Patterico's Pontifications

5/26/2021

Statement By President Biden On Investigation Into Covid-19 Origins

Filed under: General — Dana @ 12:42 pm



[guest post by Dana]

[Ed. Really pressed for time, just throwing this up here now as a convo starter.]

Today from President Biden:

Back in early 2020, when COVID-19 emerged, I called for the CDC to get access to China to learn about the virus so we could fight it more effectively. The failure to get our inspectors on the ground in those early months will always hamper any investigation into the origin of COVID-19.

Nevertheless, shortly after I became President, in March, I had my National Security Advisor task the Intelligence Community to prepare a report on their most up-to-date analysis of the origins of COVID-19, including whether it emerged from human contact with an infected animal or from a laboratory accident. I received that report earlier this month, and asked for additional follow-up. As of today, the U.S. Intelligence Community has “coalesced around two likely scenarios” but has not reached a definitive conclusion on this question. Here is their current position: “while two elements in the IC leans toward the former scenario and one leans more toward the latter – each with low or moderate confidence – the majority of elements do not believe there is sufficient information to assess one to be more likely than the other.”

I have now asked the Intelligence Community to redouble their efforts to collect and analyze information that could bring us closer to a definitive conclusion, and to report back to me in 90 days. As part of that report, I have asked for areas of further inquiry that may be required, including specific questions for China. I have also asked that this effort include work by our National Labs and other agencies of our government to augment the Intelligence Community’s efforts. And I have asked the Intelligence Community to keep Congress fully apprised of its work.

The United States will also keep working with like-minded partners around the world to press China to participate in a full, transparent, evidence-based international investigation and to provide access to all relevant data and evidence.

Yesterday China said that the case was closed as far as their country was concerned:

The U.S. and China staked out sharply opposing positions over how to trace the origins of the coronavirus pandemic, with Washington calling for a new round of studies to be conducted with independent, international experts.

Beijing, meanwhile, told an annual gathering of the World Health Organization’s decision-making body Tuesday that it considered the investigation in its country to be complete and said attention should now turn to other countries.

The dueling opinions, expressed during a meeting of nearly 200 governments, appear hard to reconcile and show the political tensions hindering an effort to find the source of a virus that first began to spread in China. Under global health regulations, China would have to give its consent for WHO to send international scientists into the country again for further studies.

Lack of cooperation from China, however, presents a bit of a hurdle for the WHO:

Earlier this year, a team of scientists convened by the WHO spent a month in China, as part of an effort to understand the origins of the pandemic.

A deeper inquiry into the pandemic’s origins is “a critical priority for us,” Andy Slavitt, the White House senior adviser for the Covid-19 response, said at a briefing Tuesday. “We need to get to the bottom of this and we need a completely transparent process from China [Oh. Okay.] We need the WHO to assist in that matter. We don’t feel like we have that now.”

But those efforts are up against a push by China to have the WHO shift that probe into other countries, contending that the pandemic may have originated elsewhere.

“Nothing can happen unless China says yes,” said Lawrence Gostin, faculty director of the O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at Georgetown University. “The WHO has no power under international law to require China to comply. “

He added, “Given the relationship between China and the U.S., there’s a negligible chance that the Chinese would capitulate to U.S. requests for a full and independent investigation.”

P.S. “Currently, [in] the WHO-convened origins tracing study, China’s part has been completed,” a Chinese delegate told diplomats during a videoconference meeting on Tuesday. “China supports the scientists to conduct a global origin tracing cooperation. We call on all parties to adopt an open and transparent attitude to cooperate with the WHO in origins tracing.”

–Dana

51 Responses to “Statement By President Biden On Investigation Into Covid-19 Origins”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (fd537d)

  2. President Plagiarist plagiarized Trump inquiry ol’Joe shutdown because, you know… ‘neverTrump:

    Biden ‘SHUT DOWN secret Trump-era investigation’ into Wuhan …

    http://www.the-sun.com/news/2958332/biden-shut-probe...

    JOE Biden’s administration shut down a Donald Trump-era investigation into the Wuhan institute at the center of the Covid-19 lab “leak” theory, it was reported Tuesday.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  3. President Biden apparently doesn’t believe in one country alone (like the United States) pressing Xi Jinping to do anything, but only in alliances.

