Nicholas Wade’s 2nd piece on #OriginsOfCovid

We really need a detailed, non-redacted explanation of what happened at that Feb 1, 2020 meeting among top international scientists.

thebulletin.org/2021/08/how-co…
I laid out the timeline by which top expert opinions had changed within 3 days of the Feb 1 call.

We know even after the call, several still thought a lab leak more likely and one feared he would be the scientist to break it to the world that the virus had come from a lab.
It wasn’t the result of even 2 weeks of new data and revision, it was just 3 days.
Even during the period when they all strongly thought the virus had come from a lab, one of the experts was telling the public that an intermediate host would soon be found.
We saw something similar happening with a different group of virologists.

In private, sharing fears of a lab origin.

In public, writing letters to debunk the lab leak hypothesis.

One year later, deleting their tweets and Twitter accounts.
In view of the US intelligence report coming next week, it might not be such a bad idea for scientists (not just virologists) to publicly express a more moderate viewpoint on the #OriginsOfCovid instead of insisting that the evidence points strongly in favor of natural spillover.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Alina Chan

Alina Chan Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Ayjchan

10 Sep
Thorough analysis by ⁦@theintercept⁩ ⁦@fastlerner⁩ ⁦@MaraHvistendahl⁩ ⁦@maiahibbett

“The real question is whether or not research has the potential to create or facilitate the selection of viruses that might infect humans.” theintercept.com/2021/09/09/cov…
“All but two of the scientists consulted agreed that, whatever title it is given, the newly public experiment raised serious concerns about the safety and oversight of federally funded research.”
Although the study describing 4991/RaTG13 for the first time and Latinne et al.’s paper were described as having been funded by the EHA grant, I didn’t see even a glimpse of the 9 Mojiang mine SARSrCoVs throughout the 900+ pages of text, phylogenetic trees and other figures.
Read 4 tweets
7 Sep
"More than 900 pages of materials related to US.-funded coronavirus research in China were released following a FOIA lawsuit by The Intercept."

Piping hot piece by @fastlerner and @MaraHvistendahl @theintercept
theintercept.com/2021/09/06/new…
@fastlerner @MaraHvistendahl @theintercept “they actually point out that they know how risky this work is. They keep talking about people potentially getting bitten—and they kept records of everyone who got bitten. Does EcoHealth have those records? And if not, how can they possibly rule out a research-related accident?”
Read 5 tweets
7 Sep
On the new US pandemic preparedness plan...

One of the goals is to: Prevent laboratory accidents and deter bioweapons development.

whitehouse.gov/wp-content/upl…
"There are compelling reasons to expect that the frequency [of outbreaks] will increase.. laboratories around the world handling dangerous pathogens is growing in part as a response to increasing pandemic risk, boosting the likelihood that a contagious pathogen could be released"
The old ways by which infectious diseases emerge have not suddenly disappeared. As the plan notes, there are now increased zoonotic transmissions from animals driven by human population growth, climate change & habitat loss.

But there are also new ways: lab release, bioweapons.
Read 7 tweets
5 Sep
Going up against experts who believe in a natural origin is tough because their field expertise & seniority are often enough to convince non-scientists of a particular argument.

Many who can’t understand the science put their trust in established experts. This is reasonable.
But what’s even tougher is dealing with the small anti-science crowd that believes in a lab origin and is out to get scientists. As a result even true experts who want an investigation of lab origins are painted with a broad brush as unscientific or even responsible for violence.
If you see anonymous people attacking scientists, regardless of which side, I urge you to ask them to stop or report them. These attacks distract from the scientific issue at hand and make it more difficult to hold scientists and leaders accountable.
Read 10 tweets
4 Sep
“Altos is luring university professors by offering sports-star salaries of $1 million a year or more, plus equity, as well as freedom from the hassle of applying for grants.”

This is a dream scenario for many scientists. technologyreview.com/2021/09/04/103…
If there’s this much money, please set up a department to reproduce key works in the aging field.

If you quickly show which research are reproducible, you will move the whole field forward by decades. That’s a guaranteed way to save scientists from wasting time chasing deadends.
Non-scientists have no idea how much 🧠⏳💸 (100s of mil) are wasted, redundantly, by scientists worldwide each trying to reproduce top publications.

I can’t think of a surer way to accelerate science than to rapidly reveal which studies are reproducible.
vox.com/future-perfect…
Read 5 tweets
3 Sep
Using covidcg.org to keep tabs on the Delta sublineages in North America.

Orange is AY.4, light blue is AY.3, pink is AY.12, dark blue is AY.25.
This is the cumulative % of sequences that are AY.4 in each country in North America over time (past 3 months). Visualized using the Compare Locations feature on covidcg.org
Similar plots for other Delta sublineages here:
Read 4 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(