I want to help people understand exactly what happened with these early Covid-19 sequences that were wiped off US-based and even China-based databases.
This was described in @jbloom_lab's recent preprint, which he updated with an actual email exchange between the authors & NCBI.
Neither one mentions the data that the authors had submitted to NCBI, a US-based public database that anyone can access internationally without a login or being IP-tracked.
So how in the world did Dr Bloom find the data?
This is honestly quite an indirect path and I don't think I would've been able to trace it.
But Bloom persisted and managed to salvage the data from Google Cloud...
"After I e-mailed the NIH the original version of this manuscript, they sent me the e-mails requesting deletion of the data"
In mid June, just before the paper was published, presumably it had been accepted... the authors asked the database to wipe it.
I know some very strange scientists are saying this **** is normal. No, it's not. I challenge you to find another email from authors asking NCBI to wipe their data just before their paper is published.
The paper by these authors even repeatedly uses sequences from the database that they asked their data to be wiped from. GenBank is mentioned 3x.
The authors understand how modern day scientific analysis works.
"sequences of SARS-related viruses available at GenBank were downloaded"
"complete and partial gene sequences available in GenBank through November 1, 2019, were downloaded"
"collected all complete and partial target gene sequences for these viruses available in GenBank"
Please don't give me any BS that these scientists didn't understand the consequences of wiping their data off GenBank.
Bloom had done due diligence - checking all databases accessible to him and reaching out to the authors for comment. Journalists also reached out to the authors.
No response.
No explanation for why they would wipe early Covid-19 data off databases where it would be visible.
And @TheSeeker268 joined in and searched for the sequences in Chinese databases... they had also been deleted around the same time.
Contrary to what the authors told NCBI - that they had uploaded an updated version to another website (which one!?) - their data had been deleted off not only the international US-based database, but also the China-based database.
I would like to see all the emails that have been sent to NCBI since September 2019 asking for changes in the embargo and modification/deletion of data.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"[Baric] wants to know what barriers were in place to keep a pathogen from slipping out into Wuhan’s population of 13 million, and possibly to the world."
@rowanjacobsen@techreview I would like to remind how incredibly difficult it was to even raise the -possibility- much less the plausibility of a lab leak one year ago.
Today many experts are saying that they always said a lab leak was possible and should be investigated. When? Where?
@rowanjacobsen@techreview In my view, the "consensus" has only recently (May 2021) become reasonable. That a large portion of scientists and journalists are finally saying "Of course we need to investigate all possible scenarios, including a lab leak!"
Timely article by @Schwartzesque on risky pathogen research.
I think the point that almost everyone can agree on is that the current framework+process for assessing potential pandemic pathogen work has to be completely revamped. businessinsider.com/covid-pandemic…
Now that more scientists are becoming able to process that Covid-19 might've (regardless of how likely) emerged due to research activities, it's time to transparently create a new set of functional review processes with non-scientist and international stakeholders.
US intelligence should really release what they know and put to bed all the confusion once and for all.
Were there WIV staffers sick with Covid symptoms in Nov 2019? Did one of their wives die? Or is this intelligence not solid? bloomberg.com/news/features/…
Dr Anderson was a visiting foreign scientist at WIV up to Nov 2019.
To the people on twitter mad that @antonioregalado wrote a profile of me: I'm not asking anyone to do profiles of me. People around me consistently advise me not to agree to interviews and especially profiles because you have no idea what journalists are going to quote/write.
Journalists don't show you the piece before it is published. You can't tell them what to write or how to frame your quotes. I've gotten in trouble again & again.
Even up to the day before the profile was published, I was still worried that I would be portrayed as a conspiracist.
Thankfully that didn't happen. @antonioregalado was objective. He didn't let me get away with anything in the interrogation & got lots of quotes from scientists who disagree with me (scientifically &/or personally). The profile made me think about my missteps & how to do better.
This might be the most extensive article written in support of natural origins of Covid-19 that I've seen. I think this was an incredibly well-written piece @factcheckdotorg@jjmcdona with well-rounded quotes from respected experts in the field. factcheck.org/2021/06/sciche…
@factcheckdotorg@jjmcdona If I can summarize the top 3 points for natural origins, it would be these, according to the article and interviews with experts:
(1) There is no direct evidence of a lab accident or SARS2 having existed in a lab. Instead, we have observed SARS2-like viruses in nature.
(2) An early cluster of Covid-19 in Wuhan was based at a live animal market. The vendors might’ve hidden their illegal animals when they heard there was an outbreak. China has not tested enough animals to find the animal source of the outbreak.