Philippe Lemoine Profile picture
Aug 25, 2020 26 tweets 7 min read Read on X
Many people claim that China lied about the outbreak of Wuhan and is responsible for the human and economic damages caused by the pandemic, but is this view actually supported by the evidence? (Spoiler: not really.)
I looked into this very carefully and, in a four-part essay published on @Quillette, I argue that, while there is a grain of truth to some of those accusations, they are mostly nonsense. The first part of the series has just been published. quillette.com/2020/08/24/the…
I know that many of you are convinced the accusations are true, but I hope you will read and share this essay anyway, because I really think you're wrong and I'm pretty sure it will change your mind on at least *some* things.
As I painstakingly argue in the essay, because they don't like the CCP (neither do I), people often draw nonsensical inferences, when in fact there are usually far more plausible explanations for what they see as proof of China's malfeasance.
I also document several cases of downright anti-China propaganda on the part of Western media/governments. Many widely repeated claims are based on clear misinterpretations of the evidence or, in some cases, on bald-faced lies and manipulations.
To be clear, that is not to say that China is entirely blameless. It did lie on some things and there was plenty of incompetence in Wuhan early on, but we've seen far worse in the US and other Western countries and it shouldn't be used as a scapegoat.
I will also post a longer, less polished version on my blog as Quillette publishes the series, because we decided to leave out some technical to keep the essay readable by a general audience but some of you will probably be interested in those details. necpluribusimpar.net/did-china-lie-…
Again, I know that many of you are skeptical, but this essay has required a ridiculous amount of work and I'm really confident about the conclusions I reach, so I hope you will read it with an open-mind. I will post the other parts in this thread as they are published.
The second part of my essay on the role of China in the pandemic has been published. In this part, I examine how and when human-to-human transmission was ascertained by the Chinese authorities. quillette.com/2020/08/29/the…
The Chinese authorities have been accused of knowing that sustained human-to-human transmission was occurring for weeks before they finally admitted it. However, after carefully reviewing the evidence, I conclude that this accusation is mostly baseless.
It's true that, for about a week before January 20 (when they admitted sustained human-to-human transmission was occurring), the Chinese authorities minimized that possibility, even though they knew it was likely.
But they likely didn't know before that and, even in mid-January, it wasn't clear to them exactly how easily the virus could transmit from person to person. I argue that accusations to the contrary are based on flawed reasoning.
However, in some cases, it wasn't just poor reasoning. I also document cases in which the media and/or governments like Taiwan peddled downright lies to make people believe that China had known for weeks that sustained human-to-human transmission was occurring.
Finally, I argue that even if China suppressed information about the virus for a while in January, we can't hold it responsible for the pandemic, let alone blame the botched response in the West on this.
Again I'm also posting a less polished, more technical version of this essay on my blog. So far, the differences are minimal, but this will change when I discuss the origins of the virus in part 3, since technical details will be relegated to the blog. necpluribusimpar.net/did-china-lie-…
Part 3 of my essay was just published on @Quillette. In this part, I discuss the origins of the virus. I argue that it likely didn't originate from Huanan Seafood Market, that it evolved naturally and that it probably didn't accidentally escape from a lab. quillette.com/2020/09/02/the…
Again, I published a longer, more detailed but less polished version on my blog. Part 3 on my blog examines whether China can be held responsible for the pandemic and its consequences, as well as whether the virus originated from Huanan Seafood Market. necpluribusimpar.net/did-china-lie-…
In part 4 on my blog, I examine different versions of the lab escape theory and various arguments that have been offered to support each of them, which I find unconvincing and in some cases downright confused. necpluribusimpar.net/did-china-lie-…
The discussion is a bit technical at times, so we removed the most difficult parts from the version published on Quillette, while including links to the relevant sections on my blog for the people who are interested in that kind of details.
In particular, I refute the Bayesian argument to the effect that, since SARS-CoV-2 just happened to have emerged in Wuhan, one of the few cities that has a lab where people study bat coronaviruses, the outbreak is unlikely to be unrelated to that lab and probably escaped from it.
The fourth and last part of my essay on China's role in the COVID-19 pandemic has been published. In this part, I discuss whether, as many people claim, China fudged its numbers about the epidemic and conclude that it likely didn't. quillette.com/2020/09/06/the…
That is not to say that China's official data are perfectly accurate. As I also explain, they are not doubt very imperfect, but for the most part it's for the same kind of reasons data have been very low quality pretty much everywhere, not because China deliberately fudged them.
The main approach I have used consists in asking this question: suppose that I gave you an "anonymized" dataset about the pandemic in different countries and asked you which country is most likely to have manipulated its data, would you pick China? The answer is no.
I also respond to various arguments to the effect that China manipulated the data and show they are totally unconvincing. As with the lab escape theory, there are so many I couldn't discuss all of them, so I focused on the most popular and/or less nonsensical ones.
Again, I published a less polished, slightly more technical version on my blog. The code I used for my analysis of the data has also been uploaded on GitHub and you can find a link to the repository in the article. necpluribusimpar.net/did-china-lie-…
This concludes my series. I like to think it's pretty convincing, but I'm under no delusion it will convince many people. I think that, *at the very least*, it should convince a rational person that many of the arguments that have been made for months against China are garbage 🤷‍♂️

