sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
bump this
-
FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
-
We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.
Discussion: Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) in Wuhan has been working with bats and coronavirus for many years - DNA manipulations, cloning.... - Ja
- Thread starter tetano
- Start date
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
WHO clarifies details of early covid patients in Wuhan after errors in virus report
By Eva Dou and Emily Rauhala
July 15, 2021|Updated today at 6:20 a.m. EDT
The World Health Organization said it will fix several “unintended errors” in a joint report with China on the origins of the coronavirus crisis and will look into other possible discrepancies.
In response to questions from The Washington Post, the WHO is changing the virus sequence IDs associated with three of the 13 early patients listed in a chart in the report and will clarify that the first family cluster was not linked to the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan, a spokesman said.
The WHO did not explain why a map in the annexes of the WHO-China joint report appears to show the first case on one side of the Yangtze River, while the Wuhan government had announced last year that the first patient, who fell ill Dec. 8, 2019, lived on the other side of the river, in Wuchang district.
Tarik Jasarevic, a WHO spokesman, said in an email that the agency cannot comment on what the Wuhan government announced last year, but the question of where the first-known patient lived relative to the river was not relevant to competing hypotheses about the origin of the virus. The issue is not important, he wrote, because “the current first known patient is most probably not the first case.”
...
It is not yet clear whether or how clarity on these points could help researchers understand what happened in Wuhan. But the need to correct data months after publication, in the second year of the pandemic, may renew questions about the slow and complicated search for the origins of the coronavirus.
“We need more explanation about what the source of the error and the information was,” said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University who also provides technical assistance to the WHO.
...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...e7e8a6-e2c6-11eb-88c5-4fd6382c47cb_story.html
By Eva Dou and Emily Rauhala
July 15, 2021|Updated today at 6:20 a.m. EDT
The World Health Organization said it will fix several “unintended errors” in a joint report with China on the origins of the coronavirus crisis and will look into other possible discrepancies.
In response to questions from The Washington Post, the WHO is changing the virus sequence IDs associated with three of the 13 early patients listed in a chart in the report and will clarify that the first family cluster was not linked to the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan, a spokesman said.
The WHO did not explain why a map in the annexes of the WHO-China joint report appears to show the first case on one side of the Yangtze River, while the Wuhan government had announced last year that the first patient, who fell ill Dec. 8, 2019, lived on the other side of the river, in Wuchang district.
Tarik Jasarevic, a WHO spokesman, said in an email that the agency cannot comment on what the Wuhan government announced last year, but the question of where the first-known patient lived relative to the river was not relevant to competing hypotheses about the origin of the virus. The issue is not important, he wrote, because “the current first known patient is most probably not the first case.”
...
It is not yet clear whether or how clarity on these points could help researchers understand what happened in Wuhan. But the need to correct data months after publication, in the second year of the pandemic, may renew questions about the slow and complicated search for the origins of the coronavirus.
“We need more explanation about what the source of the error and the information was,” said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global health law at Georgetown University who also provides technical assistance to the WHO.
...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...e7e8a6-e2c6-11eb-88c5-4fd6382c47cb_story.html
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
July 15, 2021
7:55 AM CST
Last Updated 12 minutes ago
China should provide raw data on pandemic's origins - WHO's Tedros
GENEVA, July 15 (Reuters) - The head of the World Health Organisation said on Thursday that investigations into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic in China were being hampered by the lack of raw data on the first days of spread there and urged it to be more transparent.
...
"We ask China to be transparent and open and to cooperate," WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told a news conference on Thursday.
"We owe it to the millions who suffered and the millions who died to know what happened," he said.
China has called the theory that the virus may have escaped from a Wuhan laboratory "absurd" and said repeatedly that "politicizing" the issue will hamper investigations.
Tedros will brief WHO's 194 member states on Friday regarding a proposed second phase of study, WHO's top emergency expert Mike Ryan said.
