User:CutePeach/YESLABLEAK: Difference between revisions

< User:CutePeach Browse history interactively ← Previous edit Next edit →Content deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 09:44, 18 July 2021 editCutePeach (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users1,782 editsNo edit summaryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit		Revision as of 09:47, 18 July 2021 edit undoCutePeach (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users1,782 editsNo edit summaryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web editNext edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{essay\|WP:YESLABLEAK}}		{{essay\|WP:YESLABLEAK}}
	{{Nutshell\|This essay makes a policy based argument for Misplaced Pages to cover ] from a ] and include all ] origin hypotheses where they are ], without giving any of them ] weight while investigations are still ongoing and evidence has yet to be found to support either of them.}}		{{Nutshell\|This essay makes a policy based argument for Misplaced Pages to cover ] from a ] and include all ] origin hypotheses where they are ], without giving any of them ] weight while investigations are still ongoing and evidence has yet to be found to support either of them.}}

			From the start of the ], there have been rumors and speculation about the possible lab origins of ] the etiological agent that causes the ] disease. From as early as Jan 2020, rumors began spreading between Chinese netizens on social media platforms, alleging that the virus was made in the ] (WIV) and that a laboratory worker accidentally got infected and spread it to the population.<ref>http://www.caixin.com/2020-02-05/101511817.html</ref><ref>https://www.thinkchina.sg/embroiled-controversies-did-covid-19-come-wuhan-institute-virology</ref> By late Jan 2020, these rumors were covered in local Chinese media, eliciting a strong response from the WIV, and subsequently gained attention in the international media.<ref>https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2020/02/18/WHO-confirms-experts-presence-at-coronavirus-epicenter-in-China/8271582041808/</ref><ref>https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp/chinese-news-51540821</ref><ref>https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/mining-coronavirus-genomes-clues-outbreak-s-origins</ref>

			In a February 10 2020 internal email with scientists, White House advisor Mark Keim proposed that the novel virus could have been "anthropogenic rather than zoonotic."<ref>https://www.ianbirrell.com/will-we-ever-learn-the-truth-about-china-and-the-pandemic/</ref> From late April 2020 on, US President Donald Trump made several statements which politicised the issue, and many scientists - including those open to the possibility of a lab leak - were reluctant to express their opinions for fear of being associated with Trump.<ref>https://theintercept.com/2020/05/19/coronavirus-pandemic-origin-trump-china/</ref><ref>https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/559050-harvard-scientist-says-trump-hatred-motivated</ref> As the issue gained prominence in public discourse, scientists generally agreed that the origin of the virus itself was zoonotic, but raised questions on the early evolution of the virus and how it first infected humans.<ref>https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/mining-coronavirus-genomes-clues-outbreak-s-origins</ref><ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7207110/</ref> In a Feb 19 2020 letter to ], a group of 27 scientists took a stand to "strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin", which was soon followed by a March 17 2020 letter to ] by a different group, asserting that the virus must have natural origins.<ref>https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30418-9/fulltext</ref><ref>https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9</ref> With the departure of Trump came ] - which left questions unanswered - and met a largely critical reception.<ref>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-30/who-chief-critiques-covid-report-says-lab-leak-study-needed?utm_source=google&utm_medium=bd&cmpId=google</ref> In a May 14 2021 letter to ], a group of distinguished scientists countered the positions of the Lancet and Nature letters saying it was not possible to distinguish between a naturally occurring infection and a ] and other types of occupationally acquired infections, shifting consensus on the virus’s origins to the middle ground.<ref>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-57268111</ref>

			Misplaced Pages editors have tried to cover this topic from different points of view, but have been "at war" on how to include it from a neutral point of view, or whether to include it at all.<ref>https://www.cnet.com/features/wikipedia-is-at-war-over-the-coronavirus-lab-leak-theory/</ref> Some editors have tried to include the ] in Misplaced Pages, citing ] and ], while other editors have opposed its inclusion citing ] and ], codifying their reasoning in ] - a userspace essay often cited in mainspace discussions. The purpose of this ] essay is to explain why some people think SARS-COV-2 may have leaked from a lab, and why some Misplaced Pages editors think these reasons - as reported in ]s - should be covered in Misplaced Pages. Since this is a mainspace essay, it may be improved by other editors, within the bounds of its statement, and Misplaced Pages ]s. As such, this essay may also be nominated for deletion once the ] are complete and evidence of natural origins has been presented to and accepted by the scientific community.

