Sunday, August 22, 2021

Robyn Mckie - The Wuhan lab leak theory is more about politics than science

Whatever this week’s Biden review finds, the cause of the pandemic lies in the destruction of animal habitats

This point is backed by Professor James Wood, of Cambridge University. “I think there is very strong evidence for this being caused by natural spillovers but that argument simply does not suit some political groups. They promote the idea that Covid-19 was caused by a lab leak because such a claim deflects attention from increasing evidence that indicates biodiversity loss, deforestation and wildlife trade – which increase the dangers of natural spillovers – are the real dangers that we face from pandemics.”

The Guardian


Joe said...

and when the next pandemic starts in Chapel Hill or Galveston I'm sure it'll be natural spillover too...

Peter Pan said...

China has produced pandemics in the past, so no reason to be ashamed of it.

Marian Ruccius said...

As usual, the Chinese Government is resisting transparency on the origins of the virus.

August 12, 2021
WHO urges China to share raw data on early COVID cases

by Robin Millard

Marian Ruccius said...

And there is this:

The Wuhan Laboratory Origin of SARS-CoV-2 and the Validity of the Yan Reports Are Further Proved by the Failure of Two Uninvited "Peer Reviews" Opening Statement

March 2021

Limeng Yan

The University of Hong Kong

Shu Kang
Shanchang Hu

The origin of SARS-CoV-2 is a question that has attracted attention from all over the world. It has been portrayed by some as a great mystery, although the laboratory nature of this virus is evident to people with trained eyes. The fundamental reason for this current situation is a large-scale, multi-domain, deliberate scientific misinformation. In an effort to defeat this scientific misinformation and expose the true nature of SARS-CoV-2, we have published two scientific reports. Our first report showed, using substantial evidence and logical analyses, why SARS-CoV-2 must be a laboratory product and how it could be created conveniently by following well-known concepts and established techniques. Our second report exposed a large-scale, organized scientific fraud, through which the nature of SARS-CoV-2 as an Unrestricted Bioweapon was revealed. Our efforts were immediately met by great resistance. Within ten days of the publication of our first report, two self-claimed “peer reviews” came out to specifically criticize our report. The first review was published by four scientists from the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security led by Dr. Gigi Gronvall. The second review was published on the MIT Press and produced by a group of four scientists led by Dr. Robert Gallo. Although we welcome critical reviews of our reports, such reviews have to be honest, logical, evidence-based, and produced by qualified scientists. These two reviews, however, did not meet any of the criteria. Unfortunately, these poor reviews were nonetheless used by the media to defame our reports, label laboratory origin theories as “conspiracy theories”, and further suppress the truth of SARS-CoV-2 origin. Building on these media reports, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime then greatly amplified its own voice and promoted the falsified theory that SARS-CoV-2 must have come from nature...."

Marian Ruccius said...

Embattled WHO Epidemiologist Peter Ben Embarek Scrambles To Save His Reputation
By Hank Campbell | August 16th 2021 09:43 AM

Marian Ruccius said...

Retracted coronavirus (COVID-19) papers (from Retraction Watch)
via CDC

We’ve been tracking retractions of papers about COVID-19 as part of our database. Here’s a running list, which will be updated as needed. (For some context on these figures, see this post, our letter in Accountability in Research and the last section of this Nature news article. Also see a note about the terminology regarding preprint servers at the end.)

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at

Matt Franko said...

Back to bat soup…

Peter Pan said...

The original theory involving the wet market is more damaging to China's reputation than the lab leak theory, where blame must be shared.

Marian Ruccius said...

Yeah, but I don't care about the fault much -- I just want to know the truth. It appears that there are two possible explanations, with the lab leak being the most likely. But we have great uncertainty.

Peter Pan said...

Doctors for Covid Ethics Symposium - Session 1: The False Pandemic

There's a technical presentation at 5:05

On that page you'll find links to some documents, regarding the origins

05.05 The SARS-CoV-2 Genome: Evidence of its Artificial Origin / Opening Plenary by M.Palmer

Yan, L. et al. (2020) Unusual Features of the SARS-CoV-2 Genome Suggesting Sophisticated Laboratory Modification Rather Than Natural Evolution and Delineation of Its Probable Synthetic Route. Preprint

Yan, L. et al. (2020) SARS-CoV-2 Is an Unrestricted Bioweapon: A Truth Revealed through Uncovering a Large-Scale, Organized Scientific Fraud. Preprint

Palmer, M. (2021) Notes on COVID