Thread by @dakekang

@macroliter Well, it’s messy and complicated. As far as we can tell, there was an initial period when there was definitely surpression of info and warnings on signs of h2h transmission at the Wuhan govt level, and by mid Jan, at the central level as well...

@macroliter for the samples, there was an order Jan 3 to destroy them or send them to certified govt labs. I think this included at least three: China CDC, China Academy of Medical Sciences, Chinese Academy of Military Medical Sciences

@macroliter was this a cover up? maybe not. maybe just done for biohazard safety reasons. but it’s pretty clear sometime in early to mid Jan that a bunch of labs are starting to obtain sequences, but it isn’t being published. not clear why and official narrative on why has gaping holes

@macroliter it could have been a central order, or it could have been petty infighting between different govt departments or groups of scientists competing for credit. it’s not clear.

@macroliter but anyways, on Jan 5 Zhang Yongzhen uploads the first sequences to NiH database. Why? well, you could say because he was a whistleblower. what complicates that narrative, though, is that he put an embargo on the sequences and they weren’t published until Jan 11

@macroliter in interviews after it’s pretty clear he is proud of being the first to publish the sequence and he points to its uploading on Jan 5 as proof. This is a way of claiming credit, and since it was uploaded to NiH it can’t be tampered with by rivals in the Chinese system...

@macroliter at the time it’s unlikely central authorities were paying attention to minutiae like uploading of sequences. top leaders problably didn’t even know the significance of sequencing etc at the time. there likely wouldn’t be a order specifically aimed at barring sequence publication

@macroliter so that gives scientists like Zhang leeway to do things like upload sequences to NiH. while it was a bold move - and clearly unsanctioned - it’s enough of a grey area at the time that he’s willing to gamble. whether it was for taking credit - or out of altruism - only he knows...

@macroliter but Zhang is also part of the system and he has his backers high up in the Chinese government, which again gives him some leeway. and I’m pretty sure there were high health officials who agreed that info needed to go out asap. again, point in favor of taking the gamble

@macroliter at the same time because of the sensitivities, centralized power, and the narrowing space for open discussion in the chinese political sphere these days, decisions can get stuck more often, as lower level folks tend to wait for explicit blessing from the top

@macroliter that probably explains a lot of the mysterious gaps and delays in info release, warnings etc. but that doesn’t mean there isn’t disagreement. there’s tons! lots of heated debate and infighting in those days. but most of it is hidden from public view...

@macroliter Outside institutions like the NiH (or foreign media) are occasionally used as a method of last resort for people who are trying to get info out and use it as leverage against rivals or enemies inside the Chinese system. I think the NiH uploading can likely be read in that context

@macroliter anyways I think this is all totally separate from the other question about later restrictions on COVID-19 research. after the floodgates opened in Jan 20 there was tons of research on the virus and things were relatively open and free, both scientists and media...

@macroliter that’s another pattern in China. following a major disaster, the top leadership wants to know everything that is going on, including what their subordinates are hiding from them. so censorship controls tend to relax so that all this info can come out in the open

@macroliter that’s why there was such incredible reporting from Chinese outlets like Caixin, why the central govt warned that local officials who hide info would be “nailed on the cross or history” (or something to that effect), etc. and Xi openly called for origins tracing research

@macroliter but then as public anger builds in Feb - especially Li Wenliang’s death - and then with the spread of the virus across the globe - and as the govt feels it has a better grasp on the situation - the incentives change. they swing back towards opacity and control, not transparency

@macroliter so then suddenly outlets start getting censored. in the media, pieces like “the whistlegiver” (发哨子的人）, which could have been published earlier in the outbreak, get censored. and then we get the govt orders restraining COVID-19 research

@macroliter and then the presses fall silent. the Party figures out its lines, and the govt narrative takes full control. and here we are today.

@macroliter let’s not forget that it was originally Chinese (!!) scientists who first proposed the lab leak theory publicly, in a preprint in Feb. why? because at the time, open discussion on the virus was being tacitly encouraged, so that the central govt could get a handle on things

@macroliter then after the new controls set in in March, all these theories and discussion and research suddenly grind to a halt, and stuff starts getting withdrawn

@macroliter the suppression of information at the central level is a fact, not a conspiracy theory. BUT - whether or not this is proof of a grander conspiracy involving a lab is... well, totally unproven atm. Beijing supresses info all the time, it’s routine, and we can’t read intent into it