“Even the headline on The Lancet article — Science, not speculation, is essential to determine how SARS-CoV-2 reached humans — seems designed to gaslight their critics, given their previous stance.”
By @ianbirrell unherd.com/thepost/why-wo…
By @ianbirrell unherd.com/thepost/why-wo…
@ianbirrell 1st Lancet letter:
"We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin"
2nd Lancet letter:
"intent of our original Correspondence was to express our working view that SARS-CoV-2 most likely originated in nature"
"We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin"
2nd Lancet letter:
"intent of our original Correspondence was to express our working view that SARS-CoV-2 most likely originated in nature"
@ianbirrell 1st L:
"Scientists.. overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.. supported by a letter from the presidents of the US NASEM"
2nd L:
"We believe the strongest clue from new, credible, and peer-reviewed evidence.. is that the virus evolved in nature"
"Scientists.. overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife.. supported by a letter from the presidents of the US NASEM"
2nd L:
"We believe the strongest clue from new, credible, and peer-reviewed evidence.. is that the virus evolved in nature"
1st L:
"Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration"
2nd L:
"Recrimination has not, and will not, encourage international cooperation and collaboration"
"Conspiracy theories do nothing but create fear, rumours, and prejudice that jeopardise our global collaboration"
2nd L:
"Recrimination has not, and will not, encourage international cooperation and collaboration"
Last one.
1st L:
"We declare no competing interests."
2nd L:
1st L:
"We declare no competing interests."
2nd L:
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
