We are clearly at a turning point in trying to understand the origins of this pandemic, and it’s good to see the “mainstream” media taking a serious interest. One remarkable thing: The almost complete absence (so far) of mainstream science journalists from any serious…
Investigations. Everything we know about what research was being done in Wuhan, what discussions were going on between Fauci/Collins/Farrar and the scientists they chose to talk to, the involvement of EcoHealth Alliance and the Baric lab, come from independent/alternative…
Publications/journalists/investigators. Few to none of the big names in science journalism, including those covering the pandemic, have done ANY serious investigative work beyond talking to scientists they gravitate towards and writing down what they say. A remarkable fail…
Perhaps that will now change, and @ScienceMagazine, @nature, @sciam and other publications with enough resources to do investigative reporting will now abandon the ideological blinders that have caused them to be MIA in this reporting effort, although I’m not holding…
My breath (and no, puff pieces about Shi Zhengli do not count as investigative reporting, much as they are loved by science writers because they fit into a preconceived notion of how the pandemic began.) #journalism#media#COVID19
One of the most idiotic ideological filters applied by generally politically liberal science journalists is that since right-wingers, including Republicans in Congress, have jumped on the lab leak hypothesis, it must be some crazy “conspiracy theory.” But…
The political right, including many right-leaning publications, have stepped in to fill a vacuum left by the ideological biases of reporters and editors who really should know better. The mainstream media knows better than to ignore the Congressional investigations…
Getting underway just because they are now led by Republicans. And there is nothing stopping Democrats from getting involved in them. Actually, I think they will, especially now that the lab origins hypothesis has gone mainstream in the mainstream media as a permissible…
Topic if inquiry and discussion, despite attempts to suppress any discussion by ideologically driven journalists and scientists. Let the chips fall where they may…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Lab Leak Most Likely Origin of Covid-19 Pandemic, U.S. Agency Now Says - [Dept Energy. It’s time for the gaslighting to stop and the serious investigation to begin. The evidence for zoonotic transfer is weak and data-poor despite the claims] wsj.com/articles/covid…
2/ While WSJ editorial pages are a bastion of reactionary opinion, the news staff is among the best, brightest, most serious in the country. That’s because capitalists need reliable information not propaganda, and why many leftists read WSJ too. So no bullshit/gaslighting.
3/ When the State Dept reported U.S. intel that lab workers in Wuhan had gotten sick with a pneumonia-like illness in fall 2019, perhaps they knew what they were talking about. 2017-2021.state.gov/fact-sheet-act…
1/ Let’s say the Covid pandemic did begin with two zoonotic transfers at the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan, as natural origins proponents insist. That would mean the $120 million USAID PREDICT project and the multi-million dollar EcoHealth Alliance projects—in which…
2/ the Wuhan Inst of Virology and China’s CDC were full partners—failed to catch not one but two spillovers in a market very near the WIV and the Wuhan branch of the CDC. Why? Researchers knew from SARS-1 that large markets where wildlife are sold were high-risk areas…
3/ Which in fact was part of the reason all that money was being spent in China (including more than $600K from NIH to WIV for pandemic prevention research.) How is that less insulting or racist to China than the lab leak hypothesis? Especially when one factors in…
Interesting about the book “Viral” by @Ayjchan and @mattwridley. Although the authors have increasingly leaned towards a lab origin, they have a keen knowledge/understanding of the arguments on the other side. The book has a whole chapter on them…
Natural origins proponents, however, to judge by their comments on social media and elsewhere, seem to either have little knowledge of arguments in favor of a lab origin or deliberately ignore that evidence (all evidence on both sides is circumstantial.) That could be…
One reason why the lab origin hypothesis continues to garner a great deal of attention: It explains the evidence on both sides of the argument, while the zoonotic transfer hypothesis explains only part of the data (and a diminishing portion of it as time goes on.)…
1/ We don't know yet whether N5N1 can be transmitted from human to human, and we can't really predict whether it will acquire that ability in the future (including the near future.) The precautions we must take should include close monitoring of labs around the world...
2/ working with the virus. In an earlier story on the Spanish mink farm outbreak, @ScienceMagazine reporter @kakape quoted Isabella Monne, a veterinary researcher at the European Union’s Reference Laboratory for Avian Influenza in Italy, to the effect that her lab...
The new work by Jones et al. revealing some of the unreported/unpublished work Wuhan scientists were engaged in should be intellectually combined with the knowledge that the Wuhan researchers had their own transgenic mice model no later than 2018 (@gdemaneuf) ...
For a number of years the Ralph Baric lab at UNC supplied the Wuhan Inst of Virology/Shi Zhengli team with "humanized" mice to do experiments with SARS-like viruses. My own theory is that the 2014-17 moratorium in the U.S. on gain-of-function research accelerated...
the efforts of Chinese researchers to create their own mice. As we know, serial passage of genetically engineered SARS-like viruses through cell cultures or animal models is a leading possibility for how SARS-CoV-2 could have been lab created, if it was. #COVID19
Yesterday I cited newly uncovered evidence that China’s “Bat Woman,” Shi Zhengli, might have been fearful of arrest shortly after the pandemic started for a paper she published about her lab’s work. I suggested she would be limited in what she could say after that…
And so I continued a critique I had made earlier of two profiles of Shi, published in @sciam and @techreview. Thanks to the tens of thousands who have viewed the short thread. It led immediately to personal attacks on me by the reporter who did the profiles, but that’s…
Par for the course despite the spreading of one very specific lie about me. More interesting, it demonstrated a lack of sophistication on the part of some both about China and the nature of journalism. Some of that actually came from science journalists themselves…