    Anyway, he’s finally said something about it himself, rather than leaving it to deputies.

    What you need to do is to ket Xi Jinping know that, regardless of what he says, the United States and Australia and the United Kingdom and France and other countries will believe China did something bad, and international health co-operation must be re-evaluated in that light and it could be some sanctions will be imposed.

    Then, and only then, will you get some movement on this subject. At least a modified limited hangout. Like the Soviet Union admitting that Raoul Wallenberg had been taken prisoner, although still telling a lie.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  4. This is a political win-win for Biden.
    If they find evidence that the virus came from a lab, China gets a face full of international condemnation. If they don’t, the White House can credibly accuse the authoritarian Xi regime of stonewalling.

    Paul Montagu (eb7299)

  5. 4.This is a political win-win for Biden.

    He always seem to believe plagiarizing/copying/stealing other people’s work is.

    Except it’s not. You can’t teach an old dog new tricks.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  6. Good luck on getting the Chinese to cooperate.

    Rip Murdock (d2a2a8)

  7. @4 lol it’s a political lose-lose for all the trump critics who mocked and fought this inquiry tooth and nail, and who are now sudden converts cuz biden

    JF (e1156d)

  8. @6. Delegate, delegate, delegate. Harris has room on her plate; if she skips the salad bar and avoids the dessert cart.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  9. Expect a Presidnt Plagiarist two-fer: UFO report to reveal Covid-19 released as alien bug. Blame the little green men in their tic-tac saucers, not the little yellow men in Red land buying treasury notes, propping up western capitalism.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  10. The question isn’t whether the virus actually leaked from the lab–if it did, whatever internal evidence existed has likely been scrubbed out already for months, and finding it will likely take whistleblower assistance anyway–the question is why this is suddenly being pushed in the media, along with the whiplash admission that Fauci actually did fund the research there, and that not doing so would have been irresponsible, just a couple of short weeks after he full-on denied it to Congress.

    Factory Working Orphan (f916e7)

  11. Ha, ha, ha! I had to read Biden’s statement twice to understand that he said nothing. The old guy’s stills got it. A master of politicalese.

    nk (1d9030)

  12. Back in early 2020, when COVID-19 emerged, I called for the CDC to get access to China to learn about the virus so we could fight it more effectively. The failure to get our inspectors on the ground in those early months will always hamper any investigation into the origin of COVID-19.

    Because back in January/February 2020 China just threw open its doors and begged international inspectors — especially Western ones — to come in and check their work. What a blowhard.

    JVW (ee64e4)

  13. Newly Released OLC Memo Shows Staff Lawyers Found No Basis For Obstruction Charges In Mueller Report

    The long-awaited, though partial, release of a memorandum from the Justice Department this week left many “frustrated,” as predicted by the Washington Post, in Washington. The reason is what it did not contain. Critics had sought the memo as the “smoking gun” to show how former Attorney General Bill Barr scuttled any obstruction charges against Donald Trump. Instead, the memo showed the opposite. The staff of the OLC actually found that the allegations did not meet the standard of obstruction even without any defenses or privileges related to Trump’s office.

    https://jonathanturley.org/2021/05/26/newly-released-olc-memo-shows-staff-lawyers-found-not-basis-for-obstruction-charges-in-mueller-report/

    BuDuh (010716)

  14. @13 Oh, so it wasn’t the sole discretion of Barr and his AAG?

    It is a curious thing that it is the Biden DOJ that is fighting like hell to keep this under seal. Only thing that explains that behavior is that this is the usual institutional recalcitrants, that transcend whomever is in office.

    whembly (ae0eb5)

  15. But, like, you know, whatever. When it comes to the corrupt, criminal, militarized, fascist Chinese police state, not only Pascal’s bet but just simple common sense and basic instinct for survival demand that we proceed on the assumption that the virus was engineered in a lab by the Fu Manchus. As a biological weapon.

    nk (1d9030)

  16. The only thing the US investigation won’t conclude is that this was an intentional release by the Chinese — even if true — since war would be an inevitable consequence and we do not want one.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  17. Earlier this year, a team of scientists convened by the WHO spent a month in China, as part of an effort to understand the origins of the pandemic.

