4 ms·

There are multiple labs in Wuhan. Wuhan institute of virology is the main on people like to talk about but there was indeed another lab a block or two away from

There are multiple labs in Wuhan. Wuhan institute of virology is the main on people like to talk about but there was indeed another lab a block or two away from the wet market. I don't know if both were doing virology experiments. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Center_For_Disease_Control_%26_Prevention https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wuhan_Center_For_Disease_Con...

awb 5y ago
It’s a Level 2 facility, not studying bats or coronavirus. https://www.wsj.com/articles/head-of-who-team-investigating-origins-of-covid-19-calls-for-closer-look-at-china-lab-11628807623 https://www.wsj.com/articles/head-of-who-team-investigating-... > “They also reported no storage nor laboratory activities on CoVs [coronaviruses] or other bat viruses preceding the outbreak.” > The lab is classified BSL-2, a safety level at which air ventilation controls aren’t particularly strict, as they are in more secure labs. At that level, lab workers are usually dealing with pathogens that either cause mild disease in humans or which don’t typically spread through small particles that linger in the air. Researchers at that level don’t necessarily wear masks. > The Wuhan CDC lab tested all of its staff for Covid-19 antibodies, it told the WHO in February. All staff tested negative, except one who tested positive, it said. That person was infected “due to family cluster transmission,” the WHO-led team’s report’s annex says. > But Dr. Ben Embarek is the first to so explicitly question the team’s conclusion, published in a joint report with Chinese counterparts, that a lab accident was an “extremely unlikely” hypothesis. > That wording was only reached after a 48 hour period of intense negotiations with Chinese counterparts said Dr. Ben Embarek, who said he would have preferred to designate an accident inside a lab as merely “unlikely.” > The lab hadn’t published any work with bats since 2013, he said. > “As far as we understand, they work mostly with parasites, not as much with viruses, so they have worked on parasites from bats.” Yet, after fighting to label the lab leak theory “unlikely”, he throws a bone to the conspiracy theorists: > “It’s also possible that someone is trying to hide something,” he added. “Who knows?”
- korantu 5y ago
  In 2016, some of the scientists including Shi and the EcoHealth director, Peter Daszak, used the NIH funding to conduct experiments in Wuhan on live coronaviruses in a biosafety level 2 lab, according to published details of the work from [0] They did do coronavirus experiments in level 2 facility. [0] https://archive.is/KwZKn https://archive.is/KwZKn? [edit] replaced link as FT makes it difficult to refer to them.
  - nitrogen 5y ago
    Did you paste what you intended to paste: "Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles."?
  - awb 5y ago
    The research in question happened in 2016 and was called “W1V1”. Regarding the 2016 work: https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-... > Since bat viruses like WIV1 haven’t been confirmed to cause disease in human beings, her biosafety committee recommended BSL-2 for engineering them and testing them and BSL-3 for any animal experiments. > In response to questions about the decision to do the research in BSL-2 conditions, Peter Daszak forwarded a statement from EcoHealth Alliance stating that the organization “must follow the local laws of the countries in which we work” and that the NIH had determined the research was “not gain-of-function.” > The genetic code of SARS-CoV-2 does not resemble that of any virus the WIV was known to be culturing in its lab, such as WIV1, and Baric says he still believes a natural spillover is the most likely cause. This theory is more than a few steps away from being a smoking gun.
    - korantu 5y ago
      The point is, they did work with coronaviruses in level 2 lab, and similar works might or might not have concluded by end 2019. (If not by these particular researchers)
      - awb 5y ago
- T-A 5y ago
  > It’s a Level 2 facility, not studying bats or coronavirus. It is indeed a level 2 facility, and it was being used to perform the bat coronavirus research outsourced to the WIV [1]: The NIH decided the risk was worth it. In a potentially fateful decision, it funded work similar to Baric’s at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which soon used its own reverse-genetics technology to make numerous coronavirus chimeras. Unnoticed by most, however, was a key difference that significantly shifted the risk calculation. The Chinese work was carried out at biosafety level 2 (BSL-2), a much lower tier than Baric’s BSL-3+. [1] https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-...
  - awb 5y ago
    This article talks about WIV (est. 2018), which is across the city from the market, not 2 blocks away and about 2016 research that was also not located near the wet market in 2016. The Level 2 lab only moved near the wet market in 2019, at which point the Level 4 lab was the one conducting the research. Also from the article: > The genetic code of SARS-CoV-2 does not resemble that of any virus the WIV was known to be culturing in its lab, such as WIV1, and Baric says he still believes a natural spillover is the most likely cause. The timelines and genetic profiles don’t match up for a level 2 lab leak 2 blocks from the wet market.
    - T-A 5y ago
      > This article talks about WIV (est. 2018), which is across the city from the market, not 2 blocks away It moved just before the outbreak [1]: The lab, where Chinese scientists research mild human diseases with bats, was moved near the seafood market where the first COVID-19 cases were found just days before the outbreak, WHO investigators said. Classified with a “Biosafety Level of 2,” the lab also has ventilation controls that aren’t as strict as other more secure facilities, according to the report. I find it surprising how little attention this tidbit got; a move of lab equipment and animals probably involved external personnel not used to bio-safety procedures. Perfect opportunity for a virus to escape. > The genetic code of SARS-CoV-2 does not resemble that of any virus the WIV was known to be culturing in its lab The key words here being "was known", since the WIV notoriously took its database offline and even requested the deletion of sequences stored on US servers [2][3]. [1] https://nypost.com/2021/08/13/who-scientist-eyes-on-wuhan-lab-that-moved-before-pandemic/ https://nypost.com/2021/08/13/who-scientist-eyes-on-wuhan-la... [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-24/u-s-confirms-removal-of-wuhan-virus-sequences-from-database https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-24/u-s-confi... [3] https://www.science.org/content/article/claim-chinese-team-hid-early-sars-cov-2-sequences-stymie-origin-hunt-sparks-furor https://www.science.org/content/article/claim-chinese-team-h...