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Philippe Lemoine

Philippe Lemoine Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @phl43

Jan 25
A French journalist asked an IDF spokesman whether they still believed there was a Hamas command center under al-Shifa Hospital, pointing out that the evidence presented after the IDF seized it didn't match the original claims made by Israel.

He replied that it was "unacceptable" for "a democracy like yours to ask another democracy a question" and added that such a question was "extremely weird or even nauseating" (if you see what I mean).

The journalist was almost apologetic and tried to argued that it was normal practice, but the IDF spokesman was having none of it. For some reason I'm supposed to give those people the benefit of the doubt though 🤷‍♂️
In case you have forgotten, let me remind you what the IDF originally claimed was under al-Shifa Hospital.
Now if you want to compare that to what the IDF showed journalists after it seized the hospital, Sky News created a 3D model of the tunnels that journalists were able to see. news.sky.com/story/secrets-…
Read 5 tweets
Nov 22, 2023
I have already retweeted this paper, but I'm doing it again because I think it's fascinating. It suggests that most of the differences in economic policy between mature developed economies that people constantly argue about are second-order relative to demography.
To be clear, this does not mean that economic policy doesn't matter and couldn't make a substantial difference, because the range of variation in economic policy among mature developed economies is limited.
It's possible that something that hasn't been tried yet could make a large difference, not to mention that Italy suggests it's still possible to fuck things up big time, but people argue about existing differences as if they mattered a great deal and they don't seem to.
Read 9 tweets
Oct 23, 2023
I'll probably write about this because it keeps coming up and there is a lot to say about the "offer" made at Camp David, starting with the fact that technically a comprehensive offer was never actually made, but for now here's what this amazing "offer" looked like in practice 🙃
Image
First, if people are going to make this argument, then they should say that and not constantly repeat the talking point that Barak made a super-generous offer at Camp David. This is a lie.
Second, the truth is that no Palestinian leader could ever have accepted this "offer", something anyone even remotely informed about the topic knows, so it doesn't really matter if they were never going to get better. Even Ben-Ami admitted as much in 2006. democracynow.org/2006/2/14/fmr_…
Read 12 tweets
Oct 2, 2023
The mandatory reference to Munich and reductio at Chamberlain in foreign policy discussions is not just stupid because a comparison with the crisis over Czechoslovakia in 1938 almost never makes sense, but also because people have a very dumb understanding of that crisis.
It's not that blaming European statesmen at the time is not appropriate, there is plenty of blame to go around in that episode, but people are always very selective in who they blame and thinking about the crisis primarily in moral terms prevents them from truly understanding it.
Maybe I'll write about this eventually, but in my opinion, it's less a story about courage/lucidity vs. weakness/cluelessness than a story about collective action problems between European states created by divergent interests, ideological differences and domestic politics.
Read 7 tweets
Sep 29, 2023
This stuff only saves lives *given current incentives*, but it affects incentives by making it more rational for people to get on those boats. If you want to save lives, as opposed to virtue signal, you should either lift restrictions on immigration or do what Australia does.
Of course, the German Foreign Office isn't going to advocate lifting restrictions on immigration if only because it knows that's politically impossible, but it also doesn't want to push for Australia's solution for ideological reasons, so instead it virtue signals on Twitter 🤷‍♂️
For obvious reasons, nothing of the sort will ever be done, but this is exactly what happened in Australia and there is no reason to think it would be any different in the Mediterranean. The midwits who lecture everyone about ethics are killing people.
Image
Read 27 tweets
Jul 13, 2023
In today's episode of "selection is everywhere", many people claim based on observational studies that naturalization improves the integration of immigrants, but this study based on a random lottery finds no effect on either economic and non-economic dimensions of integration 🧵


Image
Image
Image
Image
The study finds no effect whether the effect is defined as intention-to-treat (ITT) or local average treatment effect (LATE), which are both potentially of interest depending on the question you're interested in.
The ITT effect is the effect of winning the lottery and receiving a fee voucher to apply for citizenship, whether or not the person actually applies and gets it. It tells you how much facilitating naturalization (without changing eligibility criteria) will improve integration.
Read 9 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(