1/few. Attendees of #Nido2023 may be wondering why I am not being allowed to ask questions of the speakers. Attendees should know too that I was denied the right to share our printed scientific articles. No reason given so far except the "instructions of @ProfVolkerThiel" ...
3/few.
questions, thus exposing his research program as not a fair-minded and objective enquiry into #Covidorigins but a veiled defence of the zoonotic origin.
Here is a link to our discussion:
4/few. But the underlying question of course is why are the organisers trying to prevent YOU, attendees, from seeing our work? It seems they think that the scientific audience of #Nido2023 cannot be trusted to make up their own minds on a research question....
5/But those of you who early in your careers might want to ask whether you want to commit yourselves to the tender care of senior scientists who censor research questions or encourage and condone such behaviours?... Twitter user @HL3133 asked me an important question about.....
6/few. this episode. The person in the audience who prevented the student from handing me the microphone saying "don't give him the mike" was @flodebarre. But Florence Debarre is not an organiser of the meeting. So why did a member of the audience help censor me?
7/few. After all it is the role of the session chairs to decide who gets to pose questions? The answer is that Florence Debarre is a prominent spokesperson for the zoonotic origin of #COVID19 and her intervention shows that the organisers are in cahoots...
8/few. with people suppressing honest #lableak debate. Hence, btw, more than a bit of the disinformation that so distressed @c_drosten in his #Nido2023 keynote actually has come not only from right wing propagandists but from people in the room.
1/3 My experience of #Nido2023 (the coronavirus meeting in Montreux) so far 1) The organisers refused to let me share the materials I bought. That is, two articles, one on #Ebola2014 and our proposed origin of SARS-CoV-2
This is under the instruction of Swiss virologist Volker Thiel.
They have also been removing ones I have left around while I have been attending the talks. T
They also stopped me asking my question to ZLS.
See next tweet below:
At the conclusion of Shi Zhengli's talk the microphone person went over to hand me the microphone but the podium stopped them and sent them to another questioner.
Then I put my hand up again and a different microphone person came over to me....
1/7:
Last week at the European Congress of Virology in Gdansk #ECV2023 I deep-sixed the raccoon dog market theory of #Covidorigins by questioning Martin Beer, senior author about their key paper (Freuling et al. 2020)
2/7 I asked why they tested a more transmissible G614 strain and not the original D614 strain, which would have supported or eliminated raccoon dogs as a potential intermediate host.
His answer was not "thanks, good idea we'll jump to it". He stumbled a bit and then, incredibly.
He said: I paraphrase slightly: "he didnt know whether D614 or G614 came first"
This is an astonishing answer on many levels.
Absolutely no one thinks that D614 came after G614. Because: 1) D614 was detected first 2) G614 displaced D614 as the pandemic progressed 3) See below...
2) The orthodox origin story has negligible evidence to support it. No #Ebola was found at Meliandou, Guinea, or elsewhere in wild animals nor was it diagnosed or positively tested in 'patient zero' or his contacts. The nearest known wild source was a whopping 3,000 km away
3) The subsequent epidemiological investigation back from the first confirmed cases was also highly speculative. E.g. the father and others disagree that his family had #Ebola, even tho' the epidemiology was supposedly largely based on interviews. #Ebola2014
Wanted to try a twitter tutorial (our first, so bear with it) on the v. interesting #CRISPR issues raised by the recent birth of #geneedited#Calf "Cosmo", thx to @UCDavis researcher @BioBeef. Author @MeganMolteni gamely brought in some perspective but no technical critic, so....
The following are issues neglected or barely raised in the text but should be born in mind while reading the article, which described attempts to add the SRY sex "determining" gene and make all male animals: wired.com/story/a-crispr…
2 The researchers began w/a "crude portrait" #genome sequence (so the first embryos died because the researchers chose the wrong place to edit). The premise of #geneediting is precision but this requires EXACT knowledge of the target genome, which almost invariably is lacking.