Topic: Coronavirus outbreak

That's kinda like the articles that say "developer expressed interest in making a (insert game series) game".

It doesn't really mean much other than the fact they are exploring that option.

@Eel

It's not really like that. They apparently have a source who claims that one of the very first people infected was someone who worked in the lab. If it were true, that would at least be circumstantial evidence.

I assume the intelligence agencies don't just investigate something that any random internet user claims is a fact. I assume they only investigate "sources" if they have some reason to think they might be reliable.

FISA says hi. 😜

But just for giggles, let’s say there is irrefutable evidence it came out of a lab. Let’s say Xi himself cops to it. Then what? Nothing. Sure, there’s a bunch of teeth gnashing and pearl clutching, but nothing else. It doesn’t help anyone. It doesn’t make any party more or less reliable. How does the saying go? Fool me once, shame on you; Fool me 372 times...

I'm sure they had a source for "weapons of mass destruction" in 2003 too. shrugs

I dunno, this is one of those things where I don't think we need to make up questionable nonsense to hate China's government. Even in terms of this very situation!

I've got a feeling my July beach house rental in North Carolina will be canceled. ☹ I won't be shocked if it is.

@kkslider5552000 I think I was watching Fareed Zakaria, but there evidently were concerned Chinese scientists that issued a warning a few years ago, or longer, saying that the bats at the chinese wet markets for food consumption were a "timebomb". It was something like that.

@ReaperExTenebris It's worth remembering that it wasn't 'made' in a lab. And most scientists agree on that. I don't believe we even have the ability to 'manufacture' viruses that way. And there are natural strains like it, jumping from animal to human wouldn't be unbelievable, it happened so many times before (so even IF it was made, it was only a matter of time until it happened naturally). They COULD be exploring the option that the first transmission happened in a lab. So people studying the viruses, and one of them contracted it. But I really think this is how @Eel put it, they are exploring the option, just like how they are probably 'exploring' a billion other options.

Right, I did say that at the start. I don't think it makes any real difference at this point. It's merely an academic interest at that point.
I mentioned it purely because people were mocking it when someone suggested it before. If the intelligence services are treating it as serious enough to actually spend time investigating, it can't be that silly a suggestion.

@Dezzy That's because of the shortcomings of human understanding, concerning concepts like "life", or as @LzWinky put it so eloquently, our narrow definition of it. For many, basically, if it isn't carbon-based, it isn't alive. And honestly, that couldn't be more short-sighted if it tried...

And actually, it's also pretty arrogant, seeing as we are also "just" another life form, so it's not really up to us to qualify or disqualify other organisms as such, but as humans, we simply have this incessant need to be able to label and box everything. I'm more of an out of the box thinker. It's much more progressive and constructive.

@Octane Besides it being perfectly okay for me to explain whatever I want, me mentioning the algae wasn't an explanation, it was an example, for all intent and purposes sharing some similarities with viruses. Either way, the point of my comments, and the linked article, was to show you that it isn't all as black and white as you may think it is, so whether viruses are truly alive or not is basically still undecided. Many scientists simply deem them to not be, which basically puts them on the same scale as seeds, as mentioned in the article.

@ThanosReXXX And that's where I completely disagree though. I don't understand why're even comparing it to a seed. Because a 'seed' (assuming we're talking about seeds from a seed-bearing plant), may seem 'dead', 'inorganic', or devoid of live to the average person, but on the inside it's very much alive, just like a plant. A seed is way more complex than even your average bacteria. It contains thousands, if not millions of cells, complex cascades of protein interactions occur, even when they are dormant. A seed is always keeping track of the temperature, light intensity (especially red en far-red light), moisture levels, etc. This is just one simplified example of the biochemical cascade in the interaction between the embryo and endosperm for example:

And again, this is just one of many complex interactions that occur. None of this occurs in a virus. Nothing. Zilch.

I would agree if you said from the beginning that it can be considered neither alive or dead. But since we all like to draw lines somewhere (...), my question is, if viruses are considered alive, then what about viroids?

@Octane The debate about comparing it to a seed was in the article I linked to, and seeing as it was written by an actual scientist, I'm more inclined to believe that, then a comment from an anonymous person on a gaming forum, no matter how nice a person they may be or how good their intentions are. And a virus strain can also contain thousands of particles or cells, so in that respect, it isn't all that strange that scientists are using seeds as a comparative measure, even if only to support their narrative. It's just for illustrative purposes, mostly, if you ask me. At least: that's how I interpreted it from the article.

But had I known I could have made the discussion shorter by just saying neither/nor, then I would have.
But you started the line in the sand by specifically stating that viruses aren't alive, so I had little choice but to offer up the alternative to that statement.

As for viroids: much like viruses, they may need hosts, but they are DNA/RNA particles/molecules, and they can autonomously replicate, so I'd say that they too are alive in some shape or form. Just because something doesn't walk, talk, think or is aware of itself, doesn't necessarily mean that it's dead...

@ThanosReXXX I'm not going to post an elaborate reply, because that would be a repeat of what @Vee_Flames already said. But I do want to highlight two points in response to your comment.

1. A virus does not contain any cells. It it smaller than an average bacteria and other single-celled organisms, several orders of magnitude actually. Here's a size comparison between some viruses and E. coli (and the latter being several orders of magnitude smaller compared to our own cells even): https://www.researchgate.net/profile/W_Sattley/publication/28...
A virus is nothing more than a small strand of genetic material enveloped in proteins; usually three different proteins.

