Chinese Influence over Scientific Experts

This was meant to be quick analysis of a paper published in Nature Medicine titled 'The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2' which argued: "Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct."

The paper instead expounds the Huanan Seafood Market/pangolin theory and purports to debunk 'conspiracy theories' related to the virus emanating from an Wuhan lab. The paper appears to have some major flaws which i wanted to explore as well as some possible reasons for it's publication.

However, preliminary research into the paper and who wrote it has taken me so far down the rabbit hole of the relationship between academic institutions and China that a new topic is needed.

The first thing to remember is that the people who wrote this paper are not some mug punters like us venting stuff on a forum - they’re paid professionals who’ve been given the prestigious platform of Nature Medicine to help the world understand the source of the virus. When people say ‘listen to the experts’ - they are the experts.

So let’s meet the experts who co-authored the above paper. There are five of them - all men - all big-hitters in the virology community.

Edward C. Holmes: Marie Bashir Institute for Infectious Diseases and Biosecurity, School of Life and Environmental Sciences and School of Medical Sciences, The University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia

In the interests of full-disclosure it should be noted Sydney University gets an estimated $534.1 million a year from selling bogus degrees to Chinese students. That’s a billion every two years - which amounts to 23% of total university revenue. That figure still doesn't include grants from China for various think tanks or joint-projects. Whistle-blower, Professor Babones says:

"Some students don't read and write English well enough and don't understand what to do...we end up with Mandarin-speaking students in groups where no one is able to speak English. It's an unspoken but widely understood rule... that we are expected to help students pass. Or at least not expected to be failing them. People are getting degrees who probably shouldn't."

That is selling fake degrees for mega-bucks - it's corruption - plain and simple. However Michael Spence, University of Sydney vice-chancellor, categorized the debate around Chinese influence as just "anti-China hysteria".

Meanwhile, according to a Financial Times article, "University of Technology Sydney is involved in a A$10m research partnership with CETC, a Chinese state-owned military technology company that developed an app security forces use to trace and detain Muslims (Uighurs)."

Edward C. Holmes is also the Honorary Visiting Professor, Fudan University, Shanghai, China and Guest Professor, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing, China . These types of positions are known to be highly suss. Although the financial details of this gig are not made public, there have been several cases recently exposing such arrangements as nothing more than cash delivery devices from the CCP in return for information and publishing of papers favourable to the CCP.

For example:
"Charles Lieber, the chair of the department of chemistry and chemical biology (at Harvard), is accused of hiding his involvement in China’s Thousand Talents Plan....Prosecutors say, he was paid $50,000 (£38,000) a month by the Wuhan University of Technology in China and living expenses up to $158,000. He was also awarded more than $1.5m to establish a research lab at the Chinese university.

In exchange, prosecutors allege, Lieber agreed to publish articles, organise international conferences and apply for patents on behalf of the Chinese university, among other things."

From Financial Times article:

"Edward Holmes, an Australian virologist who helped map and share the genetic sequence of the virus, said there was “no evidence” that Sars-Cov-2, the virus that causes Covid-19 in humans, originated in a Wuhan laboratory. He said the closest known relative of Sars-Cov-2 was a bat virus named RaTG13, which was indeed kept at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. But he added the bat virus, which was sampled in Yunnan province, had a level of genome sequence divergence from coronavirus equivalent to at least 20-50 years of evolutionary change. Thus, he does not believe it was responsible for Covid-19."

W. Ian Lipkin: Columbia University, New York.

No figures published that i could find for how much Columbia makes from Chinese students per year but it was a growth industry. 15 000 foreign students, one third are Chinese. A full cost year’s enrolment goes for $76 856 a pop so 5000 times that... equals 384 odd million. Not as good as the Aussies but it’s still a lazy 4 billion over a decade.

Then, on Nov 23, 2019 the staging of a panel at Columbia University discussing the topic: “Panopticism with Chinese Characteristics: Human rights violations by the Chinese Communist Party and how they affect the world” was cancelled.
The University says it was due to scheduling procedural problems. Panellists, say pressure from the Chinese Students and Scholars Association (CSSA) was the real reason. The panel was set to discuss China’s “extensive matrix of digital surveillance systems, optimised for maximum social control”.
The panel linked the decision to six “similar incidents of blatant vandalism, hate speech and physical assaults from pro-Beijing Chinese students” on other campuses.

W. Ian Lipkin actually visited China in January, 2019 where, by his own admission, he has special access, claiming, "I have a different reputation, and I can go pretty much anyplace I want." Whilst there, he collected a medal "issued from the Central Government, Central Military Commission, and the State Council". The medal was to show appreciation for "working closely with scientists and officials in China" over twenty years.

In 2016, he was "honored with the China International Science and Technology Cooperation Award, presented in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, presided by President Xi Jinping."

Of all of our co-authors, Lipkin is arguably the biggest in terms of profile. Known as the Virus-hunter, he's definitely number one in terms of China guan-xi.

"At the height of the SARS outbreak in 2003, Lipkin was invited by senior Chinese scientists and officials to assess the state of the epidemic, identify gaps in science, and develop a strategy for containing the virus and curtailing infections and deaths. Once the outbreak was contained, Lipkin helped develop the institutional infrastructure to ensure China would have the resources to detect and more rapidly respond to emerging infectious threats, in part through building the Institut Pasteur in Shanghai, new national Centers for Disease Control in Beijing, and the Guangzhou Institute of Biomedicine and Health. Today, he continues to consult with the Ministry of Science and Technology, the Chinese Academy of Science, and the Ministry of Health. He has also served as a consultant for a climate change program at Beijing Normal and as a visiting professor at Beijing University. Last year, the Chinese Academy of Sciences awarded funding for a collaborative project between CII and Sun Yat-Sen University in zoonotic diseases."

That's a handy resume. How many foreigners get that far in Chinese society?

Interestingly, in Feb or March it appears he contracted the virus but is now back at work.

Andrew Rambaut: Institute of Evolutionary Biology, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Guessing the income from Chinese students there is similar to the above so won't rake over that.

The interesting thing about Rambaut is that he is a staunch advocate of genomic surveillance, which is DNA profiling technology.

Apart from the virus originating at the seafood market through pangolins article, his most recent published paper in Nature Medicine is: Pandemics: spend on surveillance, not prediction. In this paper he praises another Nature article which states:

"Surveillance and discovery efforts are bearing fruit in chronic disorders and in studies of normal physiology... What is anticipated, although not yet achieved, is the development of systems that aggregate data about the use of medical services, data about prescription and over-the-counter drug purchases, and other chatter that could promote situational awareness."

However, other dissenting reports point out, "Across the world, DNA databases that could be used for state-level surveillance are steadily growing. The most striking case is in China. Here police are using a national DNA database along with other kinds of surveillance data, such as from video cameras and facial scanners, to monitor the minority Muslim Uyghur population in the western province of Xinjiang."

Now here's the thing. Guess who the co-authors on Rambaut's genomic surveillance paper are?

None other than Edwards C. Holmes and Kristian G. Andersen (who we'll get to next) - both co-authors of the article endorsing China's version of the conronavirus origin - both big-time recipients of Chinese money.

The three of them frequently collaborate. Their stuff seems to get automatically printed in Nature - the top Science rag in the world. In theory, that makes our guys the world's pre-eminent think-tank on genomic surveillance.

Kristian G. Andersen:Department of Immunology and Microbiology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA, USA, lead author of the Proximal Origin paper

Along with two of the above co-authors, Andersen is a genomic surveillance enthusiast:

"We urge those working on infectious disease to focus funds and efforts on a much simpler and more cost-effective way to mitigate outbreaks — proactive, real-time surveillance of human populations."

Andersen works for Scripps Research Institute. Scripps was in financial trouble hemorrhaging 20 mil a year. But just when the first virus cases were emerging, they received great news. They issued a press release Nov 27, 2019:

“Scripps Research and Shenzhen Bay Laboratory (China) today announced a trans-Pacific chemical biology research collaboration that combines the expertise of both institutions.”

Presumably the financial expertise was more from the Chinese side of the equation. Shenzhen City Council and Peking University Shenzhen Graduate School are backing the venture.

"Several Scripps Research chemical biology faculty will establish joint laboratories at Shenzhen Bay Laboratory with research areas including synthetic chemistry, natural products, glycobiology, chemical genetics, proteomics and other critical areas of chemical biology.

"Shenzhen Bay Laboratory (SZBL) is a recently established Guangdong Provincial Laboratory located in the heart of China’s Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macau Greater Bay area. SZBL strives to become a hub for world-class research at the forefront of health science and innovation, spurring novel solutions to the grand issues challenging mankind."

So to break that down: a new bio-tech lab set up in the Hong Kong vicinity with the Hong Kong protest in full swing - in partnership with a bankrupt firm whose head scientist is a cheer-leader for genomic surveillance - funded with money from the CCP - in late Nov 2019.

No - nothing fishy about that at all!

Scripps promotes remdesivir which was also endorsed by WIV, which, according to article in Gulf News, Shi Zheng-li’s team “applied for a patent for the drug (remdesivir) in China on behalf of WIV.” (not sure how you patent a drug that's already owned by Gilead)

Eric Topol, founder and director of the Scripps Research Translational Institute (whatever that is):It’s a very safe and effective drug. We now have a definite first efficacious drug for Covid-19, which is a major step forward and will be built upon with other drugs, [and drug] combinations.