    I’m sure the Chinese were excellent hosts, too.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  18. The Chinese claims that it came from outside, and possibly from a US military source, tells me that they have something to hide. “The lady doth protest too much”

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  19. As a biological weapon.

    And it was an excellent one. Not so terrible it ends the world. Not even so terrible it requires a nuclear response. It simply paralyzes the adversaries for a year while you get some breathing space.

    The really bad news for weapons labs — the mRNA technique has the capability (if you don’t care about testing) of producing a vaccine for almost any virus in a week or two. Even in mass quantities if you have generic production lines set up.

    The really good news for everyone else: expect vaccines for AIDS, Ebola and other nasty viruses shortly.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  20. @12. What a blowhard.

    That’s an insult to blowhards, JVW. He’s a brain-damaged boob.

    And—- a plagiarist.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  21. Why the stonewalling and cover up from China?
    Why the claim from China that 4900 people died in China from Coronavirus… clear epicenter of virus, when Paraguay has 8600 dead, clear epicenter of nothing

    steveg (ebe7c1)

  22. while two elements in the IC leans toward the former scenario

    This is interesting given there is zero evidence for the COVID-19 intermediate-host hypothesis. How exactly are two intelligence agencies leaning toward it?

    frosty (f27e97)

  23. each with low or moderate confidence

    Same confidence to the Russian bounty story that you (Biden) and the Democrats and the media said was true.

    Funny that.

    Hoi Polloi (b28058)

  24. 11.Ha, ha, ha! I had to read Biden’s statement twice to understand that he said nothing.

    You spent more time on it than he did; as if he wrote it to begin with.

    Ha. Ha. Ha.

    DCSCA (f4c5e5)

  25. frosty (f27e97) — 5/26/2021 @ 6:37 pm

    This is interesting given there is zero evidence for the COVID-19 intermediate-host hypothesis. How exactly are two intelligence agencies leaning toward it?

    The case for the intermediate-host hypothesis is that there is no (specific) evidence for a lab leak. The case for the lab leak is that there is no (specific) evidence for any tranittal through a wild animal.

    Except that there’s this: There is lot of secrecy by China about the history f the virus and about some of what went on in the labs.

    And then one is just 300 yards away from a “wet market” – Rota Cosby on WABC radio 77 AM is calling it a wet market even now. A wet market that wasn’t a wet market, but a seafood market, that, except for possible rare exceptions, did not contain any animals that breathed air!

    If they just picked out a place to attribute the origin to, they could have easily found a real “wet market” in Wuhan. The fact that they picked a seafood market as the epicenter, indicates that that place is really close to where the epidemic started from. That, and the persistent lying about it being a “wet market” – which means a place where fresh meat is sold (which have persisted because Chinese people do not trust the origin of anything processed in China) point to the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention as the lab where the virus leaked from.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  26. * Rita Cosby.

    Even after I pointed out that Ted Cruz mentioned two labs, she still thinks the two labs were close together.

    (The Wuhan Institute of Virology, which they are mostly talking about, and where the 3 scientists who were hospitalized are probably most associated with, although maybe that was a cover story too when they warned the staff, is 8 to 9 miles away from the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. (The second floor: was eyeglasses) It wouldn’t as a rule, contain many creatures that breathe air.

    The Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Pathology was just some 300 yards away.

    I didn’t get to mention my point about the wet market really being a seafood market before she cut me off. She just kept talking.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  27. Factory Working Orphan (f916e7) — 5/26/2021 @ 2:38 pm

    the question is why this is suddenly being pushed in the media

    It probably means there’s evidence for the lab leak that hasn’t been made public yet. US media sources are propaganda outlets but that’s not true of all media so there’s still a limit to the lies they can tell and still manipulate public opinion. As it dawns on people that the US taxpayer funded the Chinese research that led to COVID-19 the media needs to be in a position to explain why that really isn’t a big deal. Better to get in front of that as soon as possible.

    frosty (f27e97)

  28. Newly Released OLC Memo Shows Staff Lawyers Found No Basis For Obstruction Charges In Mueller Report

    This was by OLC chief, Steve Engel, a loyal Trump doggie.
    He was guy who issued an OLC opinion supporting the Justice Department’s decision not to release Donald Trump’s tax returns. He was overturned in court as it relates to the NY investigation.
    He was the guy who opined that the Justice Department not forward the Trump–Ukraine scandal whistleblower complaint to Congress, even though not doing so was unlawful.
    He was the guy who offered the completely unprecedented standard that White House advisors had “absolute immunity” from being subpoenaed to testify in the impeachment inquiry against Trump.

