This market resolves once we have a definitive answer to this question. (i.e. "I've looked at all notable evidence presented by both sides and have upwards of 98% confidence that a certain conclusion is correct, and it doesn't seem likely that any further relevant evidence will be forthcoming any time soon.")
This will likely not occur until many years after Covid is no longer a subject of active political contention, motivations for various actors to distort or hide inconvenient evidence have died down, and a scientific consensus has emerged on the subject. For exactly when it will resolve, see /IsaacKing/when-will-the-covid-lab-leak-market
I will be conferring with the community extensively before resolving this market, to ensure I haven't missed anything and aren't being overconfident in one direction or another. As some additional assurance, see /IsaacKing/will-my-resolution-of-the-covid19-l
(For comparison, the level of evidence in favor of anthropogenic climate change would be sufficient, despite the existence of a few doubts here and there.)
If we never reach a point where I can safely be that confident either way, it'll remain open indefinitely. (And Manifold lends you your mana back after a few months, so this doesn't negatively impact you.)
"Come from a laboratory" includes both an accidental lab leak and an intentional release. It also counts if COVID was found in the wild, taken to a lab for study, and then escaped from that lab without any modification. It just needs to have actually been "in the lab" in a meaningful way. A lab worker who was out collecting samples and got contaminated in the wild doesn't count, but it does count if they got contaminated later from a sample that was supposed to be safely contained.
In the event of multiple progenitors, this market resolves YES only if the lab leak was plausibly responsible for the worldwide pandemic. It won't count if the pandemic primarily came from natural sources and then there was also a lab leak that only infected a few people.
I won't bet in this market.
Related questions
Just came across this market. What is the reason the probability tanked after ACX review/article? https://www.astralcodexten.com/p/practically-a-book-review-rootclaim
https://www.c-span.org/video/?536819-1/heritage-foundation-discussion-china-covid-19-pandemic
Heritage Foundation Discussion on China and the COVID-19 Pandemic
John Ratcliffe, former National Intelligence director (Trump administration, 2020-21) and chair of the Heritage Foundation’s Non-Partisan Commission on China and COVID-19, joined former CDC Director Dr. Robert Redfield (Trump administration, 2018-21) and other commission members for a discussion on their investigation into China’s role in the Covid-19 pandemic. The report asserts the Chinese government’s actions are to blame for the pandemic. Several topics were discussed, including the probability that COVID-19 originated from a lab leak, the Chinese government’s lack of transparency, U.S. government funding of scientific research in foreign countries, and the need to form a 9/11-style commission regarding the COVID-19 pandemic.
The Science and Operating Environment
After a careful review of the available evidence, it is the view of this Commission that the COVID-19 pandemic very likely stemmed from a research-related incident in Wuhan, China. The Chinese government has obscured much of the relevant record and obstructed all credible international efforts to investigate the origin of the virus, but the available evidence strongly supports a research-related accident.
Although it remains theoretically possible that COVID-19 emerged via zoonosis in the wild42
Jonathan E. Pekar et al., “The Molecular Epidemiology of Multiple Zoonotic Origins of SARS-CoV-2,” Science, Vol. 377, No. 6609 (July 26, 2022), pp. 960–966, https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8337 (accessed July 1, 2024).
or spillover in a wet market43
Michael Worobey et al., “The Huanan Market Was the Epicenter of SARS-CoV-2 Emergence,” Zenodo, February 26, 2022, https://zenodo.org/records/6299116 (accessed July 1, 2024).