And this brings me to point 2; it cannot replicate autonomously. The genetic material it contains usually only codes of the capsule proteins, and it may have some genes that are able to influence its host cell, and possibly RNA or DNA polymerase to speed up the process. However, it does not contain the genetic material to achieve replication by itself. Several complex proteins are required for gene replication; RNA/DNA transcription and translation all require proteins that the virus itself does not code for.

Simply put, it enters a host cell, which then starts reading and replicating the viral genes; creating more copies, and capsule proteins. These capsule proteins can self-assemble (can't think of an exception right now), but this is basic chemisty/protein-protein interaction. And without a stop sign, the host cell simply continues until it's filled up with virus particles (most of them will be defective by the way, because the virus assembly is still a product of chance). And the cycle continues...

My point about viroids is that they are just that, a strand of genetic material, but no means to replicate themselves. However they can enter plant cells, and plants can replicate them and release them. It's literally a strand of rogue RNA. Just that. Nothing more. A complex molecule, usually no longer than a few hundred base pairs. But fair enough, I'll gladly continue this conversation. And we can go even smaller! If viroids are alive, then what about prions?

@Vee_Flames Just for clarification. Currently applying for PhD!

@Vee_Flames Oh, great, now I definitely wish I never replied to @Octane's post...

All kidding aside, though, you do bring up some interesting and valid points. However, my point was not to claim that viruses, or viroids for that matter, are just as alive as any other living entity, just that they are not dead entities, and they do exhibit a number of feats of which I would say would, or should, put them at the very least in the grey area, which is also what the scientist in the article I linked to was proposing, regardless of any general sentiment in the scientific or general audience.

And I think it's pretty safe to say that this person is who he claims to be, seeing as it is a scientific website, so anyone who posts or makes articles for it, would surely be scrutinized/verified before they're allowed to do so, otherwise it would irreparably damage the reputation of the site as a scientific news source. Besides, his profile is mentioned underneath the article, and it can be checked online, so I don't think there's any reason to doubt it, whatsoever.

Here it is, so you don't have to scroll back:

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)

LUIS P. VILLARREAL is director of the Center for Virus Research at the University of California, Irvine. He was born in East Los Angeles. He received his doctorate in biology from the University of California, San Diego, and did postdoctoral research in virology at Stanford University with Nobel laureate Paul Berg.He is active in science education and has received a National Science Foundation Presidential Award for mentoring. In his current position, Villarreal has established programs for the rapid development of defenses against bioterrorism threats. He has two sons and enjoys motorcycles and Latin music.

Anyway, seeing as I'm just a logical/deductive (out of the box) thinker, and not a scientist or biologist, that's about as deep as I'm willing and able to go with it, also because it's starting to derail this topic, even though Covid-19 is obviously also a virus, so I'll take my leave here.

tl;dr? It's a grey area.

I'm a bit late to the conversation, but I just want to point out that even if China admitted it came from a lab. Even if they admitted it was a deliberately made bioweapon, even if it was released on purpose, there is little we can reasonably do beyond massive economic sanctions.

A war with China is a war no one wins. Any such conflict would see so much death and destruction that this pandemic would be nothing but a side show. But I remember 9/11. I remember how many people were practically foaming at the mouth for revenge. And the "revenge" that was wrought left hundreds of thousands dead across the middle east and Africa, destroyed two nations and destabilized the entire region. That sort of reaction toward China would give results orders of a magnitude worse.

And that's assuming that both the US and China hold back their nuclear weapons. I hope people understand that China is not Iraq or Afghanistan or even Iran. And it's not the 1940s. There may be people who say WW3 is inevitable, and I don't think they are entirely wrong - but that doesn't mean we should just accept it. I will oppose that route no matter what. I will never support war as an option. My view is that the only justifiable war is one of self-defense. Fighting back against a foe who is actively invading either you, or your formal allies.

There's basically zero chance of that happening. Not even the war-hawk military industrial complex pawns are trying to push for that.

Welp, Uncle is out of the hospital and in self quarantine now. Still a bit weak and he has a cough (virus had fun in his left lung apparently) but he is in good spirits. My Aunt (his ex- which is really nice of her considering) is bringing him food and one of my cousins is staying in the house on the first floor to clean and be there for him as needed. Of course now that the virus scared the crap out of him, he is lecturing everybody, but we are kinda indulging him for now. Thanks to all that sent positive thoughts and well wishes.

Fascinating convo about viruses by the way. Biology is not my wheelhouse but y’all sucked me in enough that I went back a few pages.

@Dezzy Really? Because I've heard it brought up several times. I don't think it's likely but I'm not remotely confident enough to think it's impossible at this point.

@Heavyarms55 I disagree WW3 is inevitable. Times have changed too much since the 30s where globalisation has become rampant and the world economies relies on relations between countries.

Anyone remember the movie The Interview? It was ridiculous to think a rubbish comedy almost kicked off a world war and its sad to think it wasn’t over issues like human rights or oppression.

@Ryu_Niiyama Very glad to hear he’s come out the other side of it in one piece (and with at least one functioning lung!). It must have been a really harrowing ordeal for all involved.