Thread by @Ayjchan

This is a good piece that communicates some of the major misunderstandings held by scientists and experts exploring the origins of SARS2 / COVID-19.

https://twitter.com/betswrites/status/1366359312185122819

The first major misunderstanding:

Some experts keep saying it took a decade to confirm that SARS1 came from bats.

But in 2003 and 2004, the animal sources of SARS1 were found within 2 months and 1 week, respectively.

https://twitter.com/ayjchan/status/1365297968044273666

So I think these top experts studying the origins are very very confused.

They’re looking for the ancestral origins of SARS2 in bats.

But finding the proximal origins of the virus shouldn’t take a decade.

Unfortunately, it looks like China was not interested in following up to identify these proximal origins of SARS2, whether by intermediate host, by a person travelling from South China (SARS spillover zone and location of closest SARS2-like viruses) or research-related incident.

https://twitter.com/ayjchan/status/1365421589328707585

The 2nd major misunderstanding:

“Viruses related to SARS2 exist in nature so SARS2 must have natural origins.”

This misses the point that we don’t know how the virus, which has a natural ANCESTRAL origin, emerged in Wuhan.

See picture of Wuhan: images.app.goo.gl/dRD8emb7REv134…

Between the ancestral natural version of SARS2 and the SARS2 we see today- we don’t know what transpired.

We don’t know if it passed through an illegally trafficked animal.

We don’t know if it was sampled from an animal or human by a lab. If it was studied and maybe edited.

We could keep sampling animals (bats) and maybe one day find a closer SARS2 match than the viruses in Yunnan, China.

But it is unclear whether this process will

1. discover another SARS virus with an FCS insertion or

2. reveal how SARS2 traveled 1000 miles to Wuhan.

The 3rd major misunderstanding:

“If SARS2 leaked from a lab, wouldn’t the (Wuhan) lab have published its precursors or admitted to their accident by now?”

This perspective imo reflects a lack of understanding of how things work in academia and in China.

Even if SARS2 leaked from a lab and the lab personnel wanted to confess, I don’t think that option is on the table without very severe penalties for the person and their families and colleagues in China.

As it is a citizen journalist is tortured and sentenced to 4 years prison.

https://twitter.com/ayjchan/status/1343546493643485184

The suggestion that a scientist who knows what happened could just submit a letter to a top journal... is laughable.

You think their emails and activities aren’t being watched? That they can trust an editor (at a journal potentially with Chinese $ interests) not to turn them in?

https://twitter.com/Ayjchan/status/1306398565363744772

Does anyone know what happened to Botao Xiao and Lei Xiao, the husband and wife scientists in Wuhan who published a preprint letter in Feb 2020, saying that the virus could’ve come from a Wuhan lab? washingtonpost.com/opinions/globa…

The last major misunderstanding I want to address in this thread:

“Lab origin proponents believe SARS2 was made using RaTG13.”

This is a straw man imo. Most scientists who are asking for an investigation of lab origins are not suggesting that RaTG13 was transformed into SARS2.

I hope this can guide journalists in trying to understand what a virus leaked from a lab might look like:

https://twitter.com/Ayjchan/status/1363523344012828673

A few non-scientist lab origin proponents have rushed to claim that RaTG13 is the “smoking gun” backbone of Sars2. This is so obviously incorrect that it gives natural origins proponents (scientists) the opportunity to call out their opponents’ lack of scientific training.

This focus on RaTG13 as a backbone distracts from actual issues with RaTG13: WIV was not forthcoming with its sample history, when it was sequenced, and its link to miners who sickened with a SARS-like pneumonia in 2012; these cases were followed up by top pathogen labs in China.

It also distracts from the fact that the WIV took their massive wildlife pathogen database offline and altered the data in it shortly after covid emerged in Wuhan - the data describing more than 22,000 pathogen samples collected across China over the years.

@TheJohnSudworth @BBC had asked Dr Shi ZL at the WIV about this database and why it was taken down. Shi said it was for security reasons.

@lemondefr confirmed that the database used to exist online but was taken down.

https://twitter.com/ayjchan/status/1341392762063695873

The @WSJ article by @betswrites points out that the @WHO convened team could not properly look into lab origins hypotheses because they were not given access to lab records and databases.

I think it is very important to access the WIV database and see what was altered and when.

The missing database(s) were also covered by the @washingtonpost editorial board, which presumably got in touch with the DRASTIC internet sleuths. washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/…

It also sounds like there is possibly intelligence about the database that could be useful if declassified.