    Paul Montagu (a05eda)

  29. The case for the intermediate-host hypothesis is that there is no (specific) evidence for a lab leak. The case for the lab leak is that there is no (specific) evidence for any tranittal through a wild animal.

    Which would they cover up?

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  30. This was by OLC chief, Steve Engel, a loyal Trump doggie.

    If it was from a partisan Trump hater, and the conclusion was the opposite, would this be more believable? I imagine you’d say yes, but for similar reasons.

    Kevin M (ab1c11)

  31. If it was from a partisan Trump hater, and the conclusion was the opposite, would this be more believable? I imagine you’d say yes, but for similar reasons.

    Well, that’s the problem, Kevin, that the OLC became so politicized, like everything became politicized under Trump. The body of Engel’s work is damning.
    The thing is–and I hate doing hypotheticals–there wouldn’t be “partisan Trump hater” in that job under Trump. And if he was too contrary on an opinion or two that caught Trump’s attention, he wouldn’t be there for long.

    Paul Montagu (a05eda)

  32. Bottom line, the OLC’s opinion has as much weight as Marla Maples’s. Can we get Stormy to chime in? That maybe there was obstruction but it was smaller than average?

    nk (1d9030)

  33. Factory Working Orphan (f916e7) — 5/26/2021 @ 2:38 pm

    the question is why this is suddenly being pushed in the media

    I think in part because it’s news. The data no supporting the jump from animals is a newish thing so they’re talking about it. Plus they get to write articles about how the initial reporting was wrong, and articles in response to that. Remember 2 things;

    1 The number one job of the MSM is to keep our attention. Everything is secondary to that.
    2 The MSM isn’t a monolith. Reporter 1 can write the the sky is green now and another reporter from the same organization can write they were wrong and the publisher can still come out ahead. Especially when reporters 3-N write about the nuances and lessons learned etc etc.

    Time123 (d1bf33)

  34. Re:13… this brings to mind fond memories of those who carried water for the Russia Collusion Hoax.

    Motherless bottom-dwellers that they are…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  35. The case for the intermediate-host hypothesis is that there is no (specific) evidence for a lab leak. The case for the lab leak is that there is no (specific) evidence for any transmittal through a wild animal.

    29. Kevin M (ab1c11) — 5/26/2021 @ 10:44 pm

    Which would they cover up?

    The lab leak, of course, and they have hidden information, even after they were asked, politely, to be more forthcoming. (the case for innocence would be that they’re hiding something else nefarious, but they could try to carve it away)

    And which would they know for a fact if it was true?

    What are the chances that, if it was endemic in some population of wild animals. it wouldn’t have been discovered by now, or that the government of China wouldn’t ask for help in ferreting it out?

    IF natural transmission theory were true, while they might possibly not know for sure the wild animal theory was true, THEN they’d probably want to find out where it came from and get that information out.

    They could take precautions, too, and let everyone know they did so and set people at ease.

    But an unknown reservoir of disease would make people afraid to go to China. So it is logical they want it to be an (improbable) origin outside of China.

    But, on the other hand, IF they had nothing to hide THEN they wouldn’t bother with such an unconvincing theory like frozen food.

    But they are bothering with it.

    China prefers to lesve the matter of the origin of Covid unresolved, because BOTH the lab leak theory, AND the wild animal theory (if the source is not found) are bad for China.

    IF the lab leak theory were true. THEN they’d be much more likely to know the lab theory was true, and just how and where, and that the wild animal theory was not.

    IF they knew for fact it came from a lab, THEN they wouldn’t be interested in exploring the animal theory.

    They are not interested in exploring the animal theory. Even a fake investigation done for the outside world.

    Because they would know it wouldn’t come up with anything, and a futile search would lower the probability that natural transmission was the answer, and it would rule out certain posibilities, if you can think of any that sound at all probable in the first place, and that would in turn raise the probability that it came from a lab or researcher. (Bayesian analysis yells you that the harder people look, and don’t find, the stronger is the case for the alternative.)

