Breeding means successful births in cages and from which a new generation of bats is obtained that is itself ready to reproduce.
But we also know that Shi Zhengli had been keeping bats for experiments since at least 2009. bit.ly/2ZvIOrt
Some rather odd wording:
"During this spring festival the students are back home on holiday, [so] teacher Shi **silently** assumed the task of raising bats. ** For this reason, a lot of people do not know about this until now. **"
Thanks to the OSINT specialist who shared this.
But some well respected people obviously know better - they must live in a parallel world though:
Post WHO conference, let's remember that paper published on the Saturday 22nd Feb by a very unlikely team lead by conservation biologists from Yunnan on a Chinese preprint site, that:
(1) systematically rejected the wet-market hypothesis based on a careful analysis of available
sequences to that date
(2) tried to unravel the evolutionary links between the novel coronavirus and RaTG13
(3) complained about not enough sequences of early cases being published
(4) clearly stated that the breakout may have started in November
Then it gets interesting: about a year after the miners death, Olival & Epstein from EcoHealth Alliance co-authored a paper about the coronavirus risk infection from bat guano collection.
"Yes, lab accidents do happen around the world [--]. The fact that several laboratories of relevance are in and around Wuhan, and are working with coronavirus, is another fact. ***Beyond that we didn't have much in terms of looking at that hypothesis as a likely option. ***"
That's a weird statement. It cannot justify in any way declaring during the conference that the lab-related pathway was off the table.
It is patently clear that China has to kill it then and there, especially given the retained approach of continuously updating their assessments
Here is my summary of the Silent Numbers: the creeping numbers of semi-official 2019 cases and the related leaks (which we are now starting to match).
It was updated for the disclosure of 174 confirmed cases.
I also list some ham-fisted attempts at manipulating the data.
A direct link to the (draft spreadsheet) is here: bit.ly/2OyytJ4
A previous thread on the absurdities in the data is here:
The CNN count (~200) and even the SCMP count (~300+) are actually very plausible. That would mean min 250 to 300 conf cases with onset in 2019 (taking some from the 1st Jan 20 which is artificially bumped up), with some Nov cases and possibly late Oct cases.
But more importantly, there are at least 3 levels of information feeding into each other:
First that rushed data collection likely feeds into official national database of cases managed by Pr. Yu Chuanhua and his team. (Pr. Yu Chuanhua has strong links to the PLA).