singemonkey

Oh dear. The mindset behind comments like this is not helpful at all.

Please stop perpetuating such arrant nonsense.

This looks very useful - thanks.

The pre-approved plugin list (https://www.altis-dxp.com/resources/pre-approved-plugins/) returns 404 though :(

> Could this have been prevented

Yes, tens of thousands of deaths could have been prevented.

South Korea has a population of a similar size to the UK (51 vs 65 million), and have had approximately 400 deaths due to Covid compared to 40,000 in the UK.

> Facts can’t be racist.

As long as they actually are facts, then yes this is true.

However, the presentation and choice of which facts to use can be racist, I'm sure you'll agree with me on that.

I mean, black and dark skin colour are overlapping sets, but the word black doesn't define everyone with dark(er) skin.

If you mean darker skin (darker than what???) then use that term.

Accuracy is important.

Using hypotheticals to rebut actual history and facts is very 21st century GOP.

I'm not really following your point?

Are you trying to say there's a global conspiracy to silence scientists who disagree with the prevailing theories of natural selection and evolution?

Quite possibly, but that's a world away from your original (and I'm paraphrasing here) "everyone thinks orange man and his associates are bad" comment.

We do seem to agree that proper scrutiny of claims is important.

No I'm not. I invite you to read the response you replied to more carefully.

Sure - I agree that there will be some scientists who will self-censor.

What I'm taking issue with is the trope that there's some kind of conspiracy of silence going on, where the global science community has decided it's beholden to China and refuses to research / publish credible theories that this is a lab-made virus. My experience is that scientists aren't a homogenous group and quite a few of them actually care about truth and facts and put that above the risk of losing links to Chinese funding.

Proofreading a paper is absolutely not peer review, at least if we're using the commonly accepted meaning of the term 'peer review'.

I'm sure you agree that your personal anecdote isn't evidence of a vast global conspiracy where scientists around the world censor themselves in order to ensure they retain links to Chinese labs?

Do you know many scientists? To counter your anecdote, my personal anecdote is that many scientists I know (as friends or colleagues) are cantankerous contrarians who would delight in going against the grain especially in the knowledge that real proof of such a theory would vastly increase their profile/notoriety.

> Although I am absolutely not in favor of Bannon, many scientists self-censor to preserve their carrier, funding, link with chinese labs. Only those in favor of the natural selection publish in well known journals.

This is fairly standard conspiracy theory stuff. Next you'll be telling us about QAnon and pedophiles.

> Even if not told aloud or published, entire teams are intimately convinced the virus was released by the Wuhan BSL4, although not necessarily intentionally.

Let's have some actual evidence of this please.

Or perhaps a non peer reviewed paper funded by an organisation that is rabidly anti-Chinese needs to have its claims scrutinised heavily.

What does your limited undergraduate knowledge have to do with anything? It's really just one step away from a high schooler citing their biology homework as a source of authority.

You also seem to think that proofreading a paper increases the chances that it's correct which (in my opinion) shreds your credibility.