One thing for sure - whoever has got a piece of the remdesivir pie has just become mega-wealthy.

Interestingly, Andersen, an advocate of genomic surveillance, believes the attempt to catalog bat viruses (championed by WIV and an American virologist called Peter Daszak) is a waste of time and money:

I feel the claim they are making that you can prevent the next pandemic by doing this type of work is preposterous. If you could, given they worked in Wuhan for so long specifically, you would have thought they could have prevented the current pandemic, and they didn’t.

Somehow didn't stop Andersen riding to Daszak's rescue with the Proximal Origin paper. That's curious. Guess there were 'higher considerations'.

Coincidentally, Scripps board of directors includes Dr Ge Li, founder of WuXi PharmaTech.

WuXi AppTec website: Ge Li, Ph.D, Chairman and CEO (:)
Scientist and entrepreneur leading WuXi since its founding in 2000. Ph.D. in Organic Chemistry from Columbia University. Awards and honors include "2018 SAPA Distinguished Achievement Award", "2018 The 40 Most Influential People in Pharmaceutical Industry in Commemoration of the 40th Anniversary of Reform and Opening-up", "2016 CBA Brilliant Achievement Award".

CBA stands for Chinese Biopharmaceutical Association, USA.

Jeez... I will reread all this tomorrow, and the referenced articles, but one thing that strikes me is that this is about much more than financial incentive. These western academics collaborating (or conspiring, but that's a dirty word) with the Chinese have their reputations at stake here, which, one could argue, is worth much more than a few million dollars. They're all in.

And yet we're told to 'trust the science'.

Kristian G appears to be a twitter fanatic - hopefully i can mine some more interesting data there.

Twitter Jan 15https://twitter.com/K_G_Andersen/status/1217274675023056897
I honestly think China (and all people involved) deserves a *fuck ton* of credit. Responding, detecting, identifying, isolating, and sequencing a novel pathogen in 2 weeks = incredible!

Response to a mild criticism:
“Nice enough work - now, let me just congratulate you by slapping you in the face. Congrats.

“We have exactly zero data suggesting it came from the lab, only speculation, and a lot of data showing it came from nature,” says @K_G_Andersen about the coronavirus origin theory. “The discussion is basically over”
https://twitter.com/VanityFair/status/1258838826082078721

I haven't been following this nearly to the degree you have, but, this is the first I've read that the Chinese admitted the virus did not come from the market:

https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20200529/china-says-wuhan-market-not-origin-of-covid-19

"But Gao Fu, director of the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, didn’t say where the virus, which has killed 350,000 people worldwide, came from originally.

He told the state-controlled Global Times this week that further research shows no connections between food sold in Wuhan’s market and the coronavirus."

Links in the article:

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)30183-5/fulltext

https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1189506.shtml

Could they be preparing us for something?

Could they be preparing us for something?

That's a bombshell! There goes the the market-pangolin theory.

“The novel coronavirus had existed long before" it was found at the market, he said.

He doesn't say much so what does 'existed long before' mean? The market was the main explanation for how a Yunan bat virus pops up in Wuhan 1200 miles away. Now what?

George Gao (Gao Fu) was one of the people Lipkin met in his four day trip to China (along with the Li Kechiang)

Lipkin does make this comment on an hour-long podcast interview when he was sick. (If you listen to podcasts while your exercising or something, then it's got some crazy self-incriminating things in it.)

‘There’s going to be some stuff that’s going to come out that’s going to show more insight into the origins of the outbreak. Some people are going to say this is evidence that they (CCP) withheld information - I’m gonna push back and say ‘No, that’s not the case.’

This is interesting - it's a paper from Kristian G.called Tracking Virus Outbreaks in the Twenty-First Century. There's talk about how the world was caught unprepared but it seems like some organizations were ready:

Here, we describe how many of the key questions in infectious disease epidemiology, from the initial detection and characterization of outbreak viruses, to transmission chain tracking and outbreak mapping, can now be much more accurately addressed using recent advances in virus sequencing and phylogenetics. We highlight the utility of this approach with the hypothetical outbreak of an unknown pathogen, 'Disease X', suggested by the World Health Organization to be a potential cause of a future major epidemic.

Phylogenetics is concerned with:
1. Evolutionary relationships or histories among my species/individuals/genes of interest
2. How sequences evolve
3. Describing processes of sequence evolution with a mathematical model

Number 2 is the interesting one. This is where you get into 'gain-of-function' experiments - the idea being to take a look at evolution from the inside - give it a helping hand - see what happens - so you can better anticipate it - all for our own good etc

Given the last main paragraph, that's enough of a reason, regardless of financial gain, to defend China's effectiveness in controlling the virus, considering that he had a major role in building their infrastructure.

EDIT: In other words, if it's shown that China's infrastructure failed miserably, that will reflect directly on him.

Given the last main paragraph, that's enough of a reason, regardless of financial gain, to defend China's effectiveness in controlling the virus, considering that he had a major role in building their infrastructure.

EDIT: In other words, if it's shown that China's infrastructure failed miserably, that will reflect directly on him.

I'm starting to wonder if this is more about genomic surveillance than it is medicine.

Here we have the world's three leading experts on genomic surveillance working with China - who loves that stuff. Whereas in the US they are going to at least meet some headwinds from civil liberties advocates, it's the opposite with the CCP.

The plot thickens...

There's an interesting interview with Lipkin on This Week in Virology where he admits to some classic 'for your own good lying' regarding the effectiveness of masks. Referring to an old SARS study he says:

(P)eople who use facemasks in a consistent way have a 70% reduction in community transmission and if they use them intermittently it was 60%. That was - you know i found that impressive and we talked about it but there was no access to facemasks and so i was.. i thought a long time about trying to publish this coz if i did that - if we did that - it would have deprived - you know - people on the frontlines because there weren’t sufficient facemasks - for getting access to those - and it would have made things worse - so i didn’t proceed with that - so that’s something that unfortunately is going to go in the memoirs rather than the written record.

After asking two modelers to model likely infections in New York around the end of Feb - two weeks before the virus exploded in mid-March, he says:

"There was a big spike as you might anticipate a couple of four weeks later and i anticipate that we’ll see the same thing nationally but then one of these people doing the modelling said, ‘But you know all we need to do is put people into facemasks and everybody can go back to work tomorrow.' I said ‘Absolutely not! That’s crazy!' First of all most people don’t know how to use facemasks, right, so you know they fiddle with, you know, so they really sort of obviate the whole purpose - and secondly - uhm - you know - we don’t really have any data to support that - all we know is that in conjunction they’re important."

This is the kind of thing we've seen too much of. Haughty experts appointing themselves as gatekeepers of the truth - which invariably involves covering up the truth or outright lying for 'our own good'. Problem is, as we saw with the WHO's lies, it wasn't for our own good at all - it directly ushered in an unmitigated disaster.

Upon his return from his fact-finding mission to China, Lipkin launched a media blitz as a 'leading expert'. He repeatedly downplayed the virus and the need to wear masks.

The Columbia University website quoted Lipkin as saying: “So far, there is no evidence that the Wuhan virus will spread to the same extent as SARS, which reached 33 countries.”

On Feb 10, he told NBC that SARS-nCoV-2 is “not nearly as challenging for us as influenza.”

Making a live appearance onthe Doctor Oz show on March 12, Lipkin, to allay people's concerns about the need for masks, said: “One of the things I try to emphasize whenever I talk about this virus is … we will almost certainly have additional fatalities ... but it is not as dangerous as some people may suggest - so if for example we look at this like seasonal flu - it’s gonna be much less than say 1% of people - that’s not to say that we won’t lose lives and it’s not important.” (timestamp 4:00)

In March/April he was advising people not to wear masks, saying "they're not useful" (timestamp 4:00) and describing a suggestion to have people maskup as "crazy" - despite having seen a “compelling” 2003 WHO study “that showed that face masks whether surgical or N-95 had a dramatic impact on community transmission”. (Lipkin's words) (timestamp 32:35)

That's a leading expert using his massive public platform to knowingly spread disinformation. Pure and simple.

Somehow, he (or any of the many other experts who were putting out the same bullshit - including all of Australia's Chief Medical Officers) avoided any blowback from that whatsoever. So i was surprised to read today a headline story about Biden attacking Trump for doing the same thing.

“He had the information,” Mr Biden said. “He knew how dangerous it was. And while this deadly disease ripped through our nation, he failed to do his job on purpose. It was a life-and-death betrayal of the American people.

“It’s beyond despicable, it’s a dereliction of duty. It’s a disgrace.”

I'm not defending Trump, just pointing out that Lipkin (not a Trump supporter), who pushed the same disinformation/lies across as much media as he possibly could (whilst also saying how great China is), gets off Scott free.

Actually i've got more tolerance for politicians lying to us than i do scientists. At least with politicians we half expect it, but scientists are forever trading off this 'we always just report the facts' nonsense, when in fact, some of them, are deliberately spreading lies - with horrific consequences.

So the question is: Is this lying being directed by the CCP, with whom Lipkin has deep ties (see previous posts)? If so, to what end?

"Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct."

But that's not the point! This is a straw man argument. The main concern and possibility is not that this virus was constructed in a lab, it's that it was released from a lab.

None of these headlines denying Chinese lab responsibility unequivocally state that the virus did not escape from the lab in it's natural, unadulterated state; nor do they state with absolute assurance that an adapted virus didn't escape. All they say is this -- that the virus was not contructed in a lab, meaning, in it's purest form, that the DNA was not constructed form scratch in a lab.

It's faulty logic. It's an old political trick. It's like Bill Clinton saying, "I did not have sex with that woman." No, he didn't have intercourse. He just got a blowjob. And unfortunately for him, she didn't swallow. These scientists are making sure they swallow.

EDIT: If you're unfamiliar with the Clinton case, he was busted because his semen was found on Lewinsky's dress.

Yes it's straw-man 101.

Posit a radical view that no one is actually saying: It was engineered in a lab then deliberately released to infect the world.

Then structure your argument to counter this.

That's why i'm curious to look into it.

To say 'Let's take a look at the possibility it may have accidentally escaped from a lab in Wuhan that was working on coronaviruses' - that's not some wild conspiracy theory - it's a reasonable line of enquiry - so what's motivating the over-the-top reaction against it?

Robert F. Garry:
Tulane University, School of Medicine, Department of Microbiology and Immunology, New Orleans, LA, USA
Zalgen Labs, Germantown, MD, USA

Robert F. Garry teaches at Tulane, which, in turn, was involved in the Viral Hemorrhagic Fever Consortium (VHFC) consortium with Scripps (Kristian G. Andersen) and Harvard among others for work in Africa related to Lassa fever, which is supposedly classified as "a potential bio-terrorism threat."

Our man Robert F. Garry is listed as the the founding director of VHFC and the current President. I wonder if that influenced the decision to appoint Zalgen Labs, Garry’s spin-off company, as the industry partner?

So what is Zalgen labs. There’s a listing on Bloomberg but no profile info. A site called Zoomdata has a profile but i don’t know how accurate it is.
According to that site Zalgen Labs has 10 employees. It’s revenue is reported to be $2 million, which doesn’t sound like much, but just before the virus outbreak it was $204 000.

In the few months after the outbreak it’s income has increased 10-fold.

The following was listed in a section at the bottom of the Proximal Origins paper.

Ethics declarations
Competing interests
R.F.G. is co-founder of Zalgen Labs, a biotechnology company that develops countermeasures to emerging viruses.

Some links Dan sourced in relation to Zalgen:

https://www.zalgen.com/press-releases

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160822005090/en/Zalgen-Labs-Introduces-Viral-D...

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/08/02/2018-16537/revocation-of-authoriza...

https://gumshoenews.com/2020/04/26/the-man-made-laboratory-origin-of-covid-19/

https://medicalveritas.org/the-covid-19-lab-origin/

https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/mcm-legal-regulatory-and-policy...

https://vhfc.org/zalgen-labs-awarded-nih-grant-to-advance-diagnostic-products-for-asses...

I'm going to have to take a look down this rabbit hole...

"...so what's motivating the over-the-top reaction against it?"

The most logical and intuitive answer would be that they know or strongly suspect that it did escape from their lab, or at the very least that they can't prove that it didn't.

"...so what's motivating the over-the-top reaction against it?"

The most logical and intuitive answer would be that they know or strongly suspect that it did escape from their lab, or at the very least that they can't prove that it didn't.

Exactly - it's the over-the-top reaction that makes me curious.

Looking at the paper now - you could back a mack truck through some of the holes in their arguments.

Came across this article - haven't delved into it yet but it raises some questions about the honesty of the authors.

https://www.spectator.com.au/2020/04/who-dunnit-who-knows/

Africa could be part of the picture as well. Lot of viruses - lot of Chinese influence - good playground for genomic surveillance.

Btw Dan several links are to the same source - if it's a quote i linked it even if i'd already done it for previous info from that source - so sorry if you wind up reloading the same article

That article indeed led me down the rabbit hole.

While there, I saw a reference to Event 201, which I'd seen headlines about previously but never really looked at. Having taken a closer look now, it really is amazing that this simulation took place a mere six weeks before the outbreak:

https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/

EDIT: Replacing the YouTube version of their highlights video with the main video page which includes all videos: https://www.centerforhealthsecurity.org/event201/videos.html

Again, this is all six weeks before the outbreak. Of course, that doesn't mean anything in itself, but if you watch the video, the parallels are stark.

------

A few links unrelated to Event 201 I have collected:

https://www.zalgen.com/press-releases

https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20160822005090/en/Zalgen-Labs-Introduces-Viral-D...

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/08/02/2018-16537/revocation-of-authoriza...

https://gumshoenews.com/2020/04/26/the-man-made-laboratory-origin-of-covid-19/

https://medicalveritas.org/the-covid-19-lab-origin/

https://www.fda.gov/emergency-preparedness-and-response/mcm-legal-regulatory-and-policy...

https://vhfc.org/zalgen-labs-awarded-nih-grant-to-advance-diagnostic-products-for-asses...

The Theories

Originally the line was that a new corona virus had sprung up from the NanHua Seafood market where wild animals were being slaughtered. Sounded plausible.

In Feburary 2020, Chinese scientists Botao Xiao, and Lei Xiao from the South China University of Technology “proposed the coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory.”

On Feb 22 at an NTU seminar held by the Taiwan Public Health Association Fang Chi-tai (方啟泰) explored the possibility that the virus escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

According to a report in the Taipei Times:

"A French research team that examined the gene sequence of COVID-19 has discovered that it has four more amino acids than other coronaviruses (which) makes its transmission easier.

Mutations of viruses that occur naturally only result in small, singular changes; one would not normally see a naturally mutated virus suddenly take on four amino acids. While such a large mutation is not impossible, it is highly unlikely, he said.

Only an internal administrative review at the institute could rule out whether the virus was manufactured there. Such an investigation would require access to lab records, which is unlikely to happen in the short term, he added.”

Fang Chi-tai's presentation directly challenged the China/WHO message management. It provoked some heavy-hitting attention. Scientists and media outlets lined up to ridicule Fang Chi-tai as a 'conspiracy theorist'.

Then on Mar 17 The Proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 co-authored by 5 eminent professors was published in Nature Medicine.

It claimed “strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 is not the product of purposeful manipulation”. Instead it argues that “...pangolins with nearly identical RBDs provide a much stronger and more parsimonious explanation” of how the virus originated.

This paper generated world news at a time when people were looking for answers. The Guardian wrote:

“A study of its genetic sequence, conducted by infectious disease expert Kristian G Andersen of the Scripps Research Institute...and colleagues, rules out the possibility that it could have been manufactured in a lab or otherwise engineered. Puff go the conspiracy theories.”

The Brisbane Times headline: Scientists dispel theory COVID-19 escaped from lab

However, questions persisted. When you have an earth shattering event that alters the course of history, it’s normal some people will ask ‘What happened there?’

The answers to these origin questions are quite knowable - it’s not theoretical astro-physics - a thorough investigation will uncover it. No doubt the CCP already knows. But not telling.

That increases speculation. Which is also quite normal. From that, we are left with two main theories:

1. It originated from bats which passed it to pangolin which passed it to humans at the Huanan Seafood market where live bats and pangolin were being slaughtered for sale.

2. It accidentally escaped from one of two labs in Wuhan that were studying bat corona viruses.

The bottom line with these theories - and every other theory, is - we don’t know. We don’t know coz China’s not telling. Therefore everything is conjecture.

So that begs the question as to why five leading experts went to so much trouble to combat theory 2 by endorsing theory 1 which also happens to be the CCP's official explanation?

The Strawman

The oldest trick in the book - involves projecting a radicalised voice onto your adversary - then using that to underpin your own arguments.
In this case five professors distorted the “escaped accidentally from an Wuhan lab” to “purposefully manipulated virus” let loose. As W. Ian Lipkin, one of the authors, puts it in an interview with This Week in Virology:

"And then you had all these conspiracy theories that didn’t help either - the notion somehow that it was a deliberately manufactured biological weapon that was created at Wuhan Institute of Virology - this sort of foolishness slowed us down and prevented what could have been more productive interactions. The rumours they have their own life - i don’t know how they’re sustained but they seem to be sustained - there doesn’t seem to be any good way to choke them."

Meanwhile, another group of scientists initiated a petition declaring:

“The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data (by China) on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins. We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.
We support the call from the Director-General of WHO to promote scientific evidence and unity over misinformation and conjecture.”

That's just stupid coz at this stage everything is conjecture, but in essence, the strawman is just bait - get someone to take it - then you’ve got them defending the extreme level trope that you’ve introduced. Politicians do it all the time. Now our leading scientists are in on the act.

Normally you should avoid such arguments like the plague, but seeing how the plague has dominated our input, i’m gonna take the bait, just for the fun of it.

Here’s the central tenant of the paper:

"Theories of SARS-CoV-2 origins

"It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of a related SARS-CoV-like coronavirus. As noted above, the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is optimized for binding to human ACE2 with an efficient solution different from those previously predicted.

Furthermore, if genetic manipulation had been performed, one of the several reverse-genetic systems available for betacoronaviruses would probably have been used. However, the genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone."

The conclusion:

"Our analyses clearly show that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory construct or a purposefully manipulated virus."

However, a paper published in Journal of Virology, does detail a purposeful manipulation of a newly discovered bat virus (SL-CoV S) backbone involving the insertion of SARS virus sequences - to see if they could make the bat virus infectious to humans. At that stage the SL-CoV S was not infectious.

"A series of S chimeras was constructed by inserting different sequences of the SARS-CoV S into the SL-CoV S backbone."

In terms of Ace2-binding, the experiment was successful.

“ACE2-binding activity of SL-CoVs was easily acquired by the replacement of a relatively small sequence segment of the S protein from the SARS-CoV S sequence”

Far from being ‘unpredicted’, and not the way you’d go about it if you did want to enhance ACE-2 binding activity - it has been done - and - it was 'easy'.

Knowing the capability of different CoVs to recombine both in the laboratory and in nature, the possibility that SL-CoVs may gain the ability to infect human cells by acquiring S sequences competent for binding to ACE2 or other surface proteins of human cells can be readily envisaged.

The good news is that this engineering of contagious deadly diseases is all for our own good.

“The outcome of such research will also be invaluable in formulating control strategies for potential future outbreaks caused by viruses that are similar to, but different from, the SARS-CoVs responsible for the 2002-2003 outbreaks.”

How did that strategy work out btw?

They conclude:

The findings presented in this study serve as the first example of host switching achievable for G2b CoVs under laboratory conditions by the exchange of a relatively small sequence segment among these previously unknown CoVs.

So that paper directly refutes the Proximal Origin one which claimed to “irrefutably show” that the virus couldn’t have been engineered.

Later i checked the authors of this alternative paper - maybe they were hacks who lack credibility. Turns out there are 10 of them - guess where they come from?

Five are from Wuhan Institute of Virology, including Bat Woman, Shi Zheng-li.

Imagine that! Having your argument debunked by the very institute you’re trying to protect!

Two others involved in the SARS-like construction experiment are Aussies from the CSRIO - how they are mixed up in this i don’t know - the other three are from China. The funding of course is from the CCP.

Now at least we know a couple of things for sure:

1. Corona viruses were being 'purposely manipulated' in the Wuhan lab. They wrote a paper about it.
2. It is relatively easy to manipulate a corona virus to make it more infectious to humans by enhancing the ACE-2 binding activity in a lab.

Pangolin

In line with the paper’s assertion that the virus wasn’t a laboratory construction, the authors propose their pangolin theory which they trace to the “Huanan Market” (conveniently leaving the Seafood part out of the title). Let’s just ignore for a moment the fact that of the first known cases "13 of the 41 cases had no link to the marketplace" including the very first ones, thereby wrecking the whole market-pangolin case, and take a look at it anyway:

“Malayan pangolins illegally imported into Guangdong (over 1000 km away) contain coronaviruses similar to SARS-CoV-2. Although the RaTG13 bat virus remains the closest to SARS-CoV-2 across the genome, some pangolin coronaviruses exhibit strong similarity to SARS-CoV-2. This clearly shows that the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein optimized for binding to human-like ACE2 is the result of natural selection.” (my brackets)

How does that clearly show anything? They’re similar - not the same. A virus detected in a Malayan pangolin by researchers in Guangdong (interestingly in October 2019 - just before the outbreak) indicated that “Pangolin-CoV is 91.02% and 90.55% identical to SARS-CoV-2 and BatCoV RaTG13, respectively, at the whole-genome level” That’s still short of the 96% match for the bat virus being studied at WIV.

Incidentally, were they also playing around with pangolin virus at WIV? Maybe seeing what happens if you combine the two? We don't know - probably never will.

If a virus is manipulated in a lab it’s not constructed from the ground up. As we saw in the WIV (Wuhan Institute of Virology) experiment, small elements of the original SARS virus were inserted into the backbone of an existing bat virus. That produces a new virus that is similar to the one that received the insertions.

The Proximal Origins paper also asserts:

“For a precursor virus to acquire both the polybasic cleavage site and mutations in the spike protein suitable for binding to human ACE2, an animal host would probably have to have a high population density (to allow natural selection to proceed efficiently).”

That means, in order to account for the many mutations to get from the 92% pangolin match to 100% for nCoV-2, you'd need a lot of animals together over a long period of time. However, according to wikipedia:

“Pangolins are solitary and meet only to mate.”

Regardless, the above is scientific conjecture based on the assumption that the first cases came from the Huanan Seafood Market. If that's wrong, which it is, then everything after that is wrong.

That means the "high density population" of pangolins being slaughtered at the Huanan Seafood Market is a moot point - but let's check it out anyway.

Have seen a lot of stuff related to the virus - it's hard to see anything else - but still haven’t seen any evidence that live pangolins were sold at the market. Surely that’s something that can be definitively ascertained. Lots of people live in Wuhan - many of them went to that market - wouldn’t there be verifiable reports? So how is it so hard to find evidence of “high density population” of pangolins being slaughtered there?

Interestingly, one person who has spent a lot of time in China, including Wuhan, and would have a pretty good idea about whether pangolin are widespread at markets there, is one of the paper’s authors, W. Ian Lipkin. In January he went to China to receive his medal from the CCP. When he returned he gave an interview. When asked about the consumption of pangolin, he said: “I don’t think there’s a whole lot of pangolin eating (in China).” https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/epidemiologist-veteran-of-sars-and-mers-shar...

That sounds like one of the authors debunking the theory he's put his name to.

The question then, is, ‘Why are they doing that?’

CCP money is a factor as we discovered by looking at the authors' income streams. The other thing in common as Kristian G. Andersen put it: proactive, real-time surveillance of human populations."

Maybe the last sentence of the paper is the most truthful one in it:

"Irrespective of the exact mechanisms by which SARS-CoV-2 originated via natural selection, the ongoing surveillance of pneumonia in humans and other animals is clearly of utmost importance."

Interesting references Dan. I forgot about the French guy - Nobel prize winner no less.

Other refs show how bio-tech companies profit from viruses - even when their vaccines are rubbish. They do have a vested interest. Taiwan seems to have proven that all you need is a cheap mask - not billions of dollars thrown at drug companies to find a technical solution that never seems to actually work.

As you pointed out before, the heavyweight attacks on anyone going off script is the thing that gets your attention.

The first ever Wuhan lab conspiracy theorist was Shi Zheng-li, aka Batwoman, a senior scientist at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. According to an interview published in Scientific American, when she first got the call from WIV, she was at a seminar in Shanghai. It was the Director of the lab: “Drop whatever you are doing and deal with this now.”

Shi Zheng-li caught the first train back to Wuhan. On the journey her mind was churning:

“I wondered if [the municipal health authority] got it wrong. I had never expected this kind of thing to happen in Wuhan, in central China.”

To the world’s leading expert in SARS-like bat viruses (she discovered the bat virus believed to be the source of SARS), it just didn’t add up. If there was going to be a new SARS-like outbreak, she’d pegged Guangdong or Yunan in the south of China as the most likely places given that’s where the major populations of coronavirus-carrying bats lived - not 1000km away in Wuhan city. Her first thoughts were:

“Could they have come from our lab?”

Which leaves the question as to why scientists get so worked up by anyone speculating that the Wuhan labs might have been the source? Even Batwoman - who actually worked there - instinctively thought it was the most likely explanation.

Back at the lab they went to work on identifying the virus’s genome sequence. They extracted samples from 7 patients - 5 were identified as coronavirus - then sent them to another facility to determine the cells' exact RNA (aka DNA).

“Meanwhile she frantically went through her own lab’s records from the past few years to check for any mishandling of experimental materials, especially during disposal.”

The article doesn’t detail the results of this audit but 3 days later the results from the genome sequencing were in. On Feb 3, Shi Zheng-li’s WIV team published a paper to announce their findings:

“2019-nCoV was highly similar throughout the genome to RaTG13, with an overall genome sequence identity of 96.2%. (F)or all sequences—RaTG13 is the closest relative of 2019-nCoV and they form a distinct lineage from other SARSr-CoVs.”

RaTG13 is a horseshoe (rhinolophus) bat virus that was collected from a cave in Yunan by an intrepid team of researchers from WIV, including Shi Zheng-li.

In addition they reported that the virus had jumped directly from bats to humans, with no intermediate host, which directly conflicts with the pangolin theory (espoused by Andersen et al). Finally they “confirmed”:

“2019-nCoV uses the same cell entry receptor—angiotensin converting enzyme II (ACE2)—as SARS-CoV.”

That’s interesting - coz in 2008 WIV conducted an experiment that inserted a SARS S sequence into a bat virus to enable ACE-2 binding. According to that paper:

“ACE2-binding activity of SL-CoVs was easily acquired by the replacement of a relatively small sequence segment of the S protein from the SARS-CoV S sequence.”

That was 2008. From what i can ascertain, that experiment to insert a SARS sequence into SL-Covs was not conducted on the RaT13 strain. But Professor Edward Holmes - co-author of the Proximal Origin paper confirmed that RaT13 was later kept at WIV.

In a curious interview with the Financial Times, he says in one breath that there was “no evidence” that Sars-Cov-2 … originated in a Wuhan laboratory, but in the next he says “the closest known relative of Sars-Cov-2 was a bat virus named RaTG13, which was indeed kept at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.”

According to Professor Holmes, RaTG13, despite being 96.2% identical, “had a level of genome sequence divergence from coronavirus equivalent to at least 20-50 years of evolutionary change (through natural mutations). Thus, he does not believe it was responsible for Covid-19.”

This is interesting on two levels. Firstly, when Shi Zheng-li discovered a bat virus in Yunan “with a genomic sequence nearly 97 percent identical to the one found in civets in Guangdong, the finding concluded a decade-long search for the natural reservoir of the SARS coronavirus.”

So “nearly 97%” is conclusive but 96.2% is “no evidence”? Holmes then co-authors Proximal Origins claiming pangolins were the likely source of Covid-19 on the grounds of a 91% match. (cont. next post)

(cont. from prev post)

Secondly, what if, instead of the 20-50 years of evolutionary change required to bridge the 3.8% gap between RaTG13 (or similar collected virus) and Covid-19, the process had a helping hand in a lab?

As it turns out, that’s exactly the sort of experiments that were being conducted at WIV. Apart from genetically modifying viruses, as we saw in the 2008 experiment, WIV scientists were also forcing viruses to mutate through artificial means. In an article published June 24, 2016 in Journal of Virology, a team of WIV scientists, including Shi Zheng-li, detail how they succeeded in getting a bat virus sample (named WIV1) to mutate. In a section titled ‘Construction of WIV1 mutants’ they write:

“RT-PCR was used to generate five amplicons containing the five mutations designed in the strategy.”

The paper states that stocks of these viruses were cultivated and stored at the lab “for future use”.

In the same paper, under the heading, 'Strategy for construction of an infectious WIV1 BAC' the WIV scientists report that: “we have developed a fast and cost-effective method for reverse genetics of coronaviruses.”

Again the point of the exercise was to see if they could make the virus more infectious to humans … “to develop therapeutics for future control of emerging SARS-like infections.”

So, according to their own published papers, WIV scientists, including Shi, were actively devising strategies to both genetically modify existing bat viruses as well as forcing them to mutate.

But were they performing such techniques on RatG13, or a similar collected virus - or combining "all the building blocks" of different ones?
The very last line in the 2016 paper suggests they were - at the very least it says they wanted to:

“The development of different cell lines from the Rhinolophus bat, which is the reservoir host of SL-CoV, will facilitate this research in the future.”

RatG13 is a virus collected from Rhinolophus bats in Yunan. It was held at WIV. As were others.

Finally, in an article published on Feb 2, 2020 in Cell Research, Shi Zheng-li and other authors declare:

“(R)emdesivir and chloroquine are highly effective in the control of 2019-nCoV infection in vitro... (W)e suggest that they should be assessed in human patients suffering from the novel coronavirus disease.”

According to a comprehensive article in Gulf News, Shi Zheng-li’s team “applied for a patent for the drug (remdesivir) in China on behalf of the WIV.”

So what have we learned?

1. Shi Zheng-li originally thought WIV was the source of Covid-19.
2. RatG13 is the closest known match to Covid-19 at 96.2%
3. RatG13 was stored at WIV.
4. WIV was conducting experiments that involved inserting SARS sequences into new bat viruses (to enhance ACE-2 binding) in order to make them more infectious to humans.
5. WIV was forcing viruses to mutate - to see what happens.
6. Shi Zheng-li doesn’t support the pangolin theory.
7. Shi- Zheng-li is an advocate for remdesivir as a cure and applied for a patent on behalf of WIV.
8. She hasn’t been heard from since the CCP clamped down on domestic scientists making public comment in early April.

(cont. from prev post)

None of the above is conclusive proof that Covid-19 escaped from an Wuhan lab - it’s circumstantial evidence. But it’s enough to propose an independent investigation of what the hell was/is going on at a lab that was deliberately engineering viruses to make them more deadly to humans. Not just that one - but all such facilities worldwide that are engineering deadly pathogens.

Add to the mix the Washington Post report stating: “U.S. Embassy officials sent two official warnings back to Washington about inadequate safety at the lab, which was conducting risky studies on coronaviruses from bats.”

Regardless of where the virus came from, there are societal ethics questions involved in such research.

Claims from scientists that these risky experiments are all for our own good - then get angry if they're questioned about it - that doesn’t cut it. These experiments have been going on since at least 2008 - what we do know is that none of that knowledge gleaned was helpful in terms of preventing the current outbreak. Advocates will cry 'Yes - that's why we need even more virus engineering!'

Some people, inside and outside the scientific community, are now saying, ‘Thanks - but no thanks.’

As for Batwoman, despite the backlash against her (which originated from social media within China), the impression you get from reading about her - it’s not the ‘evil scientist’ archetype at all. She seems like an Indiana Jones style virus hunter who genuinely believes her research might be helpful. She strongly denies that the virus originated from WIV.

“The novel 2019 coronavirus is nature punishing the human race for keeping uncivilised living habits. I swear on my life that it has nothing to do with our laboratory.”

Although she has become the face of WIV, it’s important to remember that she's not the boss there and she did not work alone. All of the papers involving the manipulation of bat viruses are collaborative efforts - including with scientists from around the world. How do all these scientists hold up when they’re put under the microscope? Is there a clique within this group that exercises control or is running an agenda? I don’t know. But despite what you read about scientists pledging "solidarity with all scientists in China", there is dissent within the scientific community.

One example is Prof Simon Wain-Hobson, a virologist at the Pasteur Institute in Paris. In 2014 he warned against so-called ‘gain-of-function’ virus manipulation calling it "misleading" and "irrational."

“There is nothing good to be gained … The consequence of any accident would be anywhere from a handful of infections to a catastrophic pandemic.”

This is a fascinating series of posts, one that will take some time to digest and follow up on.

In the meantime, I watched a 'conspiracy theory' documentary, Plandemic, that I had discounted mainly due to all the negative press it received. But, partly because of all the negative press, and because it was pulled from every media outlet possible, I decided to watch it. I'll post my initial reactions under a new sub-thread, but it does mention the Wuhan lab.

In short, it wasn't nearly as tin foil hat as I'd expected. It's sloppy in a few places, but I'm not sure what all the fuss is about. It's tame.

With regards to:

“The novel 2019 coronavirus is nature punishing the human race for keeping uncivilised living habits. I swear on my life that it has nothing to do with our laboratory.”

Not surprising. Either that, or you and your family disappear.

Just got around to watching Event 201 all the way through. That's freaky!

Uncannily accurate on how it was going to pan out - not much detail on how to prevent it - which i assume was meant to be the point of the conference.

Remdesivir keeps cropping up in the research into the authors of Proximal Origin (especially Scripps) as well as WIV (who have applied to patent it for use in China). Nothing necessarily suss about that but it's worth bearing in mind that Covid-19 will make some people in the drug business supremely wealthy. If you can get your drug up as a possible cure then you've instantly hit the jackpot, regardless of whether your drug actually works in the long run.

In some ways Remdesivir is the gift that keeps on giving. According to wiki:

"Remdesivir was originally developed to treat hepatitis C and was then tested against Ebola virus disease and Marburg virus disease, but was ineffective for all of these viral infections."

On each occasion it would have received funding at the very least.

Now it's being taken for a spin around the block once more with Covid-19, involving massive world-wide sales.

It's only those remedies that can be patented that will be investigated. For all we know. slug slime might be the magic cure, but it can't be patented so it won't be tested. They only test those formulas that don't appear in nature. If they appear in nature, they can't be patented. So they have to alter anything in order to make money off of it.

I chose not to watch Plandemic initially mainly because I'd read so many negative stories about it, and because I'm just too damn busy. But lately, with all the weirdness going on in the media, I decided to watch it because it received so much bad press.

This post is not about the overall validity of the video. I have not had time to fully research everything, and I probably won't any time soon. I'm more interested in the media response. This video, which is quite tame by conspiracy theory standards, very tame in fact, downright boring even, has been scrubbed from every major platform. Why?

Even it's Wikipedia page doesn't have a link to the main site for the video! How can an encyclopedia, which, I would think, supports objectivity and critical thinking, not include a link to the video on which the encyclopedia page is about? I may have missed it. Check for yourself: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plandemic . BTW, here's a site hosting the video. It doesn't appear to be run by the producers: https://plandemicvideo.com/.

I've looked into two claims from the video so far. The first is the Bayh-Dole Act, which allows private interests doing research for the US government to acquire patents on inventions they made while under contract with the government. So, with taxpayer money, they invent something, then make billions off the patent while charging those taxpayers a premium. This is all true: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bayh%E2%80%93Dole_Act.

The other thing I looked into was a claim in the video that flu vaccine increases the risk of coronvirus by 36%, or something to that effect, and they splash an image of the study briefly. I found the study, and indeed it appears that flu vaccine does make one more vulnerable to coronavirus, if I'm reading things correctly. A quote:

" Vaccine derived virus interference was significantly associated with coronavirus and human metapneumovirus..."

"Examining non-influenza viruses specifically, the odds of both coronavirus and human metapneumovirus in vaccinated individuals were significantly higher when compared to unvaccinated individuals ..."

See https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7126676/.

This is interesting given the recent headlines regarding a push to increase flu vaccine and availability in the coming months: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-flu/fears-of-coronavirus-second-w...

I'm just beginning to look at this. There are holes in the video, but the overwhelming negativity with which the media has treated it seems odd.

Heading down that rabbit hole here.

Fears of coronavirus second wave prompt flu push at U.S. pharmacies, drugmakers

From: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-flu-focus/fears-of-coronavirus-se...

Some U.S. doctors are also considering clinics in parks and community centers and even home visits for vulnerable patients, said David Ross, vice president of commercial operations for North America at Seqirus.

“As we look at immunization this coming fall, it will play an enormous role in this battle against COVID-19,” Ross said.

So let's look at Sequirus:

https://flu.seqirus.com/

"Seqirus offers one of the most comprehensive portfolios of influenza products all year round."

So COVID will help push increased use of the flu vaccine. I got the flu vaccine last year for the first time on a whim, and had a nasty reaction in the form of severe conjunctivitis. I was in for something else, and the nurse said, hey, we just got the new flu vaccine in. Want one? So I took him up on it.

With regards to the study at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7126676/, I don't think I'll be getting it this year. I'm very pro vaccine. I think it's great stuff, when you're talking about a pathogen that has a 20%+ fatality rate or one, like polio, that disables millions. But for the common flu? Sorry.

Yes - one thing all this rabbit-holing has done is to make me skeptical of swallowing whatever the experts want to shove done my throat - especially medicines.

Like you, i've never been an anti-vaxxer - but would i be willing to take an experimental vaccine rushed onto the market by some big-pharma company who stands to make a killing out of getting everyone to accept their narrative? Nup.

Just read a Washington Post article where the experts are now saying to get ready for the virus to go on for many years and detailing all the state impositions we need to get used to 'going forward'. It's like they've landed in this position of prominence and now they're never gonna let go. The scary thing is that many politicians have got a popularity bump out of this so that encourages them even more.

I look forward to reading your analysis, but in the meantime there are two obvious, irrefutable examples of human manipulation of events leading to the destruction of our environment and economies.

The first is our inability to work together to address a pandemic. In itself, that is shocking. Given all the technology we have, particularly with regards to instant global communication and data transfer, it's astounding that we can't manage a wimpy virus like COVID. Imagine what a much worse virus could do, one with, say, a 30% mortality rate that transmits before symptoms are present and kills the healthy, not just the old and those with weakened immune systems.

But the far worse example is global warming. We're looking at one, maybe two more generations after which the human race is toast if radical change is not made now. It's surely entertaining to watch, as a good typhoon is, except this is the grandaddy of typhoons.

I go through cycles of having hope, thinking maybe the next generation will get it right, and just saying, you know, we don't have what it takes. Our brains are going to be our undoing. They led to our rise on the food chain, but they're just not up to the task of getting over all those animal urges, also produced in the same brain, of greed and self preservation.

Maybe some instinct will kick in universally that will allow us to cooperate and actually act as an organism, our species that is, as birds fly in flocks and ants do all sorts of crazy shit, maybe that biological trait is lying dormant in us and will rise when needed. Let's hope so.

"Examples ... of human manipulation of events leading to the destruction of our environment and economies.

1. Our inability to work together to address a pandemic. In itself, that is shocking. (good observation) Given all the technology we have, particularly with regards to instant global communication and data transfer...

This is where the double-edged sword comes in. We're not just galloping towards the precipice of big-data control (and warming) anymore - we've careered over - due to Covid (and exponential consumption). Saw a good anti-lockdown banner that said 'Covid-1984'. We're living it. There are still substantial pockets of resistance - the fight's not over by any means - but the fight is on.

China has gone right ahead and done it. It's own people first - then Tibet, Hong Kong and Xinjiang. It's a high tech block break n brainwash.
Hong Kong is an example of both sides of the sword. The internet allowed people to come together in a just cause - they used it, savvily, but, combined with Covid, it was also the instrument that crushed them.

This is the technological 'Great Leap Forward'. It's happening. The difference from the last Great Leap Forward is that the internet has no borders. Even if we forget all about what the origin of the virus was, which we mustn't do (although mass media has long forgotten), there's still the fallout of jacked-up surveillance justified under the dark cloak of night. That's real, whatever the 'reason' for it. I think you're right with the 'decentralization'. It's a fucking pity, but it may be the only way to undermine the centralized power base.

2. Global warming. We're looking at one, maybe two more generations after which the human race is toast if radical change is not made now. It's surely entertaining to watch, as a good typhoon is, except this is the grandaddy of typhoons.

Yeah, i often wonder if aliens discovered earth just now - what they would make of us? Off the rails dysfunctional suicidal consumers with a contagious disease? It pisses me off that so many 'experts' have dropped the ball on Covid - it devalues the hard-accrued facts about the consequences of pollution and global warming.

I go through cycles of having hope, thinking maybe the next generation will get it right, and just saying, you know, we don't have what it takes. Our brains are going to be our undoing. They led to our rise on the food chain, but they're just not up to the task of getting over all those animal urges, also produced in the same brain, of greed and self preservation.

I do think robots will outlive us - it's all about the 'vehicle for Thought' - hopefully they'll do a better job.

Maybe some instinct will kick in universally that will allow us to cooperate and actually act as an organism, our species that is, as birds fly in flocks and ants do all sorts of crazy shit, maybe that biological trait is lying dormant in us and will rise when needed. Let's hope so.

As Brian once said - basic morality is a self-preservation mechanism - his evidence: a society is not gonna get far as a pack of murderous cheats - so it must be built in there somewhere. It's prone to manipulation as you say - maybe the day has come where the bees will rally, start fighting back, demand some answers. Involvement breeds its own excitement.

Holy fuck - the scientific experts (Andersen, Holmes, Lipkin, Garry, Rambaut) that wrote the paper that convinced the world that Covid wasn't a lab-escape, knew all along it was engineered!

That's criminal. Proximal Origin will go down as one of the greatest academic frauds in the history of humanity (best since anthrax at least).

They fabricated a scientific paper, which was proudly peer-reviewed/published by Nature, then mega-promoted by the world's biggest media platforms - to cover up the origin of Covid. To protect the CCP.

This paper was a con-job from the beginning. Why has it taken until now for it to be questioned by the media?

Even now most media outlets are ignoring these incriminating emails.

[image]

Yes, this seems to be snowballing rather quickly. No doubt it will just roll of a cliff and be forgotten.

But maybe not. Here is a fascinating read about the group DRASTIC which Newsweek credits with bringing this story into the limelight and making it acceptable to talk about.

Just a snippet:

"If there had been any remaining doubt about the WIV's pattern of deception, these new theses put it to rest. They indicated that the WIV researchers had never believed a fungus had killed the Mojiang miners, contradicting Shi's remarks in Scientific American and elsewhere. In fact, WIV researchers had been so concerned about a new SARS-like outbreak that they'd tested the blood of neighboring villagers for other cases. And they had known the genetic sequences for the eight other SARS-like viruses from the mine—which could have helped researchers to understand more about SARS-CoV-2 in the early days —long before the pandemic started, and had kept the information to themselves, until DRASTIC called them out." (emphasis added)

Here's an interesting bit from the Newsweek article. Why this isn't front and center on every nighttime news broadcast is insane:

Ribera was responsible for solving another piece of the RaTG13 puzzle. Had the WIV been actively working on RaTG13 during the seven years since they discovered it? Peter Daszak said no: they had never used the virus because it wasn't similar enough to the original SARS. "We thought it's interesting, but not high-risk," he told Wired. "So we didn't do anything about it and put it in the freezer."

Ribera disproved that account. When a new science paper on genetics is published, the authors must upload the accompanying genetic sequences to an international database. By examining some metadata tags that had been accidentally uploaded by the WIV along with its genetic sequences for RaTG13, Ribera discovered that scientists at the lab had indeed been actively studying the virus in 2017 and 2018—they hadn't stuck it in a freezer and forgotten about it, after all.

In fact, the WIV had been intensely interested in RaTG13 and everything else that had come from the Mojiang mineshaft. From his giant Sudoku puzzle, Ribera determined that they made at least seven different trips to the mine, over many years, collecting thousands of samples. Ribera's guess is that their technology had not been good enough in 2012 and 2013 to find the virus that had killed the miners, so they kept going back as the techniques improved.

He also made a bold prediction. Cross-referencing snippets of information from multiple sources, Ribera guessed, in a Twitter thread dated August 1, 2020, that a cluster of eight SARS-related viruses mentioned briefly in an obscure section of one WIV paper had actually also come from the Mojiang mine. In other words, they hadn't found one relative of SARS-CoV-2 in that mineshaft; they'd found nine. In November 2020, Shi Zhengli confirmed many of DRASTIC's suspicions about the Mojiang cave in an addendum to her original paper on RaTG13 and in a talk in February 2021.

Of course, the only reason Ribera has had to perform such Sherlockian feats is because the WIV has not shared the data investigators have asked for. The WIV maintained a database on its website with all the data on the viruses in its collection, including the many unpublished ones, but that page on its website has been empty for some time. When asked about the missing database in January 2021, Shi Zhengli explained that it had been taken offline during the pandemic because the WIV web server had become the focus of online attacks. But once again, DRASTIC poked holes in this explanation: the database was taken down on September 12, 2019, shortly before the start of the pandemic, and well before the WIV would have become a target.

Other databases yielded other clues. In the WIV's grant applications and awards, The Seeker found detailed descriptions of the Institute's research plans, and they were damning: Projects were underway to test the infectivity of novel SARS-like viruses they'd discovered in human cells and in lab animals, to see how they might mutate as they crossed species, and to genetically recombine pieces of different viruses—all being done at woefully inadequate biosecurity levels. All the elements for a disaster were on hand.

Of course, that is not proof that a disaster took place. Barring unlikely eyewitness testimony, we may never have that. But all the evidence DRASTIC has produced points in the same direction: The Wuhan Institute of Virology had spent years collecting dangerous coronaviruses, some of which it has never revealed to the world. It was actively testing these viruses to determine their ability to infect people, as well as what mutations might be necessary to enhance that ability—likely with the ultimate goal of producing a vaccine that would protect against all of them. And the ongoing effort to cover this up implies that something may have gone wrong. (emphasis added)

EDIT: The Drastic site: https://drasticresearch.org

Here's something Dan - lead DRASTIC member, @Billy Bostickson, reached out to me about a year ago having somehow seen this thread (that dude is an intrepid researcher!) - we've maintained contact since.

We managed to play a 'small but pivotal' role in exposing the Proximal Origin paper by pointing out that the authors were up to their eye-balls in China ties, as well as documenting the fact that WIV was performing backbone insertions on viruses to make them more contagious.

Congrats to your little site, Formosahut - it has made a difference! Man, how i would love it if we could catch up for a mead or two to celebrate!

But hats off to DRASTIC. This could have gone either way - in fact it was looking for a long time like it was going to be smothered by the overwhelming force of big-everything - media, tech, science, politics.

This is corruption on an astonishing scale - that shit never stops by itself - never. It only stops when it's exposed and made to stop.

To do that it takes incredible dedication and persistence in the face of constant suppression and vilification. Drastic have broken through that finally and altered the course of humanity - that sounds ridiculous - but it's true.

They won't get the full credit they deserve as the media desperately covers their arses and pretends they've unearthed 'new evidence' as they take ownership of the lab-leak reality. But those who have been involved in the effort to expose this massive fraud know the critical role DRASTIC has played - and is continuing to play - coz this is far from over.

In the fullness of time, i trust that their relentless pursuit of the truth (all done for free Vs the billions paid to the experts to cover it up) will be enshrined in the history of Covid (with a tiny footnote for Formosahut!).

Wow! Well done. I just provided the vehicle, you did all the work. I have to say, It did cross my mind that perhaps you were @Billy Bostickson (or one of the other members). I've only just scratched the surface of the Drastic site. It is nice to see the internet used for something truly good and productive for a change.

This is corruption on an astonishing scale - that shit never stops by itself - never. It only stops when it's exposed and made to stop.

To do that it takes incredible dedication and persistence in the face of constant suppression and vilification. Drastic have broken through that finally and altered the course of humanity - that sounds ridiculous - but it's true.

Well put! I wonder who has the movie rights to their story? You know there's going to be one. I hope it does their efforts justice.

And ditto on the mead!

Here's another major story citing DRASTIC from yet another very mainstream publication, Vanity Fair. Like the Newsweek story, this is a major piece of work, and this one has, seemingly, primary information sourced by Vanity Fair.

Phrases like, "according to documentation of the meeting obtained by Vanity Fair," and "said four former State Department officials interviewed by Vanity Fair. " give a Watergate, Deepthroat feel to this whole mess. Keep in mind a "State Department official" can be most anyone who worked for the State Department, which is enormous.

Some excerpts of interest:

A months long Vanity Fair investigation, interviews with more than 40 people, and a review of hundreds of pages of U.S. government documents, including internal memos, meeting minutes, and email correspondence, found that conflicts of interest, stemming in part from large government grants supporting controversial virology research, hampered the U.S. investigation into COVID-19’s origin at every step. In one State Department meeting, officials seeking to demand transparency from the Chinese government say they were explicitly told by colleagues not to explore the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s gain-of-function research, because it would bring unwelcome attention to U.S. government funding of it.

In an internal memo obtained by Vanity Fair, Thomas DiNanno, former acting assistant secretary of the State Department’s Bureau of Arms Control, Verification, and Compliance, wrote that staff from two bureaus, his own and the Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, “warned” leaders within his bureau “not to pursue an investigation into the origin of COVID-19” because it would “‘open a can of worms’ if it continued.”

---

As months go by without a host animal that proves the natural theory, the questions from credible doubters have gained in urgency. To one former federal health official, the situation boiled down to this: An institute “funded by American dollars is trying to teach a bat virus to infect human cells, then there is a virus” in the same city as that lab. It is “not being intellectually honest not to consider the hypothesis” of a lab escape.

---

Park, who in 2017 had been involved in lifting a U.S. government moratorium on funding for gain-of-function research, was not the only official to warn the State Department investigators against digging in sensitive places. As the group probed the lab-leak scenario, among other possibilities, its members were repeatedly advised not to open a “Pandora’s box,” said four former State Department officials interviewed by Vanity Fair. The admonitions “smelled like a cover-up,” said Thomas DiNanno, “and I wasn’t going to be part of it.”

It's worth noting that both these stories from Newsweek and Vanity Fair came out on the same day, or pretty close anyway.

Here's an intriguing excerpt from the Vanity Fair article:

That fall, the State Department team got a tip from a foreign source: Key information was likely sitting in the U.S. intelligence community’s own files, unanalyzed. In November, that lead turned up classified information that was “absolutely arresting and shocking,” said a former State Department official. Three researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, all connected with gain-of-function research on coronaviruses, had fallen ill in November 2019 and appeared to have visited the hospital with symptoms similar to COVID-19, three government officials told Vanity Fair. (emphasis added)

This suggests there is actually hope, and it gives even more of a Deepthroat feel to the whole thing. One question is, do they know who the foreign source is, or not? Regardless, how did the foreign source know what information was likely in US intelligence files?

It's that second question that might serve as a lead of sorts. How did they know the US had the facts, knowingly or not? They knew that that US intelligence had information about six sick lab researchers. How would they know that?

A related question is, how did US intelligence get the information that they failed to analyze? But the real intriguing point is that the source new more about the US intelligence than the US intelligence services themselves!

It's that second question that might serve as a lead of sorts. How did they know the US had the facts, knowingly or not? They knew that that US intelligence had information about six sick lab researchers. How would they know that?

A related question is, how did US intelligence get the information that they failed to analyze? But the real intriguing point is that the source new more about the US intelligence than the US intelligence services themselves!

The simplest answer is that the source gave the information to intelligence previously, bundled with other intelligence, and the reference to the illnesses was simply glossed over and forgotten.

Once again from the Vanity Fair article:

That fall, the State Department team got a tip from a foreign source: Key information was likely sitting in the U.S. intelligence community’s own files, unanalyzed. In November, that lead turned up classified information that was “absolutely arresting and shocking,” said a former State Department official.

This seems to be a major takeaway from their research. I've looked back over previous articles on the tip off regarding the sick researchers, and I have not yet found a previous mention of the source having such an intimate connection to US intelligence, intimate enough to know what they would probably have in their files.

For example, the Washington Post article of May 23 puts it this way:

WASHINGTON—Three researchers from China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report that could add weight to growing calls for a fuller probe of whether the Covid-19 virus may have escaped from the laboratory.

The details of the reporting go beyond a State Department fact sheet, issued during the final days of the Trump administration, which said that several researchers at the lab, a center for the study of coronaviruses and other pathogens, became sick in autumn 2019 “with symptoms consistent with both Covid-19 and common seasonal illness.”

Then on May 24 the Washington Post gives a bit more information regarding the source:

The Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday that three WIV researchers became ill enough in November 2019 that they sought local hospital care, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report, though officials expressed differing views over the strength of the evidence. White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Monday the information came from a foreign entity, and that the U.S. needed additional information to independently verify it.
(emphasis added)

The Guardian is vague on the source in on May 24:

China has vehemently denied a Wall Street Journal report citing US intelligence materials that said several members of staff at a key virus laboratory in Wuhan had fallen ill shortly before the first patient with Covid-like symptoms was recorded in the city on 8 December 2019.

So, so far as I can tell, Vanity Fair has given us more than anybody else so far regarding the source of this information. If what Vanity Fair reports is true, we can assume that:
-the source is well known to US intelligence
-the source knows US intelligence operations well
-the source had some sort of regular dealing with US intelligence, OR, the source had knowledge of a stream of US intelligence source and knew what that stream would include

This narrows the field dramatically. If what VF reports is true, this wasn't some nurse tipping them off. Also, it means there may be much more to come.

This also indicates that there was massive coverup in the US, along with, perhaps coordinated with, that in China.

To one former federal health official, the situation boiled down to this: An institute “funded by American dollars is trying to teach a bat virus to infect human cells, then there is a virus” in the same city as that lab. It is “not being intellectually honest not to consider the hypothesis” of a lab escape.

That is, always has been, always will be the biggest piece of evidence. I've watched a lot of crime tv series in my time - how do you rule out the chief suspect without any investigation?

I get why the CCP are doing it - but what's the motivation of all these scientific experts, media, politicians, economists?

That's when you need an investigation into the investigation. But who can do it?

People talk about a 'culture problem' at a football club - this is culture problem with culture itself.

There's a way out. It's simple but somehow hard - involves getting back to truth. Normal truth. Not some secret 'higher truth' that justifies a bunch of non-truths.

Get that part right - the foundation - build from there.

I've downloaded all the emails. Here's a link to them in pdf format: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/20793561/leopold-nih-foia-anthony-fauci-emai...

Your post didn't include what to me is the most astonishing part of that email:

"We have a good team lined up to look very critically at this, so we should know much more at the end of the weekend. I should mention that after discussions earlier today, Eddie, Bob, Mike, and myself all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory. But we have to look at this much more closely and there are still further analyses to be done, so those opinions could still change." (emphasis added)

So there it is...

[image]

Well done on getting the primary source for those emails.

Here's a possible scenario:

Andersen and Holmes find that it was engineered, but then Lipkin gets a call from his powerful mates in the CCP saying he needs to control the situation. Fauci is also concerned coz the NIH has helped fund the GoF research that produced the virus - despite a then-ban on GoF research in America.

