1/ Last summer, when NIH cancelled the subcontract (via EcoHealth Alliance) it had awarded to the Wuhan Inst Virology for work on SARS-like viruses due to failure to report its results, @sciencemagazine/@sciencecohen/@JohnTravis failed to cover it. When called out on it… 2/ they used the lame excuse that since they had already covered the earlier suspension of the grant by NIH, they had covered the story. Wrong. NIH had given WIV and EcoHealth more than a year to put things right; when they finally did cancel the grant, they concluded…

1/ What’s remarkable about the political side of the Covid origins debate is that while it may be implicitly political for #Republicans—they know proof of a lab origin would hurt #Democrats—for the Dems it is explicitly political. That’s because they keep insisting… 2/ the lab origin hypothesis is a political witch-hunt by the right-wing. The problem with that is many scientists and journalists on the left and right think it is plausible or likely. By staking so much politically on a natural origin, Dems…

1/ I think that with the revelation of more documents related to the Proximal Origin paper in @NatureMedicine we are getting a more nuanced insight into what happened. In fact Kristian Andersen did not change his mind about the possibility of a lab origin in just...

https://twitter.com/mbalter/status/1679967203976794112

2/ a few days, even though the pressure on him and the other Proximal authors was strong from Fauci and Francis Collins. But early in the process, Fauci and Collins (who probably already knew it but played dumb) was given details about the extent to which NIAID/NIH...

1/ Since the beginning of the pandemic, the Proximal Origin authors (two of whom testified to Congress on Tuesday) and other scientists have stated their belief that the pandemic virus was not "genetically engineered" or "genetically engineered," while accepting... 2/ the remaining possibility--even if they think it is low--that the virus could have a research-related origin. But actually, this is a distinction without a difference, and very misleading. Why? Because the implication is that genetic engineering means a lab set out...

1/ This a thread about Boston University (@BU_Tweets), its biology department (@BU_Biology), and the university administration’s long tolerance of an abusive biologist for many years before finally forcing him to resign. The biologist is Adrien Finzi, whose resignation… 2/ was effective at the end of June of this year: . This mini-report is based on discussions with a number of current and former members of the biology department with intimate knowledge of the history of events. They have asked to remain…bu.edu/biology/people…

1/ One of the major “achievements” of those who strongly advocate the zoonotic spillover hypothesis is that they have succeeded in #gaslighting many, including actual scientists, into thinking that a lab origin is somehow inherently unlikely, even before considering… 2/ the facts. I want to say first that the following owes an intellectual debt to @WashburneAlex, a biologist who has discussed these issues extensively on his Substack newsletter, “A Biologist’s Guide to Life” (.) Alex, and others who are serious…alexwasburne.substack.com

1/ Anthony Fauci, NIAID officials, Peter Daszak, and the Proximal Origins authors are not stupid. They all knew what kind of research was being done at the Wuhan Inst Virology, in part with NIAID and USAID funds, and they knew the pandemic virus could have arisen there. 2/ All of their behavior since the beginning can be explained by their knowledge of this possibility and their determination to cover up that knowledge as much as possible. ALL.

1/ It's a reasonable guess that the leaks we saw from intel agencies about #COVID19 origins just before the ODNI report was released--reports of sick Wuhan Inst Virology researchers in Nov 2019, and that WIV researchers had inserted infection-enhancing genetic segments... 2/ into SARS-like viral backbones--were from sources concerned that the "official" report was going to whitewash and distort what is really known about the pandemic's origins, especially intel from the DoE and FBI which lean towards a lab origin (and which the ODNI...

1/ There’s something truly extraordinary about this piece in @nytimes today by national security reporter @julianbarnes. While it very briefly refers to reports in the Sunday Times and Public/Racket about intel concerning the Wuhan Inst Virology, research… 2/ conducted there, and the names of three allegedly sick researchers, there is absolutely no discernible attempt by the reporter to confirm or debunk that earlier reporting. Any national security reporter worth his or her salt has sources who could do that. Instead…

1/ So #Republicans are passing bills in a number of red states forbidding anyone from using a bathroom that does not coincide with the sex they were assigned at birth, regardless of their current gender identity. I am wondering what it is they really want? 2/ Let’s do a little thought experiment. Caitlin Jenner is at the airport and she has to use the restroom. So she goes into the women’s room, one or more women in their get upset and make her leave. 3/ So then she goes into the men’s room next door, with her dress and long…

1/ A few comments on today's @WSJ story confirming earlier reports that three named researchers at the Wuhan Inst Virology who worked closely on coronaviruses (esp SARS-like viruses) got sick in Nov 2019 of Covid-like symptoms (Accssible: archive.is/2023.06.20-140…) 2/ The story gave credit to the Substack blog Public which published the names of the researchers last week. It also gave a lot of credit to @WhiteCoatWaste and its dogged work over the past few years to dig out documents the U.S. government did not want public.