awb 5y ago

It’s a Level 2 facility, not studying bats or coronavirus. https://www.wsj.com/articles/head-of-who-team-investigating-origins-of-covid-19-calls-for-closer-look-at-china-lab-11628807623 https://www.wsj.com/articles/head-of-who-team-investigating-... > “They also reported no storage nor laboratory activities on CoVs [coronaviruses] or other bat viruses preceding the outbreak.” > The lab is classified BSL-2, a safety level at which air ventilation controls aren’t particularly strict, as they are in more secure labs. At that level, lab workers are usually dealing with pathogens that either cause mild disease in humans or which don’t typically spread through small particles that linger in the air. Researchers at that level don’t necessarily wear masks. > The Wuhan CDC lab tested all of its staff for Covid-19 antibodies, it told the WHO in February. All staff tested negative, except one who tested positive, it said. That person was infected “due to family cluster transmission,” the WHO-led team’s report’s annex says. > But Dr. Ben Embarek is the first to so explicitly question the team’s conclusion, published in a joint report with Chinese counterparts, that a lab accident was an “extremely unlikely” hypothesis. > That wording was only reached after a 48 hour period of intense negotiations with Chinese counterparts said Dr. Ben Embarek, who said he would have preferred to designate an accident inside a lab as merely “unlikely.” > The lab hadn’t published any work with bats since 2013, he said. > “As far as we understand, they work mostly with parasites, not as much with viruses, so they have worked on parasites from bats.” Yet, after fighting to label the lab leak theory “unlikely”, he throws a bone to the conspiracy theorists: > “It’s also possible that someone is trying to hide something,” he added. “Who knows?”

