Thread by @AntGDuarte

@gsgs2 @franciscodeasis @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @nature @edwardcholmes @arambaut @angie_rasmussen @K_G_Andersen Questions/hypotheses about SARS-CoV-2 origin mustn't distract us from established facts. Sequential recap:

1/ A bat-derived coronavirus (CoV) starts an outbreak near a bat CoV research center, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV)
2/ WIV's virus database is noticed to be offline

@gsgs2 @franciscodeasis @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @nature @edwardcholmes @arambaut @angie_rasmussen @K_G_Andersen 3/ In a February 2020 paper, WIV admits having possession (since 2013) of one close relative of the outbreak virus, but fails to cite its own 2016 paper where it had been published as RaBtCoV/4991

@gsgs2 @franciscodeasis @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @nature @edwardcholmes @arambaut @angie_rasmussen @K_G_Andersen 4/ They rename this close relative RaTG13; omit the original name & accession; publish a full genome, but only partial raw data; & imply they had recently sequenced it
5/ An anti-lab origin campaign starts immediately, orchestrated by WIV research associates EcoHealth Alliance

@gsgs2 @franciscodeasis @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @nature @edwardcholmes @arambaut @angie_rasmussen @K_G_Andersen 6/ A Masters thesis shows that RaTG13 was collected in a mine where in 2012 a group of miners had caught a deadly SARS-like pneumonia
7/ That thesis (since scrubbed from CNKI) details the clinical presentation of miners cases: they're indistinguishable from what we now call Covid

@gsgs2 @franciscodeasis @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @nature @edwardcholmes @arambaut @angie_rasmussen @K_G_Andersen 8/ WIV publishes further raw data (amplicons) with respect to RaTG13; file names suggest sequencing was done long before the Wuhan outbreak, in 2017-2018

9/ WIV admits RaTG13 sequencing was actually done in 2018

@gsgs2 @franciscodeasis @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @nature @edwardcholmes @arambaut @angie_rasmussen @K_G_Andersen 10/ WIV publishes an addendum to its February 2020 paper: yes, RaTG13 comes from the mine linked to the 2012 Covid-like outbreak

11/ The addendum additionally confirms that WIV scientists collected 8 other related SARS-like CoVs from bats in the same mine

@gsgs2 @franciscodeasis @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @nature @edwardcholmes @arambaut @angie_rasmussen @K_G_Andersen 12/ That is, WIV scientists worked on an unpublished group of bat SARS-related CoVs between 2013 and the start of the Wuhan outbreak

13/ The addendum also says that in 2012 WIV scientists received & tested blood samples from the sick miners, that were allegedly negative for CoVs

@gsgs2 @franciscodeasis @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @nature @edwardcholmes @arambaut @angie_rasmussen @K_G_Andersen 14/ The addendum reports that the 2012 miners blood samples were retested for SARS-CoV-2 with negative results

15/ These *facts* call into serious question one of the main arguments against a lab scenario: that no SARS-2-like viruses existed at the WIV before the Wuhan outbreak

@gsgs2 @franciscodeasis @Rossana38510044 @jhouse678 @nature @edwardcholmes @arambaut @angie_rasmussen @K_G_Andersen 16/End

Is it possible that all these facts & events, while true & incontrovertible, are only unrelated coincidences?

Logic and probabilities are inexorable, and there is no escaping the facts: the probability of a lab scenario is closer and closer to 1.