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  36. @33 cool theory, except that if trump were still president anyone advancing the lab leak scenario would still be branded racists and nutcases

    comical to see those who were okay with the epithets for more than a year now trying to get in front of the issue

    JF (e1156d)

  37. Of course Beijing is covering up. But the previous administration appears to have been less than forthcoming about what it knew and when it knew it:

    To some inside the government, the name of the laboratory was familiar. Its research on bat viruses had already drawn the attention of U.S. diplomats and officials at the Beijing Embassy in late 2017, prompting them to alert Washington that the lab’s own scientists had reported “a serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators needed to safely operate this high-containment laboratory.”

    But their cables to Washington were ignored. . . .

    The Wuhan Institute of Virology had openly participated in gain-of-function research in partnership with U.S. universities and institutions. But the official told me the U.S. government had evidence that Chinese labs were performing gain-of-function research on a much larger scale than was publicly disclosed, meaning they were taking more risks in more labs than anyone outside China was aware of. This insight, in turn, fed into the lab-accident hypothesis in a new and troubling way. …

    Back in 2017, the U.S. diplomats who had visited the lab in Wuhan had foreseen these very events, but nobody had listened and nothing had been done. “We were trying to warn that that lab was a serious danger,” one of the cable writers who had visited the lab told me. “I have to admit, I thought it would be maybe a SARS-like outbreak again. If I knew it would turn out to be the greatest pandemic in human history, I would have made a bigger stink about it.”

    There were diplomatic reasons why the previous admin. didn’t want to reveal everything it knew:

    Secretary of State Pompeo was angry when he found out about the leak [of the 2017 cables]. He needed to keep up the veneer of good relations with China, and these revelations would make that job more difficult.

    But maybe–just maybe–the admin. didn’t want anyone to know how it had blown off the concerns raised by U.S. diplomats in China.

    Radegunda (5296a6)

  38. Veneer of good relations very important if Ivanka-schlock brands want keep Chinese trademark protection and Kushner family want keep on sell green cards to Chinese investors.

    nk (1d9030)

  39. @37 lol, the spin machine is in high gear

    not only were the lab leak theorists racists and crazies, they concealed from us what they were racist and crazy about

    JF (e1156d)

  40. @37 lol, the spin machine is in high gear

    Where is the spinning in that Politico story? Did you read it?
    The second paragraph says:

    The exact origin of the new coronavirus remains a mystery to this day, but the search for answers is not just about assigning blame. Unless the source is located, the true path of the virus can’t be traced, and scientists can’t properly study the best ways to prevent future outbreaks.

    Rogin also writes:

    Trump and President Xi had agreed during their March 26 phone call to halt the war of words that had erupted when a Chinese diplomat alleged on Twitter that the outbreak might have been caused by the U.S. Army. That had prompted Trump to start calling it the “China virus,” deliberately blaming Beijing in a racist way. Xi had warned Trump in that call that China’s level of cooperation on releasing critical equipment in America’s darkest moment would be jeopardized by continued accusations.

    That’s the closest he comes to saying “bad Trump.” He also points to legitimate diplomatic concerns that may have constrained the administration.

    But there’s still the fact of those cables in late 2017 and the administration’s lack of action in response. An honest narrative on Chinese lab origins would acknowledge that detail. But the main concern of Trumpers is to claim that Trump was always 100% correct and always totally on top of every problem, and that anything unflattering to him is Fake News spin and lies.

    Radegunda (2ba443)

  41. BTW, Rogin first wrote about the cables in April 2020.

    Radegunda (2ba443)

  42. 33. Time123 (d1bf33) — 5/27/2021 @ 7:08 am

    Reporter 1 can write the the sky is green now and another reporter from the same organization can write they were wrong and the publisher can still come out ahead. Especially when reporters 3-N write about the nuances and lessons learned etc etc.

    That’s true, although we don’t see it that much. A publisher can a gain circulation if there’s a raging controversy being waged in the paper or broadcast. But they are not usually that cynical.

