3 ms·

Thanks for pointing that out. I agree with your first point about the book deal. On your second point, she has stated repeatedly and explicitly that her positi

Thanks for pointing that out. I agree with your first point about the book deal. On your second point, she has stated repeatedly and explicitly that her position is that she doesn't know what the origin of the virus is, natural origin is not ruled out either, and that all she is asking for is that both theories are credibly investigated, for example here [1]. Of course she talks a lot more about the lab leak, but that's largely because she feels this side has not been discussed sufficiently, which was certainly true until 2/3 months ago. On your third point, you're right that she truncated the quote, but I think her interpretation is the one many readers would come to: "lab leak=conspiracy theory". The quote is dishonestly structured to start with, lumping together lab leak with 5G/Bill Gates silliness. It's the same mistake that the Andersen paper made lumping lab leak with bioweapon. I wouldn't count that as a win on either side. [1] https://twitter.com/ayjchan/status/1411049136762327043?s=21 https://twitter.com/ayjchan/status/1411049136762327043?s=21

_tik_ 5y ago
I just read Alina Chan profile news on local news. It is mention that her background is in genetic therapy. How seriously I should take her statement on covid based on her background?
- erostrate 5y ago
  I'd encourage you to read what she says before you decide. Her background should make you take her more seriously that if she was, say, a software engineer, but less seriously than if she was a virologist. But for me, her background is only one factor in my decision of how seriously I take her. A bigger factor is how serious, informed and reasonable what she says is.
- raphlinus 5y ago
  I'd absolutely give her this one. This is the relevant line from LinkedIn: > Investigating the effects of human genetic variation on the efficacy of adeno-associated virus (AAV) variants in order to engineer gene therapy viral vectors targeting diverse patient populations. So this is professional work at a prestigious institute on (a) viruses, (b) engineering of viruses, and (c) deeper understanding of the dynamics of transmission of these viruses in humans. Further, adenovirus is one that can be engineered to be combined with pieces of SARS-CoV-2 to do interesting things in humans, as I can personally attest, having had the J&J vaccine. It's hard to imagine a set of credentials better suited to analyzing origins of Covid. There are a lot of grifters out there, "epistemological trespassers" if you will, but Dr. Chan's is a voice that deserves being listened to.

_tik_ 5y ago

I just read Alina Chan profile news on local news. It is mention that her background is in genetic therapy. How seriously I should take her statement on covid based on her background?

erostrate 5y ago
I'd encourage you to read what she says before you decide. Her background should make you take her more seriously that if she was, say, a software engineer, but less seriously than if she was a virologist. But for me, her background is only one factor in my decision of how seriously I take her. A bigger factor is how serious, informed and reasonable what she says is.
raphlinus 5y ago
I'd absolutely give her this one. This is the relevant line from LinkedIn: > Investigating the effects of human genetic variation on the efficacy of adeno-associated virus (AAV) variants in order to engineer gene therapy viral vectors targeting diverse patient populations. So this is professional work at a prestigious institute on (a) viruses, (b) engineering of viruses, and (c) deeper understanding of the dynamics of transmission of these viruses in humans. Further, adenovirus is one that can be engineered to be combined with pieces of SARS-CoV-2 to do interesting things in humans, as I can personally attest, having had the J&J vaccine. It's hard to imagine a set of credentials better suited to analyzing origins of Covid. There are a lot of grifters out there, "epistemological trespassers" if you will, but Dr. Chan's is a voice that deserves being listened to.