We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by podgorniy
Reddit commenter on Bayesian inference and COVID-19 origins
These people can’t apply Bayesian inference. We have outbreak in a city where there is a lab which explicitly studies viruses gain of function which would make possible to infect people and already has history of poor security (documented in 2018 year). And already 2 occasions of sars viruses escaping lab in Bejin in 2004. “We found no evidence, thus it must be an animal for which we also found no evidence”. What is more probable giving all these facts?AI Verified (Mar 10, 2026)
1h ago
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
The quote is directly about the statement’s core dispute: it contrasts a lab-related origin with an animal-origin explanation and argues the lab scenario is more probable given the Wuhan lab, biosafety concerns, and prior lab escapes. In the Reddit source context, this is plainly presented as the author’s reason for favoring a lab-origin explanation over zoonotic spillover, so a determinate stance is substantially more likely. ([reddit.com](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1rpkoz1/comment/o9mwbm2/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 1h ago
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
The author argues that a lab-related origin is "more probable" than an animal origin, citing the Wuhan lab's virus work, alleged safety problems, and past SARS lab escapes; that strongly implies support for COVID-19 originating from a lab-related incident rather than zoonotic spillover. ([reddit.com](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1rpkoz1/comment/o9mwbm2/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 1h ago
votes For
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
Relevant: in a Reddit discussion specifically about SARS-CoV-2 origins, the commenter explicitly argues that people are failing to use Bayesian inference and that the origins question should be resolved by weighing which explanation is more probable given the available facts. That makes a pro stance on using Bayesian analysis for this question substantially more likely. ([reddit.com](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1rpkoz1/comment/o9mwbm2/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 1h ago
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
for: The author explicitly says "These people can’t apply Bayesian inference" and asks "What is more probable given all these facts?" In context, he faults the study/discussion for not doing a weighted probabilistic comparison of origin hypotheses, which strongly implies he sees Bayesian-style analysis as the proper framework for deciding the COVID-19 origins question.
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 1h ago
Quote authenticity verification history
Report thisQuote authenticity comments
AI Verified
Verified: the supplied Reddit URL contains a comment by "podgorniy" whose body matches the quoted paragraph verbatim, and the comment JSON identifies the same comment id (o9mwbm2) and author. The stored date is also consistent: the JSON gives created_utc 1773131224, which corresponds to 2026-03-10 UTC by calculation. The full Reddit comment continues with an additional paragraph after the quoted passage, but the quoted passage itself is exact. ([reddit.com](https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1rpkoz1/comment/o9mwbm2/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 1h ago
replying to podgorniy