1/ As the gaslighting that the lab origins hypothesis for #COVID19 is just some crazy “conspiracy theory” steadily loses effectiveness in the fact of growing evidence, journalists should note that it’s still not too late to catch up with the story. Here are some leads:

https://twitter.com/ydeigin/status/1670993551348334594

2/ And here are some more. The difference between members of DRASTIC (and independent reporters) and mainstream science journalists is that the former actually investigated Covid-19 origins, while the latter cozied up to their favored sources and copied down what they said.

https://twitter.com/theseeker268/status/1670938077928525825

1/ This @NewYorker piece by Keith Gessen asking “who lost Russia?” is an important read and I highly recommend it. The main takeaway for me is the effect that Western advice and pressures had on sending the entire Soviet block… newyorker.com/magazine/2023/… 2/ into poverty, except for the fraction of their populations that got rich (the two sides of the coin always go together, despite the trickle down illusions of some.) While the worst period, eg in Russia, might have been mostly the first decade after the fall of…

1/ Two claims central to the #COVID19 origins debate have now been published, apparently based on U.S. intel sources. First, that three researchers at the Wuhan Inst Virology got sick with something resembling Covid-19 during fall 2019. Second, that WIV researchers did… 2/ indeed insert furin cleavage sites into SARS-like viruses. As @Ayjchan has suggested, if these claims are considered well supported by the intel community, then the origins debate is over and a lab origin will be established within reasonable doubt….

1/ If the intel agencies are going to miss the deadline for declassifying what they have on Covid-19 origins, which it appears they will, it’s odd that the mainstream #media does not have an update for us on how far along they are, whether they have asked for an extension… 2/ (which presumably can only be granted by Congress itself by amending the law), or even if they have done any work on this at all. Perhaps @nytimes, @washingtonpost, and other media have stories about this all ready to go; or perhaps the Biden Admin is a scofflaw…

1/ It’s notable that most sources cited in the Times and Public/Racket stories about the “patient zeros” in Wuhan are identified as U.S. government officials. They are likely to be individuals familiar with what some of the intel shows (perhaps that of FBI or DoE)… 2/ and given the timing of the leaks, familiar with what the declassified documents about to be released will show. If that is true, then the question becomes, how good is the intel, especially the identification of three named researchers at the Wuhan Inst Virology?

1/ As the story about the Wuhan Inst Virology researchers who allegedly contracted #COVID19 in fall 2019 races around the world, it also raises some questions about the mainstream #media in the U.S. As the deadline for declassifying intel on Covid origins arrives… 2/ in just days, it was a no-brainer for journalists to start talking to sources in the intel community about what was in them, or even what might be redacted if that is likely to happen. The appears to be just what reporters at the (London) Times have done, and also…

The correct journalistic response to this report and the earlier one in the [London] Times is to talk to sources and try to confirm the details—not to dismiss it, poo-poo it, or otherwise try to ignore it. The leaks may become a torrent. public.substack.com/p/first-people… 2/ My guess, and I could be wrong, is that the leaks we are seeing are from intel sources who know what information is being declassified and feel more free to discuss it as a result. We shall know soon. #media

1/ I’ve said this before, but again: The role of mainstream science #journalism in the #COVID19 origins debate has been a major fail for the field, the worst one since I have been a science journalist myself (40+ years.) Most science writers decided from the beginning that… 2/ a lab or research-related origin was a “conspiracy theory” and “disinformation” without actually doing any real reporting on the origins question—simply relying on quotes from leading virologists and other scientists who—as it turned out—had a vested interest…

My hunch is that when the intel is declassified, and if there are not too many redactions, this is basically what it will say. The whistleblowers are giving us a preview and also trying to keep the intel agencies honest. thetimes.co.uk/article/inside… 2/ The meltdown over this article by some members of the international raccoon dog team (whose work has been largely discredited) is quite amazing in its desperate vitriol. They see their credibility rapidly disintegrating. Science should not be able defending a position.

1/ One of the many flaws in #media coverage of the #COVID19 pandemic is the very narrow focus of the “experts” used as sources in the reporting. Virologists are usually considered the number one go-to scientists, with physicians and public health officials a close second… 2/ But actually, understanding a pandemic (or any public health issue for that matter) requires the input of many specialties, including epidemiologists, immunologists, cell and molecular biologists, microbiologists, geneticists, statisticians, and then…