...
https://www.reuters.com/business/he...ata-pandemics-origins-whos-tedros-2021-07-15/
7:55 AM CST
Last Updated 12 minutes ago
China should provide raw data on pandemic's origins - WHO's Tedros
GENEVA, July 15 (Reuters) - The head of the World Health Organisation said on Thursday that investigations into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic in China were being hampered by the lack of raw data on the first days of spread there and urged it to be more transparent.
...
"We ask China to be transparent and open and to cooperate," WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told a news conference on Thursday.
"We owe it to the millions who suffered and the millions who died to know what happened," he said.
China has called the theory that the virus may have escaped from a Wuhan laboratory "absurd" and said repeatedly that "politicizing" the issue will hamper investigations.
Tedros will brief WHO's 194 member states on Friday regarding a proposed second phase of study, WHO's top emergency expert Mike Ryan said.
...
https://www.reuters.com/business/he...ata-pandemics-origins-whos-tedros-2021-07-15/
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
China rebuffs WHO claims it obstructed Covid investigation
Issued on: 16/07/2021 - 11:28
Modified: 16/07/2021 - 11:26
Beijing (AFP)
China on Friday rebuffed WHO accusations that it failed to share raw data needed for an investigation into Covid-19's origins, insisting experts were given adequate access when they visited the country this year.
The WHO is facing intensifying pressure for a new, in-depth investigation into the pandemic's origins after the UN agency sent a team of independent, international experts to China's Wuhan in January -- more than a year after Covid-19 first surfaced there.
WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told reporters Thursday that one of the main challenges during the first phase of the investigation was that "the raw data was not shared," and urged China to "be transparent, to be open and cooperate" on a second phase of the investigation.
...
https://www.rfi.fr/en/china-rebuffs-who-claims-it-obstructed-covid-investigation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian's Regular Press Conference on July 16, 2021
...
Bloomberg: The WHO Director-General called on China to cooperate in the second phase of studying the origins of the coronavirus. My question is, does China plan to cooperate and allow people into China for the second phase?
Zhao Lijian: China has taken note of the the draft proposed by WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreysus and the WHO Secretariat for origins study, which are being studied by experts on the Chinese side.
China's position on the issue of global origin-tracing is consistent and clear. Origins study is a scientific issue. All parties should respect the opinions of scientists and scientific conclusions, instead of politicizing the issue. The plan for the next phase of global origins study should be led by member states and agreed upon through consultation. In March this year, WHO released the report on the joint WHO-China study, which reached important conclusions including that lab leak is extremely unlikely, that we need to continue to search for possible early cases globally and further understand the role of cold chains and frozen foods in the transmission of the virus. This is a scientific and authoritative report, which laid the basis for the next stage of global origin-tracing work.
CCTV: On July 15, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told a news conference that investigations into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic in China were being hampered by the lack of raw data on the first days of spread there. “We ask China to be transparent and open and to cooperate,” he said, adding that it is premature to rule out a lab leak as the origin and more study is needed. Do you have any comment?
Zhao Lijian: The fact is, China showed raw data that requires special attention item by item when the joint mission was conducting the origins study in China. Foreign experts said on multiple occasions that the expert group has access to large amounts of data and information and fully understands that some data cannot be copied or taken abroad as it concerns personal privacy.
During the study, the joint mission made field trips to institutions including the Hubei Provincial Center for Disease Control, the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and visited biosafety laboratories and had in-depth, candid and science-oriented exchanges with experts there. Through these field trips and in-depth visits, members of the mission unanimously agreed that the hypothesis of lab leaking is extremely unlikely.
The above-mentioned points are fully and unequivocally captured in the WHO report of the joint study released in March this year.
On the issue of origins study, all should respect science and the opinion and conclusion of scientists with an objective and unbiased attitude. On July 15, 48 countries sent letters to the WHO Director-General on the issue of origins study. They welcome the publication of the report of the WHO-convened global study of origins of SARS-CoV-2: China Part, support the effort to conduct the origins study around the world and oppose politicization of origins tracing. This reflects the strong appeal from the international community.
...