Revision as of 09:47, 18 July 2021

This is an essay.
It contains the advice or opinions of one or more Misplaced Pages contributors. This page is not an encyclopedia article, nor is it one of Misplaced Pages's policies or guidelines, as it has not been thoroughly vetted by the community. Some essays represent widespread norms; others only represent minority viewpoints.

Shortcut

WP:YESLABLEAK

This page in a nutshell: This essay makes a policy based argument for Misplaced Pages to cover COVID-19 origins from a WP:NPOV and include all WP:NOTABLE origin hypotheses where they are WP:DUE, without giving any of them WP:UNDUE weight while investigations are still ongoing and evidence has yet to be found to support either of them.

From the start of the COVID-19 pandemic in mainland China, there have been rumors and speculation about the possible lab origins of SARS-CoV-2 the etiological agent that causes the COVID-19 disease. From as early as Jan 2020, rumors began spreading between Chinese netizens on social media platforms, alleging that the virus was made in the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and that a laboratory worker accidentally got infected and spread it to the population. By late Jan 2020, these rumors were covered in local Chinese media, eliciting a strong response from the WIV, and subsequently gained attention in the international media.

In a February 10 2020 internal email with scientists, White House advisor Mark Keim proposed that the novel virus could have been "anthropogenic rather than zoonotic." From late April 2020 on, US President Donald Trump made several statements which politicised the issue, and many scientists - including those open to the possibility of a lab leak - were reluctant to express their opinions for fear of being associated with Trump. As the issue gained prominence in public discourse, scientists generally agreed that the origin of the virus itself was zoonotic, but raised questions on the early evolution of the virus and how it first infected humans. In a Feb 19 2020 letter to The Lancet, a group of 27 scientists took a stand to "strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin", which was soon followed by a March 17 2020 letter to Nature Magazine by a different group, asserting that the virus must have natural origins. With the departure of Trump came a joint study between China and the World Health Organization - which left questions unanswered - and met a largely critical reception. In a May 14 2021 letter to Science Magazine, a group of distinguished scientists countered the positions of the Lancet and Nature letters saying it was not possible to distinguish between a naturally occurring infection and a laboratory-acquired infection and other types of occupationally acquired infections, shifting consensus on the virus’s origins to the middle ground.

Misplaced Pages editors have tried to cover this topic from different points of view, but have been "at war" on how to include it from a neutral point of view, or whether to include it at all. Some editors have tried to include the COVID-19 lab leak hypothesis in Misplaced Pages, citing WP:N and WP:DUE, while other editors have opposed its inclusion citing WP:FRINGE and WP:MEDRS, codifying their reasoning in WP:NOLABLEAK - a userspace essay often cited in mainspace discussions. The purpose of this WP:YESLABLEAK essay is to explain why some people think SARS-COV-2 may have leaked from a lab, and why some Misplaced Pages editors think these reasons - as reported in reliable sourcess - should be covered in Misplaced Pages. Since this is a mainspace essay, it may be improved by other editors, within the bounds of its statement, and Misplaced Pages policies and guideliness. As such, this essay may also be nominated for deletion once the Investigations into the origin of COVID-19 are complete and evidence of natural origins has been presented to and accepted by the scientific community.

