3 ms·

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 coronavirus

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
    Of course, but it bears repeating that it’s a theory lacking evidence at this point. The idea of COVID leaking from a Level 2 lab 2 blocks from the Wuhan wet market is solely circumstantial.

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
  Of course, but it bears repeating that it’s a theory lacking evidence at this point. The idea of COVID leaking from a Level 2 lab 2 blocks from the Wuhan wet market is solely circumstantial.