of eliminating women/girls single sex spaces in order to give access to "very "special" men" who very very much want access to spaces previously reserved for women & girls. If you call these out as lies you will be demonised, called transphobic, liar, receive threats etc.

Dissenters & those who point out these lies are treated the same way as those raising issues with covid - abused, called names, shouted down etc.

Did you have anything to add to the debate? 🙄

A clear majority of virologists support the zoonotic origin though - regardless of opinion pieces in the Times.

https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jvi.01240-24

I think there are still points in favour and identifiable flaws in both theories.

Yeah no self interest there at all.

“Makes you think what else the conspiracy theorists got right”

That is just the most RIDICULOUS statement!

What - by your definition - is ‘got right’??

When it becomes consensus opinion?

well that's how people view other scientific theories.
Once the consensus is that something is probably correct then most people agree it is probably correct.
Is that what you meant? your post was a little confusing

@Mightymoog

Exactly! That’s the power of consensus science!

So when people are trying to persuade others not to take vaccines, you go with consensus scientific opinion.

If sufficient evidence becomes available to change consensus opinion, that’s when you can safely advise others to change their behaviour.

Susan Oliver - who is an immunologist- wrote to John Campbell privately , pointing out mistakes in his video about Ivermectin. Basically he completely misread the statistics on a report from Japan iirc. But he never responded, although she had been a guest on his podcast.

It's easy to see why : his sudden enthusiasm for Ivermectin resulted in a massive increase in his viewing figures. The comments section was flooded with nutbag conspiracists especially from the USA. His earnings consequently increased hugely so he couldn't bring himself to climb down. Here's a little statistic based on Campbells videos. In my small town , pop 1550 , about 220 people should have myocarditis / pericarditis, if he is correct. It's a nasty condition so one would expect many to be hospitalised or even to have died. I'm bound to know some of them. Except there aren't any. And vaccination rates here are close to 100%. Especially among my fellow elderly.

I actually said most people go along with consensus.
There will always be a fair number of people who disagree, rightly or wrongly with the perceived "correct science".
Sometimes those sceptics are right, sometimes they're wrong. What has made this whole thing so toxic is the absolute refusal to acknowledge anything other than the state sanctioned opinion.
And your example of the injections is a terrible one; nobody should feel obliged to put anything in their body just because the majority have gone along with it.
We are grown ups; if we can be constantly told the "safe and effective" narrative which some people go along with, then we can also hear about the not so safe and effective message that others go along with.
"science" is not black and white; what was accepoetd science one day can and has in the past changed completely the nanother day

The paper has 41 authors.
Click on AUTHORS INFO AND AFFILIATIONS.

And read to to the end, obviously.

Lots of “conspiracy theorists” predicted that lockdown would not the short-term measure by which it was sold to the public. And lo and behold: lockdown was dragged out for week after week, month after month, with the goalposts being moved a little bit each time. First it was to flatten the curve, then it was to eliminate the virus, then it was just until the over 70s were vaccinated, then over 60s, then over 50s, then came whisperings about compulsory in law for everyone… we “conspiracy theorists” saw it coming.

You see, I don't even view that as a "conspiracy" yet anyone suggesting it was derided and mocked as a ct.
To me a conspiracy is pretty outlandish; chips controlling our brains etc.
The extension of the lockdown was really not outlandish. It was obvious that they were never going to shut down the country to that extent and then after 4 weeks just say ok, as you were, let's carry on as normal.

I don't think we'll ever know as China wouldn't allow anyone to find out and so the evidence was lost.
www.bmj.com/content/386/bmj.q1578

@FrumpleBoat

Yes, of course people disagree! When a theory or medication is advised, it will be constantly tested for issues.

BUT peer review etc - there needs to be sufficient evidence before advising the public that a medication/course of action is not safe or unhealthy.

THEN advice changes and it becomes the new consensus opinion!
You can’t just cherry pick certain conspiracies or certain consensus advice to prove some personal theory that you have…

did you know you were talking to yourself? 😅

I’m my own best audience…
Do you agree @FrumpleBoat?
Yes! What a wonderful post. 👍

.

This is a good listen

https://open.spotify.com/episode/1JXaKi3zgtVrWtSPwjMxqP?si=HwS9OnS1Qf-e6gvNWHldxQ

Could you sum up the gist of it?

No, I think it’s worth a proper listen - they go into the science in some detail and I wouldn’t be able to sum that up!