Category:

User essays

Revision as of 09:44, 18 July 2021 editCutePeach (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users1,782 editsNo edit summaryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit← Previous edit		Revision as of 09:47, 18 July 2021 edit undoCutePeach (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users1,782 editsNo edit summaryTags: Mobile edit Mobile web editNext edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
	{{essay\|WP:YESLABLEAK}}		{{essay\|WP:YESLABLEAK}}
	{{Nutshell\|This essay makes a policy based argument for Misplaced Pages to cover ] from a ] and include all ] origin hypotheses where they are ], without giving any of them ] weight while investigations are still ongoing and evidence has yet to be found to support either of them.}}		{{Nutshell\|This essay makes a policy based argument for Misplaced Pages to cover ] from a ] and include all ] origin hypotheses where they are ], without giving any of them ] weight while investigations are still ongoing and evidence has yet to be found to support either of them.}}

			From the start of the ], there have been rumors and speculation about the possible lab origins of ] the etiological agent that causes the ] disease. From as early as Jan 2020, rumors began spreading between Chinese netizens on social media platforms, alleging that the virus was made in the ] (WIV) and that a laboratory worker accidentally got infected and spread it to the population.<ref>http://www.caixin.com/2020-02-05/101511817.html</ref><ref>https://www.thinkchina.sg/embroiled-controversies-did-covid-19-come-wuhan-institute-virology</ref> By late Jan 2020, these rumors were covered in local Chinese media, eliciting a strong response from the WIV, and subsequently gained attention in the international media.<ref>https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2020/02/18/WHO-confirms-experts-presence-at-coronavirus-epicenter-in-China/8271582041808/</ref><ref>https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp/chinese-news-51540821</ref><ref>https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/mining-coronavirus-genomes-clues-outbreak-s-origins</ref>

			In a February 10 2020 internal email with scientists, White House advisor Mark Keim proposed that the novel virus could have been "anthropogenic rather than zoonotic."<ref>https://www.ianbirrell.com/will-we-ever-learn-the-truth-about-china-and-the-pandemic/</ref> From late April 2020 on, US President Donald Trump made several statements which politicised the issue, and many scientists - including those open to the possibility of a lab leak - were reluctant to express their opinions for fear of being associated with Trump.<ref>https://theintercept.com/2020/05/19/coronavirus-pandemic-origin-trump-china/</ref><ref>https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-cures/559050-harvard-scientist-says-trump-hatred-motivated</ref> As the issue gained prominence in public discourse, scientists generally agreed that the origin of the virus itself was zoonotic, but raised questions on the early evolution of the virus and how it first infected humans.<ref>https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/mining-coronavirus-genomes-clues-outbreak-s-origins</ref><ref>https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7207110/</ref> In a Feb 19 2020 letter to ], a group of 27 scientists took a stand to "strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin", which was soon followed by a March 17 2020 letter to ] by a different group, asserting that the virus must have natural origins.<ref>https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30418-9/fulltext</ref><ref>https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0820-9</ref> With the departure of Trump came ] - which left questions unanswered - and met a largely critical reception.<ref>https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-30/who-chief-critiques-covid-report-says-lab-leak-study-needed?utm_source=google&utm_medium=bd&cmpId=google</ref> In a May 14 2021 letter to ], a group of distinguished scientists countered the positions of the Lancet and Nature letters saying it was not possible to distinguish between a naturally occurring infection and a ] and other types of occupationally acquired infections, shifting consensus on the virus’s origins to the middle ground.<ref>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-57268111</ref>

			Misplaced Pages editors have tried to cover this topic from different points of view, but have been "at war" on how to include it from a neutral point of view, or whether to include it at all.<ref>https://www.cnet.com/features/wikipedia-is-at-war-over-the-coronavirus-lab-leak-theory/</ref> Some editors have tried to include the ] in Misplaced Pages, citing ] and ], while other editors have opposed its inclusion citing ] and ], codifying their reasoning in ] - a userspace essay often cited in mainspace discussions. The purpose of this ] essay is to explain why some people think SARS-COV-2 may have leaked from a lab, and why some Misplaced Pages editors think these reasons - as reported in ]s - should be covered in Misplaced Pages. Since this is a mainspace essay, it may be improved by other editors, within the bounds of its statement, and Misplaced Pages ]s. As such, this essay may also be nominated for deletion once the ] are complete and evidence of natural origins has been presented to and accepted by the scientific community.