Some have interpreted this tweet to mean I didn’t think a genetically engineered #OriginOfCovid was possible last year. I did think it was possible & interesting, but not worth pursuing as a top priority.
Now I believe it has to be treated as a top priority for inquiry.
Now I believe it has to be treated as a top priority for inquiry.
https://twitter.com/Ayjchan/status/1452634561767165962
Importantly, even if SARS2 was genetically modified, it doesn’t mean that it was a bioweapon or intended as dual-use.
My reading of the Defuse proposal is that the scientists were genuinely curious and wanted to study rare cleavage sites in SARSrCoVs.
drasticresearch.files.wordpress.com/2021/09/main-d…
My reading of the Defuse proposal is that the scientists were genuinely curious and wanted to study rare cleavage sites in SARSrCoVs.
drasticresearch.files.wordpress.com/2021/09/main-d…
With literally 2020 hindsight, we now know inserting novel cleavage sites into novel SARS-like viruses is a terrible terrible idea. But back in 2018, scientists might not have grasped the risks.
So EcoHealth was given till yesterday to send any unpublished data under just the NIH award to the NIH.
Did they actually send anything to NIH?
And will NIH make all of it public? When should we expect this to happen?
Did they actually send anything to NIH?
And will NIH make all of it public? When should we expect this to happen?
https://twitter.com/TheSeeker268/status/1450938549721710593
More importantly, can we see the exchanges between EcoHealth and its subcontractors on cleavage site insertion? These may or may not have been funded by specific awards but can tell us a lot about how Covid-19 might have emerged in Wuhan.
Is anyone in leadership asking for these communications?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
