Thread by @Ayjchan

“Scientists have little insight into where and how the virus emerged, in part because Beijing has delayed an independent investigation into the animal origins of the outbreak.”

“There’s no serious discussion on what actually went wrong.” nytimes.com/2020/12/30/wor…

I feel like questions about bad science or bad scientific reporting often come down to the simple question of how much was due to honest error vs misconduct.

For me, these were the most interesting points in the @nytimes article on the early events of covid emergence in Wuhan.

Dec 30 "(Wuhan) authorities ordered hospitals to report.. cases. By policy, the hospitals should have also reported them directly to the national C.D.C... They didn’t."

Dr. Gao (China CDC) "when asked about how he learned about the Wuhan cases.. Everyone saw it on the internet.”

"Despite the restrictions, scientists kept talking across borders. Prof. Stanley Perlman texted a Chinese colleague on Jan. 4 about rumors of a new coronavirus.. was swiftly told to switch to an encrypted phone app."

I keep saying there's a lot of early days info outside China.

"Jan. 8, the head of the Chinese (CDC).. became emotional after acknowledging that danger (human-to-human transmission) during a call with his American counterpart (Dr. Redfield).. Yet neither.. each constrained by politics, signaled a public alarm."
nytimes.com/2020/12/30/wor…

Mid Jan, a person "tested positive after entering the hospital on Jan. 14 — one who had never gone to Wuhan."

Jan 19 "Dr. Zhong’s trip to Wuhan.. already knew the virus was spreading between people; his real purpose was to break the logjam in China’s opaque system of government"

This story really makes you wonder what was known, who knew, and when.

Why were whistleblowers silenced? Why did so many people (local & international scientists, doctors, CDC heads) not say something publicly?

What is the hopefully improved plan for the next outbreak/pandemic?

I know many people, especially scientists, don't want to voice doubts/fears publicly because they'll be mocked as fearmongers, causing panic, fueling conspiracy theories or worsening international tensions. But this can result in everyone waiting for someone else to say it first.

If enough experts pass on communicating an inconvenient truth or uncertainty - or, worse, pretend that they know something to make the public feel more reassured - then, eventually someone less ideal (less informed, less integrity, less well-intentioned) will take on the task.

One year after the outbreak, Wuhan, a metropolitan city of 11M people, still has no idea how this virus emerged out of nowhere last year.

Was it a once in a century freak accident? Or is there a real, near future, spillover risk in Wuhan that we should be addressing globally?