(spillover is a virus originating in animals before it passes to humans), there is no evidentiary basis for either of these hypotheses despite extensive testing over four years. The proponents of these hypotheses focus on a spatial analysis of early cases, allegations of two lineages emerging from the market, and the presence of susceptible animals. There are numerous major challenges to these hypotheses. The Worobey et al. Science paper44
Michael Worobey et al., “The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan Was the Early Epicenter of the COVID-19 Pandemic,” Science, Vol. 377, No. 6609 (July 26, 2022), pp. 951–959, https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abp8715 (accessed July 1, 2024).
asserting dispositive evidence of a market origin was later refuted by two different authors’ peer-reviewed articles that statistically disproved the Worobey et al. spatial analysis.45
Dietrich Stoyan and Sung Nok Chiu, “Statistics Cannot Prove that the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market Was the Early Epicenter of the COVID-19 Pandemic,” arXiv preprint, August 22, 2022, https://europepmc.org/article/ppr/ppr537695 (accessed July 1, 2024); Dietrich Stoyan and Sung Nok Chiu, “Statistics Did Not Prove that the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market Was the Early Epicenter of the COVID-19 Pandemic,” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series A: Statistics in Society, January 16, 2024, https://academic.oup.com/jrsssa/advance-article-abstract/doi/10.1093/jrsssa/qnad139/7557954 (accessed July 1, 2024).
Early case data finally released in 2024 fully refute the double spillover argument and indicate that a single introduction of the virus into humans caused the pandemic.46
Jia-Xin Lv et al., “Evolutionary Trajectory of Diverse SARS-CoV-2 Variants at the Beginning of COVID-19 Outbreak,” Virus Evolution, Vol. 10, No. 1 (2024), https://academic.oup.com/ve/article/10/1/veae020/7619252?login=false (accessed July 1, 2024).
No evidence of infected animals in the market was ever found.47
Jesse D. Bloom, “Association Between SARS-CoV-2 and Metagenomic Content of Samples from the Huanan Seafood Market,” Virus Evolution, Vol. 9, No. 2 (2023), https://academic.oup.com/ve/article/9/2/vead050/7249794 (accessed July 1, 2024); Jesse D. Bloom, “Importance of Qualifying the Number of Viral Reads in Metagenomic Sequencing of Environmental Samples from the Huanan Seafood Market,” Virus Evolution, Vol. 10, No. 1 (2024), https://academic.oup.com/ve/article/10/1/vead089/7504441 (accessed July 1, 2024); William J. Liu et al., “Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 at the Huanan Seafood Market,” Nature, April 5, 2023, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06043-2 (accessed July 1, 2024); World Health Organization, WHO-Convened Global Study of Origins of SARS-CoV-2: China Part | Joint WHO–China Study, 14 January–10 February 2021, published March 30, 2021, https://reliefweb.int/report/world/who-convened-global-study-origins-sars-cov-2-china-part-joint-who-china-study-14 (accessed July 1, 2024); Lv et al., “Evolutionary Trajectory of Diverse SARS-CoV-2 Variants at the Beginning of COVID-19 Outbreak.”
In other viral outbreaks, such evidence was found rather quickly and in multiple places along the usual distribution channels and final destinations of these animals.48
Esam I. Azhar et al., “Evidence for Camel-to-Human Transmission of MERS Coronavirus,” The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 370, No. 26 (June 26, 2014), https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1401505 (accessed July 1, 2024); U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Prevalence of IgG Antibody to SARS-Associated Coronavirus in Animal Traders—Guangdong Province, China, 2003,” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, Vol. 52, No. 41 (October 17, 2003), pp. 986–987, https://archive.ph/iWceZ#selection-289.0-289.113 (accessed July 1, 2024); Samy Kasem et al., “Cross-Sectional Study of MERS-CoV-Specific RNA and Antibodies in Animals that Have Had Contact with MERS Patients in Saudi Arabia,” Journal of Infection and Public Health, Vol. 11, No. 3 (May–June 2018), pp. 331–338, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7102853/ (accessed July 1, 2024); Robert Roos, “Jordanian, Saudi Camels Have MERS-CoV-Like Antibodies,” University of Minnesota, Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, December 12, 2013, https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/mers-cov/jordanian-saudi-camels-have-mers-cov-antibodies (accessed July 1, 2024); Ming Wang et al.,” SARS-CoV Infection in a Restaurant from Palm Civet,” Emerging Infectious Diseases, Vol. 11, No. 12 (December 2005), pp. 1860–1865, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3367621/ (accessed July 1, 2024).
