[arisAlexis]

Although you can find a Bayesian answer for this which I am not qualified to calculate, it's irrelevant. The most pressing issue is not to dismiss it as zero probability as has been until know because it is viewed as a conspiracy. Even if the probability is very small we have to dig in deeper to prevent the next catastrophe.

[ethbr0]

> Even if the probability is very small we have to dig in deeper to prevent the next catastrophe.

There are very small chances of many catastrophes that we happily ignore.

Among the less small ones, off the top of my head: a large earthquake on the San Andreas fault and the Yellowstone supervolcano erupting.

[arisAlexis]

Can we prevent a volcano erupting? No. Can we prevent a lab leak? Yes. I wonder why people are soooo resistant to this idea and make up a myriad bad arguments.

[ethbr0]

Because we get annoyed when people insinuate that pointing out features of reality are evidence of a conspiratorial cabal.

Can we prevent a lab leak? Not really insofar as humans are less than perfect individuals.

Pretending we hadn't discovered atomic fission would have been just as dangerous as ignoring biological threats.

[igouy]

Can we prevent the live animal trade bringing people into daily proximity with novel viruses.