korantu 5y ago
In 2016, some of the scientists including Shi and the EcoHealth director, Peter Daszak, used the NIH funding to conduct experiments in Wuhan on live coronaviruses in a biosafety level 2 lab, according to published details of the work from [0] They did do coronavirus experiments in level 2 facility. [0] https://archive.is/KwZKn https://archive.is/KwZKn? [edit] replaced link as FT makes it difficult to refer to them.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  Did you paste what you intended to paste: "Please use the sharing tools found via the share button at the top or side of articles."?
- awb 5y ago
  The research in question happened in 2016 and was called “W1V1”. Regarding the 2016 work: https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-... > Since bat viruses like WIV1 haven’t been confirmed to cause disease in human beings, her biosafety committee recommended BSL-2 for engineering them and testing them and BSL-3 for any animal experiments. > In response to questions about the decision to do the research in BSL-2 conditions, Peter Daszak forwarded a statement from EcoHealth Alliance stating that the organization “must follow the local laws of the countries in which we work” and that the NIH had determined the research was “not gain-of-function.” > The genetic code of SARS-CoV-2 does not resemble that of any virus the WIV was known to be culturing in its lab, such as WIV1, and Baric says he still believes a natural spillover is the most likely cause. This theory is more than a few steps away from being a smoking gun.
  - korantu 5y ago
    The point is, they did work with coronaviruses in level 2 lab, and similar works might or might not have concluded by end 2019. (If not by these particular researchers)
    - awb 5y ago
T-A 5y ago
> It’s a Level 2 facility, not studying bats or coronavirus. It is indeed a level 2 facility, and it was being used to perform the bat coronavirus research outsourced to the WIV [1]: The NIH decided the risk was worth it. In a potentially fateful decision, it funded work similar to Baric’s at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which soon used its own reverse-genetics technology to make numerous coronavirus chimeras. Unnoticed by most, however, was a key difference that significantly shifted the risk calculation. The Chinese work was carried out at biosafety level 2 (BSL-2), a much lower tier than Baric’s BSL-3+. [1] https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-...
- awb 5y ago
  This article talks about WIV (est. 2018), which is across the city from the market, not 2 blocks away and about 2016 research that was also not located near the wet market in 2016. The Level 2 lab only moved near the wet market in 2019, at which point the Level 4 lab was the one conducting the research. Also from the article: > The genetic code of SARS-CoV-2 does not resemble that of any virus the WIV was known to be culturing in its lab, such as WIV1, and Baric says he still believes a natural spillover is the most likely cause. The timelines and genetic profiles don’t match up for a level 2 lab leak 2 blocks from the wet market.
  - T-A 5y ago
    > This article talks about WIV (est. 2018), which is across the city from the market, not 2 blocks away It moved just before the outbreak [1]: The lab, where Chinese scientists research mild human diseases with bats, was moved near the seafood market where the first COVID-19 cases were found just days before the outbreak, WHO investigators said. Classified with a “Biosafety Level of 2,” the lab also has ventilation controls that aren’t as strict as other more secure facilities, according to the report. I find it surprising how little attention this tidbit got; a move of lab equipment and animals probably involved external personnel not used to bio-safety procedures. Perfect opportunity for a virus to escape. > The genetic code of SARS-CoV-2 does not resemble that of any virus the WIV was known to be culturing in its lab The key words here being "was known", since the WIV notoriously took its database offline and even requested the deletion of sequences stored on US servers [2][3]. [1] https://nypost.com/2021/08/13/who-scientist-eyes-on-wuhan-lab-that-moved-before-pandemic/ https://nypost.com/2021/08/13/who-scientist-eyes-on-wuhan-la... [2] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-24/u-s-confirms-removal-of-wuhan-virus-sequences-from-database https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-06-24/u-s-confi... [3] https://www.science.org/content/article/claim-chinese-team-hid-early-sars-cov-2-sequences-stymie-origin-hunt-sparks-furor https://www.science.org/content/article/claim-chinese-team-h...