4 ms·

Dismissing things as a "crazy conspiracy theory" adds nothing. All indicators point to a lab leak. The project was called DEFUSE, proposed in 2018, it was led

Dismissing things as a "crazy conspiracy theory" adds nothing. All indicators point to a lab leak. The project was called DEFUSE, proposed in 2018, it was led by Daszak's EcoHealth Alliance and funded by the NIH. https://drasticresearch.files.wordpress.com/2021/09/main-document-preempt-volume-1-no-ess-hr00118s0017-ecohealth-alliance.pdf https://drasticresearch.files.wordpress.com/2021/09/main-doc... These things are known now, after being long denied by those involved.

LatteLazy 4y ago
There is no evidence, none at all, of a lab leak. Even you admit that when you limit yourself to "indicator". And it is a conspiracy theory. You need the CCP, Trump, Biden, Facci, dozens of labs staff, and any decent virologist or geneticist to all work together to hide it. Come on, get real, stop pretending.
- junofan 4y ago
  The guy just had his grant terminated for not turning over records. What’s your explanation for this counter-intuitive behavior?
  - LatteLazy 4y ago
    When was he terminated? One of his grants was suspended when he failed to get the US federal government access to china, something that was a bit above his pay grade, but that was in 2020!? But please, tell me how that conclusively proves a lab leak? Come on. You can believe it, that's up to you. But don't pretend there is any evidence.
- throwawaymaths 4y ago
  You need dozens of lab staff in China and maybe a few admin staff + daszak here in the states to hide it. Even setting aside that china is a place where scientists who speak out are regularly harassed consider this:. Suppose you set out to save millions of lives and instead wound up saving negative millions of lives. Can you say with certainty that you would have the fortitude to admit your complicity in the mistake?
- nullc 4y ago
  Because the people most directly involved are dead (e.g. staff from the wuhan lab) and records have either been lost or concealed it'll probably never be possible to prove a 'lab leak' one way or another. If you look at the defuse project proposal, however, you'll see a proposal that a reasonable person would conclude had a high risk of creating SARS-CoV2. They proposed to take a bad corona virus and attempt to grow versions that infected humans by growing it in humanized mice. If that failed, they proposed to genetically modify it to insert a furin cleavage site. After getting their humanized virus they intended to expose immune boosted wild bats to it to inoculate them to this 'predicted' virus. The biggest discrepancy is that SARS-CoV2's closest known ancestor isn't the virus they were proposing to study: instead, the nearest ancestor is the virus the lab was working on immediately prior to the defuse proposal. And CoV2's most conspicious difference from the wild type ancestor is the furin cleavage whos sequence is very distant from the virus and would not likely be produced easily through mutation yet happens to be identical to a sequence in the literature prior to the research. Even if we had absolutely concrete proof that SARS-CoV2's origin was completely natural since the research proposals obviously could have created it there ought to be serious inquiry and policy review-- because if it wasn't man made it seems like it would only be by good luck. We have been playing with fire.
  - nullc 4y ago
    s/bad/bat/ (only correcting because it took me a moment to figure out myself what the heck I was writing. :) )

LatteLazy 4y ago

There is no evidence, none at all, of a lab leak. Even you admit that when you limit yourself to "indicator". And it is a conspiracy theory. You need the CCP, Trump, Biden, Facci, dozens of labs staff, and any decent virologist or geneticist to all work together to hide it. Come on, get real, stop pretending.

junofan 4y ago
The guy just had his grant terminated for not turning over records. What’s your explanation for this counter-intuitive behavior?
- LatteLazy 4y ago
  When was he terminated? One of his grants was suspended when he failed to get the US federal government access to china, something that was a bit above his pay grade, but that was in 2020!? But please, tell me how that conclusively proves a lab leak? Come on. You can believe it, that's up to you. But don't pretend there is any evidence.
throwawaymaths 4y ago
You need dozens of lab staff in China and maybe a few admin staff + daszak here in the states to hide it. Even setting aside that china is a place where scientists who speak out are regularly harassed consider this:. Suppose you set out to save millions of lives and instead wound up saving negative millions of lives. Can you say with certainty that you would have the fortitude to admit your complicity in the mistake?
nullc 4y ago
Because the people most directly involved are dead (e.g. staff from the wuhan lab) and records have either been lost or concealed it'll probably never be possible to prove a 'lab leak' one way or another. If you look at the defuse project proposal, however, you'll see a proposal that a reasonable person would conclude had a high risk of creating SARS-CoV2. They proposed to take a bad corona virus and attempt to grow versions that infected humans by growing it in humanized mice. If that failed, they proposed to genetically modify it to insert a furin cleavage site. After getting their humanized virus they intended to expose immune boosted wild bats to it to inoculate them to this 'predicted' virus. The biggest discrepancy is that SARS-CoV2's closest known ancestor isn't the virus they were proposing to study: instead, the nearest ancestor is the virus the lab was working on immediately prior to the defuse proposal. And CoV2's most conspicious difference from the wild type ancestor is the furin cleavage whos sequence is very distant from the virus and would not likely be produced easily through mutation yet happens to be identical to a sequence in the literature prior to the research. Even if we had absolutely concrete proof that SARS-CoV2's origin was completely natural since the research proposals obviously could have created it there ought to be serious inquiry and policy review-- because if it wasn't man made it seems like it would only be by good luck. We have been playing with fire.
- nullc 4y ago
  s/bad/bat/ (only correcting because it took me a moment to figure out myself what the heck I was writing. :) )