    More often it’s a controversy between one outlet and another or between one or more and a political party. (examples: Colbert, Newsmax) Sometimes they have debates withn an institution, but that’s maybe more to show they are giving two sides.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  43. “Currently, [in] the WHO-convened origins tracing study, China’s part has been completed,” a Chinese delegate told diplomats during a videoconference meeting on Tuesday.

    That seems to have caused President Biden to reverse his decision that the WHO should do the investigating. Now he’s charged the U.S. intelligence community (CIA etc) to do it. He gave them 90 days to report back, but the most likely thing they are going to say is that they still can’r definitively answer the question, so he’ll probably give them another 90 days and so on until people get fed up.

    And China will give them a few red herrings. They already have.

    A year ago it was reported that they had word (probsbly the same thing that was told to what you could call the Outer Party – except that China probably has more than two layers) that a certain young female intern at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had confessed to being careless and infecting herself and then her boyfriend and to going to the market that had been implicated.

    This was published mostly in India but seems to have been heard by U.S. intelligence.

    Thursday 16 April 2020 13:44

    https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/trump-coronavirus-us-wuhan-laboratory-origin-fox-news-latest-a9467946.html

    It was Fox correspondent John Roberts who raised the theory with the president at the Rose Garden coronavirus briefing. “Multiple sources are telling Fox News today,” he said, “that the United States government has high confidence that while the coronavirus is a naturally occurring virus, it emanated from a virology lab in Wuhan.

    “Because of lax safety protocols, an intern was infected, who later infected her boyfriend and then went to the wet market in Wuhan where it began to spread. Does that correspond with what you have heard from officials?”

    When Mr Trump answered him, he seemed to confirm that the unsubstantiated story is being taken seriously.

    “Well I don’t wanna say that, John, but I will tell you that more and more we’re hearing the story and we’ll see. When you say multiple sources, now there’s a case when you can use the word ‘sources’, but we are doing a very thorough examination of this horrible situation that happened.”

    And she probably really even exists and might be sitting in jail till this day even though this theory was never used by the Chinese government.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  44. 38. In January, 2020, Trump wanted to declare victory and settle the trade war with China. China completed the deal with the Trump Administration before announcing the virus was contagious.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_COVID-19_pandemic_in_January_2020

    15 January

    Representative from Chinese government and American government sign the phase one trade deal over bilateral trade conflict in Washington D.C.[336][337]

    20 January

    China’s National Health Commission announced confirmation that the coronavirus had begun to be transmitted between humans.[338]

    Chinese premier Li Keqiang urged decisive and effective efforts to prevent and control the epidemic.[106] Beijing and Guangdong reported an additional three and thirteen laboratory-confirmed cases, respectively. Shanghai confirms its first case, bringing the total number of laboratory-confirmed cases in China to 218.[108][109]

    China negotiated a trade deal with promises of purchases that they knew never would ever be carried out.

    The Ivanka and Kushner trademarks and green card sales were all abandoned years before.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  45. Biden’s statement was more pr less prepared tow weeks ago, but Biden wasn’t satisfied. As is pretty obvious, it involved a little bit of declassification.

    I have now asked the Intelligence Community to redouble their efforts to collect and analyze information that could bring us closer to a definitive conclusion, and to report back to me in 90 days.

    If they ever find out good information, revealing it could very easily place some people’s lives in great danger.

    I think Biden;s plan is, if they come back and say they can’t come to a definitive conclusion, then they should come up with a list of questions for China.

    It worked for Lt. Columbo on television.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  46. There are actually three possible laboratories in Wuhan, not two, but, although I have read the number three mentioned a number of times, I have no idea what that third one is.
    I think though, it came out of the one near the seafood market, because there’s no other reason to select it as the point of origin unless it was really near the true point of origin, and that the virus was being kept at that second location, away from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, because of bureaucratic infighting, and it culd only have been moved there if it had backing from someone higher up.