Other studies observed that the transmission evidence found at the marketplace did not differentiate between a superspreader event among humans and a natural spillover.49
Bloom, “Association Between SARS-CoV-2 and Metagenomic Content of Samples from the Huanan Seafood Market”; Virginie Courtier-Orgogozo and Francisco A. de Ribera, “SARS-CoV-2 Infection at the Huanan Seafood Market,” Environmental Research, Vol 214, Pt. 1 (November 2022), https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0013935122010295?via%3Dihub (accessed July 1, 2024); Steven E. Massey, Adrian Jones, Daoyu Zhang, Yuri Deigin, and Steven B. Quay, “Unwarranted Exclusion of Intermediate Lineage A-B SARS-CoV-2 Genomes Is Inconsistent with the Two-Spillover Hypothesis of the Origin of COVID-19,” Microbiological Research, Vol 14, No. 1 (2023), pp. 448–453, https://www.mdpi.com/2036-7481/14/1/33 (accessed July 1, 2024).
The genetic and early case data appear to suggest that the virus was already in circulation among human beings before the outbreak associated with the market.50
Jesse D. Bloom, “Recovery of Deleted Deep Sequencing Data Sheds More Light on the Early Wuhan SARS-CoV-2 Epidemic,” Molecular Biology and Evolution, Vol. 38, No.12 (December 2021), pp. 5211–5224, https://archive.ph/TOpwk#selection-2199.0-3157.62 (accessed July 1, 2024); Chaolin Huang et al., “Clinical Features of Patients Infected with 2019 Novel Coronavirus in Wuhan, China,” The Lancet, Vol. 395, No. 10223 (February 15, 2020), pp. 497506, https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext (accessed July 1, 2024); Lv et al., “Evolutionary Trajectory of Diverse SARS-CoV-2 Variants at the Beginning of COVID-19 Outbreak.”
And while the SARS-CoV-2 virus conceptually could have emerged naturally51
Pekar et al., “The Molecular Epidemiology of Multiple Zoonotic Origins of SARS-CoV-2.”
from human contact with infected animals in the wild, there is still no evidence of direct zoonotic transfer from a bat or intermediate species.
That's quite a bit of copy+paste; unclear what you expect people to respond to. Let's go with this part:
Other studies observed that the transmission evidence found at the marketplace did not differentiate between a superspreader event among humans and a natural spillover
This sentence is supported by a study from Bloom, which in turn says:
These samples were all collected on 1 January 2020 or later, which is at least several weeks after the Huanan Seafood Market became a superspreading site for human infections (Li et al. 2020).
Let's continue down the chain of citation to find out where this is written by Li et al:
One of the features of SARS and MERS outbreaks is heterogeneity in transmissibility, and in particular the occurrence of super-spreading events, particularly in hospitals. Super-spreading events have not yet been identified for NCIP [(2019-nCoV)–infected pneumonia], but they could become a feature as the epidemic progresses.
The point of citing primary literature is to avoid these sorts of mistakes. Oops.
Holding China Accountable for Its Role in the Most Catastrophic Pandemic of Our Time: COVID-19
In this report, the Commission documents several major facts about the pandemic that contradict the Chinese-propagated narrative. The Commission finds that the balance of available evidence points toward the pandemic’s having resulted from an initial spillover resulting from a research-related incident at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), an institution known internationally for its coronavirus-related research, rather than emerging from wild animals sold at a market in that city.
Further details of 2018 WIV thesis, titled 'Evolutionary Mechanism of Adaptation of Bat SARS-like Coronaviruses to Host Receptor Molecules'
Key Findings: WIV is holding back 5 bat ACE2 sequences from Yunnan — 3 likely from Mojiang and 2 from Chuxiong. https://x.com/TheSeeker268/status/1805984637359206556?t=6N_KPsXdE5-o64XR9tow4g&s=19
I like how that thread says it's really important that these are Rhinolophus pusillus bats and then if you search for that species name almost none of the lab leak people have talked about it in the last 4 years:
https://x.com/search?q=rhinolophus%20pusillus&src=recent_search_click&f=live
That's kind of like when y'all made up Ben Hu's name as patient zero and everyone said, "yeah, I thought it was him" but you could go back and no one had actually said that.
