3. Peter Gutierrez points out in his response that 4 of the authors of “The Origins of SARS-CoV-2: A Critical Review”, also wrote “Proximal Origin of SARS-COV-2”.
4. As to be expected, Sydney University and its iconic virologist, Eddie Holmes, who is "not available for interview", are crowing over this biased review sydney.edu.au/news-opinion/n…
This review contains elementary errors as exposed here: 1.
I guess it was his way of admitting he was wrong about N501Y?
Again Prof Neil, one of the authors of the review continues to embarrass himself. I am starting to think that the flawed N501 claim was actually written by him.
"During initial stages of a forensic investigation of Wuhan Labs, all 4 evaluation tools including Grunow & Finke's epidemiological assessment criteria would be useful adjuncts to the investigation framework of Pilch et al."
"The Radosavljevic–Belojevic method for outbreak scoring & differentiation shows that official assumptions of its natural origin is questionable & highlights the probability that the pathogen was "accidentally" introduced to humans"
@tgof137 @Rebecca21951651 @_everythingism @AtomsksSanakan @CallumJCParr @jhas5 1. It is best to do your own reading & consult the research of others, such as #DRASTIC, who published all the most accurate details on labs, locations, engineering flaws, viral databases, field sampling of bats, lack of proper biosafety, etc. years ago: