The Origin of the Wuhan Coronavirus

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,035
3,795
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
All about who writes the history books.
A school history book mentioning the Alamo in Mexico is probably quite different that a school history book mentioning the Alamo in the USA.

Our Daughter-in-Law (from Salt Lake City UT), in her grade 12 history class, was one of 40 students in that class, but was one of 2 students in that class not born in Mexico (or first generation removed). There where open arguments with the teacher about what was in the history book as opposed to what they’d leaned in school in earlier life.
 

Jinentonix

Executive Branch Member
Sep 6, 2015
9,948
4,418
113
Olympus Mons
What's to argue about? The Alamo is where the heroic Texians crushed the Mexican army and brought peace and justice and Christianity to Texas.
Not to pick nits but I'm pretty sure the Alamo was a mission founded by Roman Catholic missionaries from Spain to "further civilize" your brethren in the South-West.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Twin_Moose

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
31,941
2,260
113
Canadian military officer demands probe into Wuhan’s ‘ground zero’ COVID outbreak
Author of the article:
Denette Wilford
Publishing date:
Jan 10, 2022 • 15 hours ago • 2 minute read •
Join the conversation
A man walks in the street on February 7, 2020 in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. The number of those who have died from the Wuhan coronavirus, known as 2019-nCoV, in China climbed to 636.
A man walks in the street on February 7, 2020 in Wuhan, Hubei province, China. The number of those who have died from the Wuhan coronavirus, known as 2019-nCoV, in China climbed to 636. Getty Images
Article content

An officer with the Canadian military is calling for an investigation into what he believes was “ground zero” of COVID — two months before the global outbreak.
Advertisement
Story continues below
Article content

The officer was one of many athletes participating in the World Military Games in Wuhan in October 2019.

He described the city at the time as “a ghost town,” with schools shut down and hardly any people around or cars in the road – odd since Wuhan is home to 11 million people.

“I’m 100% convinced the virus was present in Wuhan when we were there,” the Canadian officer, who is still suffering from the effects of the illness, told the Daily Mail .

“The burden of proof is on the scientific community and intelligence experts to prove — not for athletes,” he continued, asking why everyone seems so “reluctant” to conduct a proper investigation.

“It feels like we were present at Ground Zero of this pandemic that has had such impact on everyone’s life, with millions of deaths and economies shut down, so why not carry out due diligence?”
Advertisement
Story continues below
Article content

The officer said the mysterious virus hit the Canadian team hard, and a quarantine section was set up for them on their flight back home.

Several European athletes attending the Games also reported the development of COVID-like symptoms in Wuhan, while some reports suggest Iranian competitors died soon after returning home.

As news of the pandemic spread, many of the athletes spoke to each other to discuss if they were early victims of the virus – yet they were not tested.
More On This Topic

Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli inside the P4 laboratory in Wuhan in a 2017 file photo.
COVID-19 cover-up 'worse than Watergate,' new book claims
People wearing protective clothing and masks arrive at Hankou Railway Station in Wuhan, to board one of the first trains leaving the city in China's central Hubei province, April 8, 2020.
WHO says it may be 'last chance' to find COVID origins
This illustration shows the novel coronavirus.
Wuhan market likely origin of COVID-19 outbreak: Scientist

Maj.-Gen. Andrew Downes, Surgeon-General of Canada’s armed forces, reportedly sent a memo to competitors that stated their risk of having caught the coronavirus in Wuhan was “negligible” since they had left the city “well before the virus had begun circulating.”
Advertisement
Story continues below
Article content

However, testing in Canada only became available in January 2020, well after the participants returned.

The whistleblower claimed an email was also sent out, ordering them to not speak publicly about their concerns.

“Until we know how this terrible crisis began, it would be unwise and self-defeating not to turn over every stone,” said Jamie Metzl, a World Health Organisation adviser.

“It would shock most people to learn there has been no comprehensive international investigation into the origins of the pandemic,” he continued. “This is unacceptable and leaves the entire world and future generations at risk.”
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
31,941
2,260
113
LILLEY: Emails show rejection of Wuhan lab leak theory pure politics from outset
Author of the article:
Brian Lilley
Publishing date:
Jan 13, 2022 • 7 hours ago • 3 minute read •
Join the conversation
In this file photo taken on February 03, 2021 members of the World Health Organization (WHO) team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 coronavirus arrive by car at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China's central Hubei province on February 3, 2021.
In this file photo taken on February 03, 2021 members of the World Health Organization (WHO) team investigating the origins of the COVID-19 coronavirus arrive by car at the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan in China's central Hubei province on February 3, 2021. Photo by HECTOR RETAMAL /AFP via Getty Images
Article content

If you wanted to design a way for doctors and scientists to undermine support for public health officials, I couldn’t have done better job than they have done themselves.
Advertisement
Story continues below
Article content

Flip flopping, playing politics and at times outright lying to the public isn’t a way to build a trusting relationship.

The latest example comes from emails showing top scientists were discussing the lab leak theory on COVID’s origins but didn’t want it in the public realm to appease China.

If you have heard of the lab leak theory, then there is a good chance the news report you read, watched or listened to called it a conspiracy theory. Anyone suggesting COVID-19 leaked out of China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology has spent the last two years being branded as a radical conspiracy theorist.

Yet in emails written in early February 2020, top public health experts from the United States and United Kingdom discussed the lab leak theory as the most likely scenario for COVID-19’s appearance.
Advertisement
Story continues below
Article content

“I am 70:30 or 60:40,” said Jeremy Farrar on the question of whether the virus appeared via an accidental release or natural event.

Farrar is a medical researcher and former Oxford professor who would go on to be one of the leads on the UK’s vaccine taskforce. The email was sent on Feb. 2, 2020 to Dr. Francis Collins of the U.S. National Institutes of Health and CC’d to Dr. Anthony Fauci, the lead advisor to the American government on COVID-19.

Collins replies to both men that, “I am coming around to the view that a natural origin is more likely.”

Several top researchers in both countries discussed the idea that a lab leak was the most likely scenario of COVID’s origins while also worrying about “international harmony” and the harm to “science in China” if this idea were discussed.
Advertisement
Story continues below
Article content

By April of 2020, Collins, Fauci and others were dismissing the idea as a conspiracy theory.

Yet in the early days, before politics took over everything related to COVID, the scientists were crediting the leak theory as most credible.

“I really can’t think of a plausible natural scenario where you get from the bat virus or one very similar to it to nCoV where you insert exactly 4 amino acids 12 nucleotide that all have to be added at the exact same time to gain this function – that and you don’t change any other amino acid in S2? I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature,” Farrar wrote to Collins and Fauci.

Dr. Andrew Rambaut, a professor at the University of Edinburgh, wrote to the group that the virus did not seem natural to him.
Advertisement
Story continues below
Article content

“From a (natural) evolutionary point of view the only thing here that strikes me as unusual is the furin cleavage site. It strongly suggests to me that we are missing something important in the origin of the virus,” Rambaut wrote.

These were not the first or last scientists to consider this concept.

The idea was first floated in a paper by Botao Xiao, a biology professor at South China University of Technology, and Li Xiao, a chemistry professor at Wuhan University. In their preliminary paper, the pair said, “The killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan.”

It’s also something that has happened before.

Canada’s chief medical officer of health, Dr. Theresa Tam, told the House of Commons health committee in 2009 that SARS leaked out of a Chinese lab.
Advertisement
Story continues below
Article content

“In Beijing, China, the SARS virus came from infected laboratory workers who infected their family members,” Tam said.

If it happened with SARS, it could happen with SARS-CoV-2, or COVID-19.

We shouldn’t let politics — be it worries over Chinese sensitivities or concern over validating claims made by Trump supporters — get in the way of following the evidence. Sadly, that has happened over the past two years.

Yet now we know that the top scientists were confident the lab leak theory was true, until the politics crept in. Now they wonder why the public questions them on other fronts.

blilley@postmedia.com
 
  • Like
Reactions: taxslave

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,035
3,795
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Here’s a good one. Enjoy!!:
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
31,941
2,260
113
AG Lametti racks up nearly $123G to conceal lab firing records
Author of the article:postmedia News
Publishing date:Feb 02, 2022 • 13 hours ago • 1 minute read • Join the conversation
Minister of Justice and Attorney General David Lametti takes part in a press conference at the National Press Theatre in Ottawa, Feb. 24, 2020.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General David Lametti takes part in a press conference at the National Press Theatre in Ottawa, Feb. 24, 2020. PHOTO BY BLAIR GABLE /REUTERS
Article content
Attorney General David Lametti’s legal bid to conceal files on the termination of Chinese scientists at a federal lab cost Canadians $122,600.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

Article content
And according to Blacklock’s Reporter , payments to third-party lawyers were part of the expenses.

“In this case only solicitor-client privilege is waived and only to the extent of revealing the total legal costs,” cabinet wrote in an Inquiry Of Ministry tabled in the House of Commons.

Scientists and staff at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg who were affiliated with the People’s Liberation Army were fired Jan. 20, 2021 following an RCMP raid.

According to internal emails, Chinese researchers were in communication with the Wuhan Institute of Virology prior to the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan.

Lametti subsequently sued to conceal the files — citing national security — under the Evidence Act.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

Article content
“It is not going to be a decision that is partisan in any way,” Lametti told reporters at the time. “I will approach this as Attorney General in a non-partisan manner. I will never play politics with national security.”

This is the first time any government cabinet has sued Parliament to conceal records.

“Regardless of political stripe Parliament is supreme and we have a right to this information,” said Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner. “When the House or the committee orders this information, it is not up to the government to try and sue the Speaker of the House of Commons.”

Government business was halted and the lawsuit was dropped when the general election was called last September.

Since the election, with the Liberal’s returning another minority government, cabinet still has not permitted MPs to review the files.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ron in Regina

pgs

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 29, 2008
24,746
5,467
113
B.C.
AG Lametti racks up nearly $123G to conceal lab firing records
Author of the article:postmedia News
Publishing date:Feb 02, 2022 • 13 hours ago • 1 minute read • Join the conversation
Minister of Justice and Attorney General David Lametti takes part in a press conference at the National Press Theatre in Ottawa, Feb. 24, 2020.
Minister of Justice and Attorney General David Lametti takes part in a press conference at the National Press Theatre in Ottawa, Feb. 24, 2020. PHOTO BY BLAIR GABLE /REUTERS
Article content
Attorney General David Lametti’s legal bid to conceal files on the termination of Chinese scientists at a federal lab cost Canadians $122,600.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

Article content
And according to Blacklock’s Reporter , payments to third-party lawyers were part of the expenses.

“In this case only solicitor-client privilege is waived and only to the extent of revealing the total legal costs,” cabinet wrote in an Inquiry Of Ministry tabled in the House of Commons.

Scientists and staff at the National Microbiology Laboratory in Winnipeg who were affiliated with the People’s Liberation Army were fired Jan. 20, 2021 following an RCMP raid.

According to internal emails, Chinese researchers were in communication with the Wuhan Institute of Virology prior to the COVID-19 outbreak in Wuhan.

Lametti subsequently sued to conceal the files — citing national security — under the Evidence Act.

Advertisement
STORY CONTINUES BELOW

Article content
“It is not going to be a decision that is partisan in any way,” Lametti told reporters at the time. “I will approach this as Attorney General in a non-partisan manner. I will never play politics with national security.”

This is the first time any government cabinet has sued Parliament to conceal records.

“Regardless of political stripe Parliament is supreme and we have a right to this information,” said Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner. “When the House or the committee orders this information, it is not up to the government to try and sue the Speaker of the House of Commons.”

Government business was halted and the lawsuit was dropped when the general election was called last September.

Since the election, with the Liberal’s returning another minority government, cabinet still has not permitted MPs to review the files.
The most open and transparent ever .
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
31,941
2,260
113
WHO COVID-19 origins report says 'lab leak' theory needs further investigation
Author of the article:Washington Post
Washington Post
Adam Taylor, The Washington Post
Publishing date:Jun 09, 2022 • 18 hours ago • 4 minute read • 13 Comments

A team of scientists convened by the World Health Organization to better understand the origins of the coronavirus pandemic and possible future outbreaks has said a theory that the virus could have escaped from a laboratory needs “further investigations.”


However, in a report released Thursday, the WHO-backed team said it had not received any new data that would allow it to better evaluate that theory.

Members of the group from Brazil, China and Russia objected to the calls for further investigation into the “lab leak” theory.

The report also said that available data suggests SARS-CoV-2 had a zoonotic origin, which means it spread between animals in a natural setting, but that neither the animal that infected humans nor the place where this infection occurred could be identified.

“At this point, the strongest evidence is still around zoonotic transmission,” said Marietjie Venter, chair of the WHO team and a virologist at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. “However, the precursor viruses that have been identified in bats are definitely not close enough to be the virus that spilled over into humans.”


The report was written by the Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel Pathogens (SAGO), a body made up of experts from the United States, China and 25 other nations that first came together last year after widespread criticism of a joint WHO-China investigation into the coronavirus’s origins.

WHO officials emphasized that the report contains only the preliminary findings of the group, which was created to advise the global health body’s secretariat. SAGO did not undertake its own studies, but instead reviewed existing research.

The team is designed not only to help investigate the origins of the coronavirus but also to set up a framework for understanding the origins of future outbreaks. Its work is expected to last for years, WHO officials said.


“It is just the start,” Maria Van Kerkhove, a World Health Organization epidemiologist on the SAGO secretariat, told reporters before the release of the report. “They’ve made some good progress. They’ve clearly outlined that there’s more work to be done.”

Even so, the report may breathe life into a debate that has never come to a firm conclusion: Where did the coronavirus pandemic come from? While many scientists have favored a theory of zoonotic spread, the lab-leak theory has gained prominent support from some experts, including some U.S. officials.

Beijing has fiercely rejected the idea that the coronavirus could have escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology or another research institute studying coronaviruses in the Chinese city where covid-19 was first recorded in late 2019.


In its place, Chinese officials promoted wild theories without scientific backing, including that the virus originated in the United States or was imported to China on frozen fish.

The SAGO report aimed to evaluate pandemic origins from a scientific stance, Van Kerkhove said. “We are under no illusions that we can keep all of the politics out, but we will do our damnedest to keep focused on what needs to be done here.”

The preliminary SAGO report was released more than a year after a joint WHO-China team traveled to Wuhan and released its own report that ruled out the lab-leak theory as “extremely unlikely,” while suggesting that the idea the virus was carried by frozen food needed further investigation.

The WHO-China report concluded that zoonotic spread was the likeliest scenario for the origin of the virus, but failed to find evidence for how it was spread to humans.


That report was widely criticized after being released in March 2021, with WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus suggesting that the report did not conduct an “extensive enough” assessment of the lab-leak theory and voicing frustration with the low level of access given to the mission by Chinese officials.

One of the researchers on the joint team, Danish food scientist Peter Ben Embarek, later told interviewers that Chinese researchers on the team had pushed back against including the lab-leak theory in the report at all.

While SAGO was convened to address some of the criticism of the WHO-China report, it also was able to evaluate some new evidence, including data on blood samples from 40,000 Chinese donors in Wuhan between September and December 2019.


According to the report, more than 200 of these samples initially tested positive for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, but these were later found to be false positives. SAGO requested further information on the data and methods used to analyze the samples.

The new report suffers from some of the same limitations as the joint WHO-China report – including that Chinese officials cannot be compelled to cooperate with any investigation.

According to the SAGO report, Tedros sent letters to Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and Health Minister Ma Xiaowei on Feb. 14 and Feb. 21, respectively, requesting information on a variety of factors, including the “laboratory hypotheses.”

It is not clear whether Tedros received a reply. Tarik Jasarevic, a spokesperson for the WHO, said the body doesn’t share correspondence it has with member states.


Venter, the SAGO chair, said Chinese officials had cooperated with the team, sending experts to present and discuss new findings.

“We recognize that they’ve done a huge amount of work and they have addressed several of the questions” raised in the initial WHO-China report, Venter said.

However, SAGO found that much had not been addressed. Venter identified the Huanan Seafood Market in Wuhan as one location that needed more study. “We recognize that the market . . . may have been an amplification event of the early outbreak, but it’s not clear where all those animals came from. We need to follow up on that,” she said.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
31,941
2,260
113
New studies bolster theory coronavirus emerged from the wild
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Laura Ungar
Publishing date:Jul 26, 2022 • 9 hours ago • 3 minute read • Join the conversation

Two new studies provide more evidence that the coronavirus pandemic originated in a Wuhan, China market where live animals were sold — further bolstering the theory that the virus emerged in the wild rather than escaping from a Chinese lab.


The research, published online Tuesday by the journal Science, shows that the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was likely the early epicentre of the scourge that has now killed nearly 6.4 million people around the world. Scientists conclude that the virus that causes COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, likely spilled from animals into people two separate times.

“All this evidence tells us the same thing: It points right to this particular market in the middle of Wuhan,” said Kristian Andersen a professor in the Department of Immunology and Microbiology at Scripps Research and coauthor of one of the studies. “I was quite convinced of the lab leak myself until we dove into this very carefully and looked at it much closer.”

In one study, which incorporated data collected by Chinese scientists, University of Arizona evolutionary biologist Michael Worobey and his colleagues used mapping tools to estimate the locations of more than 150 of the earliest reported COVID-19 cases from December 2019. They also mapped cases from January and February 2020 using data from a social media app that had created a channel for people with COVID-19 to get help.


They asked, “Of all the locations that the early cases could have lived, where did they live? And it turned out when we were able to look at this, there was this extraordinary pattern where the highest density of cases was both extremely near to and very centred on this market,” Worobey said at a press briefing. “Crucially, this applies both to all cases in December and also to cases with no known link to the market ⦠And this is an indication that the virus started spreading in people who worked at the market but then started to spread into the local community.”

Andersen said they found case clusters inside the market, too, “and that clustering is very, very specifically in the parts of the market” where they now know people were selling wildlife, such as raccoon dogs, that are susceptible to infection with the coronavirus.


In the other study, scientists analyzed the genomic diversity of the virus inside and outside of China starting with the earliest sample genomes in December 2019 and extending through mid-February 2020. They found that two lineages — A and B — marked the pandemic’s beginning in Wuhan. Study coauthor Joel Wertheim, a viral evolution expert at the University of California, San Diego, pointed out that lineage A is more genetically similar to bat coronaviruses, but lineage B appears to have begun spreading earlier in humans, particularly at the market.

“Now I realize it sounds like I just said that a once-in-a-generation event happened twice in short succession,” Wertheim said. But certain conditions were in place — such as people and animals in close proximity and a virus that can spread from animals to people and from person to person. So “barriers to spillover have been lowered such that multiple introductions, we believe, should actually be expected,” he said.


Many scientists believe the virus jumped from bats to humans, either directly or through another animal. But in June, the World Health Organization recommended a deeper probe into whether a lab accident may be to blame. Critics had said the WHO was too quick to dismiss the lab leak theory.

“Have we disproven the lab leak theory? No, we have not,” Andersen said. “But I think what’s really important here is there are possible scenarios and there are plausible scenarios and it’s really important to understand that possible does not mean equally likely.”

The pandemic’s origins remain controversial. Some scientists believe a lab leak is more likely and others remain open to both possibilities. But Matthew Aliota, a researcher in the college of veterinary medicine at the University of Minnesota, said in his mind the pair of studies “kind of puts to rest, hopefully, the lab leak hypothesis.”

“Both of these two studies really provide compelling evidence for the natural origin hypothesis,” said Aliota, who wasn’t involved in either study. Since sampling an animal that was at the market is impossible, “this is maybe as close to a smoking gun as you could get.”
 
  • Haha
Reactions: taxslave

Dixie Cup

House Member
Sep 16, 2006
4,534
2,566
113
Edmonton
New studies bolster theory coronavirus emerged from the wild
Author of the article:Associated Press
Associated Press
Laura Ungar
Publishing date:Jul 26, 2022 • 9 hours ago • 3 minute read • Join the conversation

Two new studies provide more evidence that the coronavirus pandemic originated in a Wuhan, China market where live animals were sold — further bolstering the theory that the virus emerged in the wild rather than escaping from a Chinese lab.


The research, published online Tuesday by the journal Science, shows that the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market was likely the early epicentre of the scourge that has now killed nearly 6.4 million people around the world. Scientists conclude that the virus that causes COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, likely spilled from animals into people two separate times.

“All this evidence tells us the same thing: It points right to this particular market in the middle of Wuhan,” said Kristian Andersen a professor in the Department of Immunology and Microbiology at Scripps Research and coauthor of one of the studies. “I was quite convinced of the lab leak myself until we dove into this very carefully and looked at it much closer.”

In one study, which incorporated data collected by Chinese scientists, University of Arizona evolutionary biologist Michael Worobey and his colleagues used mapping tools to estimate the locations of more than 150 of the earliest reported COVID-19 cases from December 2019. They also mapped cases from January and February 2020 using data from a social media app that had created a channel for people with COVID-19 to get help.


They asked, “Of all the locations that the early cases could have lived, where did they live? And it turned out when we were able to look at this, there was this extraordinary pattern where the highest density of cases was both extremely near to and very centred on this market,” Worobey said at a press briefing. “Crucially, this applies both to all cases in December and also to cases with no known link to the market ⦠And this is an indication that the virus started spreading in people who worked at the market but then started to spread into the local community.”

Andersen said they found case clusters inside the market, too, “and that clustering is very, very specifically in the parts of the market” where they now know people were selling wildlife, such as raccoon dogs, that are susceptible to infection with the coronavirus.


In the other study, scientists analyzed the genomic diversity of the virus inside and outside of China starting with the earliest sample genomes in December 2019 and extending through mid-February 2020. They found that two lineages — A and B — marked the pandemic’s beginning in Wuhan. Study coauthor Joel Wertheim, a viral evolution expert at the University of California, San Diego, pointed out that lineage A is more genetically similar to bat coronaviruses, but lineage B appears to have begun spreading earlier in humans, particularly at the market.

“Now I realize it sounds like I just said that a once-in-a-generation event happened twice in short succession,” Wertheim said. But certain conditions were in place — such as people and animals in close proximity and a virus that can spread from animals to people and from person to person. So “barriers to spillover have been lowered such that multiple introductions, we believe, should actually be expected,” he said.


Many scientists believe the virus jumped from bats to humans, either directly or through another animal. But in June, the World Health Organization recommended a deeper probe into whether a lab accident may be to blame. Critics had said the WHO was too quick to dismiss the lab leak theory.

“Have we disproven the lab leak theory? No, we have not,” Andersen said. “But I think what’s really important here is there are possible scenarios and there are plausible scenarios and it’s really important to understand that possible does not mean equally likely.”

The pandemic’s origins remain controversial. Some scientists believe a lab leak is more likely and others remain open to both possibilities. But Matthew Aliota, a researcher in the college of veterinary medicine at the University of Minnesota, said in his mind the pair of studies “kind of puts to rest, hopefully, the lab leak hypothesis.”

“Both of these two studies really provide compelling evidence for the natural origin hypothesis,” said Aliota, who wasn’t involved in either study. Since sampling an animal that was at the market is impossible, “this is maybe as close to a smoking gun as you could get.”
So what happened to the reports that there was nothing "natural" about the virus? Are these now being debunked? I don't trust the "science" anymore because science seems only come into play when those "in charge" want to limit and/or control our activities.
 

Tecumsehsbones

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 18, 2013
50,517
3,998
113
Washington DC
So what happened to the reports that there was nothing "natural" about the virus? Are these now being debunked? I don't trust the "science" anymore because science seems only come into play when those "in charge" want to limit and/or control our activities.
Science is what it is. Whether you're dealing with a scientist or a politician with a Ph.D. isn't really any different from dealing with a salesperson. Use the same skills to determine whether you're being sold the real deal or magic beans.
 

spaminator

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 26, 2009
31,941
2,260
113
Backlash over suggestions COVID began in lab leak
Author of the article:Liz Braun
Publishing date:Sep 15, 2022 • 8 hours ago • 2 minute read • Join the conversation

The Telegraph reports that medical journal The Lancet is getting grief after a COVID-19 Commission report suggested the disease could have leaked from a laboratory — maybe even a lab in the U.S.


Published Wednesday, the Lancet paper notes in its key findings that the origins of SARS-CoV-2 remain unknown; the two leading hypotheses are a zoonotic spillover from wildlife possibly via a wet market, or emergence from a research-related incident.


Apparently, the report also suggests U.S. labs might be just as culpable as facilities in Wuhan, noting, “independent researchers have not yet investigated” U.S. labs, and saying the National Institutes of Health has “resisted disclosing details” of its work.

The Telegraph pins the controversy on the economist Professor Jeffrey Sachs, who is the commission chair.

Sachs said he was “pretty convinced” that COVID came out of U.S. biotech lab, “not out of nature,” at a 2022 Madrid conference.


And in August, Sachs appeared on a podcast hosted by high-profile anti-vaxx spokesperson Robert Kennedy Jr. — not long after Kennedy’s social media accounts were suspended because of alleged COVID misinformation, especially around vaccines, that he was sharing.


Sachs’ appearance on Kennedy Jr.’s podcast seems to have soured various experts on the guy. Some claim Sach’s actions undermine what is an important report from the COVID-19 Commission.

The Telegraph quotes Professor Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the Vaccine and Infectious Disease Organization in Canada, as saying, “Sachs’ appearance on RFK Jr’s podcast … undermines the seriousness of the Lancet Commission’s mission to the point of completely negating it.”


Rasmussen added she was “pretty shocked at how flagrantly” the report ignores key evidence on COVID origins.

Professor David Robertson, of the University of Glasgow’s Centre for Virus Research, said, “It’s really disappointing to see such a potentially influential report contributing to further misinformation on such an important topic.”

Sachs defended himself to the Telegraph, saying, “Everybody has signed off on the final text. The question of a possible laboratory release mostly involves the question of U.S.-China joint work that was underway on Sars-like viruses.”

As the Telegraph points out, a scuffle over the origins of Sars-Cov-2 is a small part of an otherwise important paper.

The report points at science policy and implementation failures and warns that many countries still have no useful pandemic preparedness plans.


And, crucially, it stresses that vaccine hesitancy must be addressed, even as it notes “the striking … irresponsibility of several influential political leaders.”

In something that seems pertinent to Ontario, the report also specifies that some places were pushed repeatedly into stringent lockdown — because preventative measures were repeatedly withdrawn too quickly.

There were 11 recommendations made in the report, including stronger regulation of the wild animal trade, a new WHO biosecurity oversight authority, stronger international coordination over infectious diseases, and a new Global Health Fund to support health systems and pandemic preparedness in lower income countries.
 

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
18,035
3,795
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
Science is what it is. Whether you're dealing with a scientist or a politician with a Ph.D. isn't really any different from dealing with a salesperson. Use the same skills to determine whether you're being sold the real deal or magic beans.
Science is what it is….except when it isn’t.
So what happened to the reports that there was nothing "natural" about the virus? Are these now being debunked? I don't trust the "science" anymore because science seems only come into play when those "in charge" want to limit and/or control our activities.
As Tec was saying… get your information from many sources, Weigh and measure it yourself…. and make the most informed decision that you can.

Science “shouldn’t” be influenced by politics….but political influence decides who gets funding and who doesn’t.

Health researchers in Canada, and elsewhere, are facing more and more pressure to be politically correct. Those who care about science — and depend on it to inform our health-care system — should be concerned.

The pressure to infuse progressive politics into scientific research is coming from science journals and funding agencies. They are exerting influence by changing publishing guidelines and adjusting research funding policies to favour progressive views. Such measures are inappropriate because they violate academic freedom and are fundamentally unscientific.

Anyway, The rest of the above link. We’ve seen this most recently with respect to the COVID 19 information and guidelines, in the “Follow the Science” lines that flip-flop depending on what’s politically expedient at any given moment, but this has been happening for a long time. I can give other examples but political influence decides funding which alters outcomes of what should be something clean like science and research.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dixie Cup