“After inspection of the WIV biosafety laboratory, the WHO–China joint expert group also concluded that the introduction of SARS-CoV-2 through a laboratory incident was “extremely unlikely””
“as mentioned in the phase 1 joint report of the WHO-convened global study of origins of SARS-CoV-2, internal audit is a better alternative for all high-level biosafety laboratories worldwide to further exclude the “laboratory incident” hypothesis.”
“SARS-CoV-2 could plausibly spread across regions through cold-chain transmission and raise questions as to whether the location in which the virus was first reported was necessarily the site of its origin”
“retrospective sampling and testing should be performed to trace the origin of cold-chain imports”
“Chinese scientists and medical workers have always kept an open and cooperative attitude, working vigorously with the international scientific community in all aspects and offering unreserved accurate data”
“… immediately shared the whole genome sequence of the virus with the rest of the world”
I’m sure the bravest people were the scientists, doctors, journalists and sleuths in China who risked and gave their lives to share important information about the virus with their communities and the world.
@TheLancet is doing these true heroes a disservice with this letter.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Dear @NSAGov I've just google searched several human transmissible viruses with the aim of understanding how many are not governed by the Federal Select Agents Program and can be used in gain-of-function research by privately funded groups.
I am not doing anything nefarious 🙏
@NSAGov The answer is there are a lot of human transmissible viruses that are not governed by the Federal Select Agents Program and can be used in gain-of-function research by privately funded groups.
@NSAGov Novel SARS-like and MERS-like viruses are not select agents. Meaning scientists in the US can bring these to their labs in major cities and enhance them without informing the authorities.
Leading science organizations and journals appear to be utterly tone deaf.
Up till last month, the National Academies kept Peter Daszak of EcoHealth Alliance as head of their forum on microbial threats. Nature journal continues to play the mouthpiece of the Proximal Origin authors & friends.
There appears to be zero introspection that they created/are part of a system that incentivizes risky research including the work in Wuhan that likely caused the pandemic.
Just this month, another top journal published 2 studies where MERS-like viruses were used in human cell infection studies at low biosafety (BSL-2) in Wuhan. The journal did not attach notices of concern to either paper.
Are we just waiting for another outbreak of ambiguous origin to occur? And will we endure more years of "it was the pangolins/bats/raccoon dogs/name your favorite intermediate host?"
@CellCellPress when you publish papers that handle animal pathogens with unclear (human) pandemic potential at low biosafety, you signal to the rest of the scientific community that this is totally fine and will be celebrated in the best scientific journals.
@CellCellPress At the very least, there should be a note of concern. For example, pointing out that the human pathogen MERS coronavirus has a ~30% fatality rate and, in the US, has to be handled at BSL-3. And that researchers should take extra precaution when handling its close relatives.
When the SARS-CoV-2 sequence was released in Jan 2020, EcoHealth could've said
1⃣They planned to put furin cleavage sites in SARS-like viruses
2⃣In 2013, the Wuhan lab discovered a new lineage of SARS-like viruses that the covid virus belongs to
3⃣Work was done at low biosafety
Instead we had to go through 5 years of the lab leak hypothesis being painted as a racist, anti-science conspiracy theory and a ton of misinformation from EcoHealth about the work being done in Wuhan.
No punches pulled piece on #OriginOfCovid by @ianbirrell
"The pandemic revealed the arrogant and contemptuous behaviour of leading scientific figures, aided by prominent academic journals, patsy journalists and weak politicians." unherd.com/2025/01/chinas…
@ianbirrell I suggest one correction @ianbirrell please replace 'despite' with 'because of':
WHO "hired Sir Jeremy Farrar, despite the former Wellcome Trust boss’s exposure as a central player in... branding any suggestions Covid could have come from a laboratory as conspiracy theory."
@ianbirrell On Feb 19, 2020, the authors of Proximal Origin realized that Jeremy Farrar - who had convened them and led their efforts - had signed the Lancet letter by Daszak condemning all lab #OriginOfCovid as conspiracy theories.
5 years ago, the authors of Proximal Origin wondered where the pandemic virus had been transmitting *intensely* so that it gained a furin cleavage site and passed it on.
One said, "No way the selection could occur in the market. Too low a density of mammals." #OriginOfCovid
Until today, there has been no reported sign of intense transmission of the virus in animals prior to the detected outbreak in Wuhan.
Investigators, including one Proximal Origin author, searched fur farms in China - no sign of any SARS-like virus. nature.com/articles/s4158…
On the other hand, a 2018 research proposal surfaced, showing Wuhan and US scientists with a plan to insert novel furin cleavage sites into novel SARS-like viruses. theintercept.com/2021/09/23/cor…
"5% chance that H5N1 starts a sustained pandemic in humans in the next year. 50% chance that H5N1 starts a sustained pandemic in humans in the next twenty years..."
@slatestarcodex In addition, under the new US gov policy on research that enhances the pandemic potential of pathogens, it will be the funding recipient (not the funder) who is responsible for flagging their own federally funded projects for review. liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.108…