It also appears that picking that bat species as the important one demolishes the talking point that there are "no relevant bats in Hubei":
https://x.com/Ticklicker56/status/1697758579313295785
Though maybe I shouldn't quote ticklicker because he contradicted himself in another thread, where he insisted only one relevant bat species lives in Hubei:
https://x.com/Ticklicker56/status/1753562394943426822
Am I reading this right that the scandal is “Holding back” Ace2 sequences that are presumably identical to other available Ace2 sequences and “not reporting” a March 2016 sampling trip when other samples from the trip were published to GenBank with March 2016 collection date and Yunnan metadata long ago?
Newsflash — not all data is published in journals, publication in theses is also publication, and publication often ends at that point. It’s not a sign of a cover up just because you’re told something is on the internet in Chinese and not English and you didn’t know about it.
Anthony Fauci's Inner Circle Initially Thought COVID Came From a Lab
Sen. Rand Paul explains why FOIA litigation shouldn’t have been necessary to find this out.
RAND PAUL | 6.18.2024 6:15 PM
So in other words they didn’t suspect they had anything to cover up, took the idea seriously, and quickly rejected it for being supported by nothing but the Wuhan coincidence, which was the right thing to do at the time and should not have taken long to do. Subsequently proven right over and over as evidence came in.
Pentagon watchdog doesn’t know how much overseas gain-of-function research is done with US funds — despite $1.4B spent: report
Scientific expert declares there is ‘zero’ evidence for natural COVID-19 origin
Yup @Bayesian — same goes for anyone with phony Bayesian analysis where every factor considered points nowhere or in the same direction. Some things will always point in the wrong direction by chance, such as the coincidence that a pandemic started in Wuhan.
https://youtu.be/vtfIIG8iYIk?si=5FPUWYcIbpkXmqiW&t=1111
Jeffrey Sachs: Lessons from the COVID Commission, Lab Leak Questions, and Nord Stream — #21
The funny thing most people don't know about Jeffrey Sachs is that he's a shill for China. Like, he denies the Uighur genocide:
He also says that US politicians should not visit Taiwan.
He's also criticized the "war on Huawei".
He holds an advisory position at a Chinese university:
And, for some reason, he blames the pandemic on "US biotechnology". Notice how his particular brand of lab leak always comes back to specifically blaming US scientists.
Like, shouldn't his article be, "what might China owe the world for Covid-19?"
He's worked with some other foreign governments, too, like he took millions of dollars from the UAE to whitewash their human rights record.
And he's pretty consistent at blaming America for everything, like NATO is of course to blame for the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
It's been a while since I heard that interview with Steve Hsu, but I recall that he also blamed Nordstream bombing on the US (possible, but not proven). Didn't he even say something about the government killing JFK?
Is China threatened by the things that Sachs is saying? Of course not, they've featured him in Chinese papers:
https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202108/1230758.shtm
Not the first time he's been in that paper. Apparently he's been referenced 52 times in that paper and 179 times in the China Daily, another Chinese propaganda outlet.
Sachs blames US biotechnology in the sense it was techniques developed by scientists in the US (Baric in particular) that were passed on to scientists in Wuhan. His focus does seem to be on getting the US to share more records. He was clearly frustrated with what he saw as obfuscation in his time chairing the Lancet COVID-19 Commission. He also formed the impression Daszak wasn't trustworthy (although I think Daszak ultimately doesn't know either way).
@PeterMillerc030 He's a shill for China but he thinks sarscov2 leaked from a Chinese lab? You may want to step up your game as people might figure out you're a fraud too. (speaking from experience)
Deleted duplicate comment.