They go to Andersen and Holmes:

Lipkin: Sorry guys, we can't report that. Think of the damage it would do for future research efforts that we're all involved in. Kristian, the new Scripps research facility in Shenzhen would be scrapped and Eddie, you'd lose your lucrative honorary professorships in China - not to mention your ties to WIV and Bat Lady. We have to think about what's for the greater good here.

Fauci: And how's it going to look if comes to light that the NIH funded the research that produced it? This is not just about deflecting blame from the CCP - we're involved in this as well.

Andersen: Then what are we gonna do? Are you suggesting we cover it up?

Lipkin: It's not a cover-up - we just don't need to report it. As you said - 99.9% of the virus looks like a normal bat virus - let's just focus on that part.

Fauci: What we say, it will still be 99.9% true - that's pretty good, right?

Lipkin: Exactly. Why add fuel to the conspiracy theorists when we can do something great for the world?

Holmes: I don't know - what if we get caught? They're gonna burn us alive.

Fauci: Eddie, you'll be burned alive if we don't do it.

Holmes: But we can say it was an honest mistake if we come clean now. If we get caught altering....

Lipkin: We won't get caught! Who's gonna catch us? We've got Nature, Lancet, New Scientist on board - we've got the media - we've got most politicians - the rest we marginalize and discredit.

Fauci: These are the hard decisions that you need to make when you have a position of power. You have to think 'What's for the greater good?'

Lipkin: In this case, the greater good is also best for us - it's a no-brainer. But we've got to act fast - we need to get ahead of this - the conspiracy theorists are growing by the day. Kristian, you start work on a paper that 'definitively proves' it was natural in origin - i'll get into Nature and hit the media circuit. Peter will work Lancet and get a bunch of other scientists on board.

Fauci: Then it will be 'the weight of science' versus a few disparate 'crackpots' - how can we lose?

Andersen: Ok, let's do it!

The first rat to jump the ship was the big one - Tedros - understated but the first break from blanket-denial.

Not long after came a 'scientists statement' signed by Ralph Baric that went further. Baric has worked at WIV on GoF experiments.

(then a stampede of rats)

It follows that he's looking for a deal. Those guys - the Lipkins the Barics working on biodefense - they are well-acquainted with US intelligence higher ups. This is where they develop their 'Master of the Universe' complexes.

How 'bout the performance of US intelligence? - has to be culpable. Did the same thing with Anthrax - seems what they normally do.

Immense job to fix this - but it's gotta be done.

How 'bout the performance of US intelligence? - has to be culpable. Did the same thing with Anthrax - seems what they normally do.

I'm guessing intelligence has failed repeatedly because it functions as an arm of whoever is in office rather than some objective, autonomous, information gathering organization. If somebody says don't go there, they won't go there. If some dickhead politician says kill that line of inquiry, they kill it.

Perhaps intelligence is a misnomer.

Not long after came a 'scientists statement' signed by Ralph Baric that went further. Baric has worked at WIV on GoF experiments.

Hmmm... possibly....

But how would he have known about the sickened WIV researchers? If it is him, either he was on site when it happened or someone gave him the information. If we can establish that he was not on site at the time, then either it wasn't him or someone gave him the information.

Like patient 0, who is source 0 in this case?

Not long after came a 'scientists statement' signed by Ralph Baric that went further. Baric has worked at WIV on GoF experiments.

Hmmm... possibly....

But how would he have known about the sickened WIV researchers? If it is him, either he was on site when it happened or someone gave him the information. If we can establish that he was not on site at the time, then either it wasn't him or someone gave him the information.

Like patient 0, who is source 0 in this case?

Of course, Baric could be the primary source for US intelligence regardless of his location at the time of the event, but if he were not on site, that would indicate someone perhaps knowingly passing on sensitive information rather than talk around the water cooler if he were on site. So there is a difference there.

But regarding the insider, the linguistics of the Vanity Fair reference is so rich. Here it is once again:

That fall, the State Department team got a tip from a foreign source: Key information was likely sitting in the U.S. intelligence community’s own files, unanalyzed.

The key word here for me is likely.

It suggests the source is pretty sure they would have it as matter of course, as a result of their regular collection of data.

So where does intelligence get regular collection of data? Basically from open or closed sources, open sources being anything publicly available. DRASTIC, for example, has built its entire case, I presume, on open source data. So there's a possibility that information is still hiding in some archive of open source data. The CCP surely deleted any mention of it, but information on the internet is hard to delete entirely.

And closed source (or whatever spooks call it) is everything else.

Regardless, this use of the adverb likely is bugging the shit out of me. It's rich, pregnant, telling.

Or, perhaps the source was just being a snobbish shit and using likely in the polite, indirect suggestive sense meaning, "You have the fucking file you idiot because I gave it to you six months ago."

We'll likely never know.

The emails contain a lot of redacted material - the reason given is that it relates to an ongoing investigation.

This suggests our man, Peter Daszak, is in hot water. When he was putting out all that CCP propaganda i was thinking 'Pete, you must be very confident you're not gonna get caught - coz if you do, you're gonna go down as one of the greatest villains in the history of humanity'.

'Scapegoat' is not quite the right word coz Daszak deserves everything he gets for his lead role in (a) dangerous GoF experiments at WIV and (b) lying to cover it up - but this goes way way deeper than a rogue scientist.

Had a discussion/argument with a friend a few months ago - they said: 'So you're saying all these reputable science journals, Nature, New Scientist, Lancet, etc - they're all corrupt?'

I replied 'Yep' - though it sounded kind of incredible in my own ears. But given the misinformation they platformed - and the truth that they actively suppressed - it's an inescapable conclusion. (Breathtaking stupidity is the only other explanation.)

Then you've got all the media, big-tech, the politicians, the intelligence agencies, the entire WHO organization, famous universities ...

The enormity of this is staggering - which makes me worry 'How are we going to reform this when the entire system is rotten to the core?'

Global Times is a great source - if they're praising you then that's a good sign you're suss. If they're attacking you, that's a good sign you're on the right track.

So great to see DRASTIC cracking it for an article.

Global Times: Shu further explained that the members of the organization act separately when publishing articles or launching campaigns. Specifically, most of the articles or reports by DRASTIC are completed by one to three people. Members tend to collect evidence related to the origins of the novel coronavirus individually instead of collectively. Team founder Billy Bostickson has also worked with members outside the organization on so-called "reports".

Weirdly, the story tries to link DRASTIC with an official US plot to undermine China.

(Lü Xiang) noted that the US is carrying out a "political war" against China with the tracing of the origins of COVID-19 and is now using both overt and covert means in its mission. .. He said that the US has a long tradition, experience and the planning skills to use "political war" against countries it does not agree with. Its ability to "disguise laundry detergent as a biological weapon" is unmatched by other countries.

The reality is that the mainstream in the US and elsewhere have done their absolute best to suppress the info generated by DRASTIC. The recent US Intelligence report with its pointless 'non-finding' shows that's still largely the case.

DRASTIC makes Newsweek in a big way:

Wuhan Lab Theory

Trump was dismissed as a conspiracy theorist and denounced as a racist for pinning the blame for COVID on China and promoting the theory that the virus may have escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Social media platforms and many media outlets called it "settled science" that he was incorrect.

A year later, the narrative has shifted. Trump's suspicion of the Wuhan lab is now mainstream. International anger at China's obfuscation of the origins of the pandemic boiled over. Biden ordered US intelligence agencies to investigate the origins of the pandemic, including the lab leak theory. And while that investigation was inconclusive, a group of amateur sleuths known as DRASTIC has compiled a lot of evidence that suggests the science of the lab leak theory is anything but settled.

Thanks to DRASTIC, we now know that the Wuhan Institute of Virology had an extensive collection of coronaviruses gathered over many years of foraging in the bat caves, and that many of them—including the closest known relative to the pandemic virus, SARS-CoV-2—came from a mineshaft where three men died from a suspected SARS-like disease in 2012. We know that the WIV was actively working with these viruses, using inadequate safety protocols, in ways that could have triggered the pandemic, and that the lab and Chinese authorities have gone to great lengths to conceal these activities. We know that the first cases appeared weeks before the outbreak at the Huanan wet market that was once thought to be ground zero for the pandemic.

None of this proves that the pandemic started in the Wuhan lab, of course: it's entirely possible that it did not. But the evidence assembled by DRASTIC amounts to what prosecutors call probable cause—a strong, evidence-based case for a full investigation.

These developments have forced some awkward U-turns on Trump's critics. Newspapers corrected stories, Facebook stopped censoring posts suggesting the virus could have been manmade, and PolitiFact yanked a "fact check" calling the lab-leak theory "debunked."

On May 11, 2021, Fauci was asked by Senator Rand Paul on Capitol Hill if the virus might have emanated from the Wuhan lab and Fauci answered, "The possibility certainly exists, and I am totally in favor of a full investigation."

DRASTIC coverage comprised a very large portion of this article.

Great to see Drastic getting some recognition.

The prevailing mentality amongst the media is that 'the fairies came along in the night' and uncovered the cover-up.

What i hear a lot now is that people have moved on or that they're over talk of Covid's origin - not over talk of Covid - which is still going full steam - just over talk of giving credit to those who did the hard yards - credit which they never gave in the first place.

It's the usual pattern for a cover-up when you've got the power to prevent an investigation/prosecution:

Deny, suppress, censor, lie - for as long as you possibly can - then when that becomes unsustainable due to the weight of evidence that still gets through to the public, despite your best efforts to crush it - then you say you've 'moved on'.

RSS Feed of thread