    Now I also read that the Wuhan Institute for Virology was actually only using Biosafety Level 2 for coronaviruses, not BSL-4 or BSL-4 (BSL-4 is for ebola and involves spacesuit type gear; BSL-2 is comparable to a dental office, with gloves, and lab coats, and warning signs)

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  47. /not BSl-4 or BSL-3.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  48. 27. frosty (f27e97) — 5/26/2021 @ 8:37 pm

    As it dawns on people that the US taxpayer funded the Chinese research that led to COVID-19

    It probably didn’t fund that exact research – and anyway it is hard to say it funded anything – they don’t spend dollars for the most part.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  49. China is denying that 3 researchers at WIV were hospitalized, according to what a WSJ article seems to say. That indeed might possibly not be the exact truth – they might have been at the lab near the seafood market. The source of the information is probably what researchers at the WIV were told

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/time-is-running-out-in-covid-19-origins-inquiry-say-who-led-team-members-11622125841

    Beijing has also denied a report in The Wall Street Journal on Sunday about a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report that three researchers from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became sufficiently ill in November 2019 to seek hospital care.

    U.S. officials have debated the strength of that evidence, which didn’t draw any conclusions on what caused the lab workers’ sickness.

    https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/china-denies-wsj-story-on-researchers-falling-sick-at-wuhan-lab-101621857067547.html

    “The report that you mentioned about three people getting sick, that is not true,” Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Zhao Lijian said at a briefing on Monday in Beijing when asked to comment about the WSJ story.

    Saying the report was “completely untrue”, Zhao said: “The United States continues to hype up the lab leak theory. Does it care about traceability or is it just trying to distract attention?”

    Separately, Yuan Zhiming, director of the lab, also told Chinese state media that the report was not correct. “I’ve read it, it’s a complete lie,” Yuan told Global Times on Monday about the WSJ story, which was published on Sunday titled “Intelligence on Sick Staff at Wuhan Lab Fuels Debate on COVID-19 Origin”.

    “Those claims are groundless. The lab has not been aware of this situation [sick researchers in autumn 2019], and I don’t even know where such information came from,” Yuan said.

    In other places, Dr Shi Zhengli, not Yuan Zhiming, has been described as the director of the lab, bu is merely the “bat lady” in charge of coronavirus research, or maybe infectious disease research. I kind of doubted she was the director of the entire Wuhan Institute of Virology. China doesn’t go out its way, to say the least, to make these kinds of details clear.

    The information seems to have come from one or more foreign researchers (probably from the Netherlands) who told their country’s government, and they would have known, or thought that, because that’s what they were told and they would have been told because somebody in charge, who was more interested in preventing the researchers from getting sick than hiding something that nobody had decided yet was a top state secret, thought it was contagious. (which fact eventually had to be admitted)

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  50. https://www.nationalreview.com/the-morning-jolt/the-circumstantial-evidence-at-wuhan-lab-keeps-growing

    A little more than a year ago, Chinese social-media users and those watching China’s Internet kept hearing rumors that a Wuhan Institute of Virology researcher named Huang Yanling was “patient zero,” and a statement from the institute named her specifically, denying the rumor, and declaring she left the institution in 2015.

    She has since become a non-person.

    Remember, dear readers, you and I are lab-leak-theory hipsters. We were into it before it was cool. Now, no less a figure than Dr. Anthony Fauci is no longer willing to say it’s too farfetched to be plausible:….

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)

  51. By Dr. Liji Thomas, MD Sep 10 2020

    https://www.news-medical.net/news/20200910/Scientists-claim-serious-data-discrepancies-in-RaTG13-sequence.aspx

    ….Many scientists mention the genome sequence of this bat CoVs, RaTG13, as being part of the ancestral descent of the current virus. A recent paper in the journal Nature also mentions its 96.2% homology with SARS-CoV-2, considering it to be a fossil record of a strain whose current existence is doubtful, but which may have been the original pool from which the current virus developed.

    The scientists assembled the viral genome from scratch, performed a metagenomic analysis, and looked at data quality. They concluded that the RaTG13 genome had serious issues and all data related to it required a full review….

    ….Full experimental details backed up the published genomic sequence of SARS-CoV-2, but not so that of the RaTG13. This is documented by several papers that have shown up the holes in the dataset underlying the published genome of the bat virus.

    The dataset that has been published in support of the RaTG13 genome, almost 30 kb long, has been found inadequate to reproduce the sequence or the experimental observations based on this dataset. While the dataset is unique and contains much information beyond the fragmented coronavirus sequence, not much is known about how it was generated.

    Sammy Finkelman (51cd0c)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.3228 secs.