 |
| Click above to go straight to the talk on lab-leak hypothesis |
Simply:
- If the virus accidentally leaked from a laboratory that was researching an enhanced versions of it, in order to work out how to control it (known as "gain of function" research) then such research ought be stopped forthwith, until better safety protocols can be worked out.
- If, on the other hand, it is proven that this virus did not come from a lab leak, then such research ought be speeded up.
So it's pretty important. Gain of function research: stopped? Or speeded up?
Many people are saying the lab-leak hypothesis has been "debunked". It has not. People -- including, of course, the whole of China -- have tried to discredit the hypothesis, but discrediting is not the same as debunking. Nor is it enough to quote the WHO that the lab-leak hypothesis is "extremely unlikely". That's not the same as "impossible". Moreover, recall that the WHO said in January 2020 that human to human transmission of the virus was also "extremely unlikely". (They now try to excuse that comment by saying they were just passing on Chinese information. But that only goes to show how much they were -- arguably still are -- parroting a Chinese line).
After the recent WHO team China visit a number of scientists sent an open letter seeking an independent inquiry, including into the lab-leak hypothesis.
In interviews with Science Magazine the head of the WHO team admitted that it didn't have the tools during its visit to research the lab-leak hypothesis. Forensic tools were needed and the team didn't have forensic tools. An amazing and frankly shocking revelation, given the alleged aims of the team visit. Moreover: they were not given access to data at the lab in question: the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). They said in an interview with Science Magazine that the Chinese "told us" that there had been no lab leak. Oh right! That settles it. Nothing to see here lads. Off to the welcome banquet!
In case the lab-leak idea sounds ludicrous (and it ought not, as lab leaks have happened regularly), the head of the WIV, Dr Shi Zhengli (aka "batwoman") rushed back to the lab in some panic, fearing, as she told the media at the time -- before she was silenced -- that there "may have been a leak from my lab". Why would she fear this, if it was impossible? She was later "relieved" to find that it had not been a leak. Oh right! More evidence! Off to the return banquet!
By the way: I'm not sure that believing the lab-leak hypothesis ought be properly investigated is some kind of conspiracy theory. It's simply stating the obvious, that all possible virus-origin sources ought be properly investigated, and by all accounts, including the WHO itself, that has not happened. Saying the lab-leak hypothesis was "extremely unlikely" (the WHO view immediately after their recent visit), doesn't do it, especially when we recall that they said human-to-human infection was also extremely unlikely back in January 2020.
ADDED: at the Darkhorse podcast look at "Show More" for a link to the WebArchive version of the lab-leak hypothesis on Wikipedia and how that has been "disappeared" in the current entry on the origins of the virus, by some activist "fact checkers". Fascinating and a touch scary.... I'm wondering why these activists would do it. Why support China? An answer: they all hate Trump and it was Trump, among others, who pushed the lab-leak hypothesis.