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1892718.shtml
Issued on: 16/07/2021 - 11:28
Modified: 16/07/2021 - 11:26
Beijing (AFP)
China on Friday rebuffed WHO accusations that it failed to share raw data needed for an investigation into Covid-19's origins, insisting experts were given adequate access when they visited the country this year.
The WHO is facing intensifying pressure for a new, in-depth investigation into the pandemic's origins after the UN agency sent a team of independent, international experts to China's Wuhan in January -- more than a year after Covid-19 first surfaced there.
WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told reporters Thursday that one of the main challenges during the first phase of the investigation was that "the raw data was not shared," and urged China to "be transparent, to be open and cooperate" on a second phase of the investigation.
...
https://www.rfi.fr/en/china-rebuffs-who-claims-it-obstructed-covid-investigation
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian's Regular Press Conference on July 16, 2021
...
Bloomberg: The WHO Director-General called on China to cooperate in the second phase of studying the origins of the coronavirus. My question is, does China plan to cooperate and allow people into China for the second phase?
Zhao Lijian: China has taken note of the the draft proposed by WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreysus and the WHO Secretariat for origins study, which are being studied by experts on the Chinese side.
China's position on the issue of global origin-tracing is consistent and clear. Origins study is a scientific issue. All parties should respect the opinions of scientists and scientific conclusions, instead of politicizing the issue. The plan for the next phase of global origins study should be led by member states and agreed upon through consultation. In March this year, WHO released the report on the joint WHO-China study, which reached important conclusions including that lab leak is extremely unlikely, that we need to continue to search for possible early cases globally and further understand the role of cold chains and frozen foods in the transmission of the virus. This is a scientific and authoritative report, which laid the basis for the next stage of global origin-tracing work.
CCTV: On July 15, WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told a news conference that investigations into the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic in China were being hampered by the lack of raw data on the first days of spread there. “We ask China to be transparent and open and to cooperate,” he said, adding that it is premature to rule out a lab leak as the origin and more study is needed. Do you have any comment?
Zhao Lijian: The fact is, China showed raw data that requires special attention item by item when the joint mission was conducting the origins study in China. Foreign experts said on multiple occasions that the expert group has access to large amounts of data and information and fully understands that some data cannot be copied or taken abroad as it concerns personal privacy.
During the study, the joint mission made field trips to institutions including the Hubei Provincial Center for Disease Control, the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and the Wuhan Institute of Virology, and visited biosafety laboratories and had in-depth, candid and science-oriented exchanges with experts there. Through these field trips and in-depth visits, members of the mission unanimously agreed that the hypothesis of lab leaking is extremely unlikely.
The above-mentioned points are fully and unequivocally captured in the WHO report of the joint study released in March this year.
On the issue of origins study, all should respect science and the opinion and conclusion of scientists with an objective and unbiased attitude. On July 15, 48 countries sent letters to the WHO Director-General on the issue of origins study. They welcome the publication of the report of the WHO-convened global study of origins of SARS-CoV-2: China Part, support the effort to conduct the origins study around the world and oppose politicization of origins tracing. This reflects the strong appeal from the international community.
...
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1892718.shtml
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
1st recorded case less than 5km from WIV.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Wuc...2ec92fd18fef96!2m2!1d114.3507769!2d30.5391889
Original WHO claim was that it was 10x further from WIV.
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Han...2ec92fd18fef96!2m2!1d114.3507769!2d30.5391889
If all errors point away from WIV, then bias is indicated.
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
bump this
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian's Regular Press Conference on July 19, 2021
...
Reuters: The World Health Organization on Friday proposed a second phase study into the origin of the coronavirus in China, including all the laboratories and markets in Wuhan. And they called for transparency from the Chinese authorities. Will China commit this second phase specifically? If so, does it have a timeline? Will it make an order on the laboratories as part of this second phase?
Zhao Lijian: The work plan on the second phase origins study proposed by the WHO Secretariat is at odds with the position of China and many other countries on the issue. At the briefing of WHO member states on July 16, China and many other countries have elaborated their views on this issue. Here, I would like to stress the following points:
First, a resolution of the 73rd session of the World Health Assembly clearly requests the WHO Director-General to continue to work closely with countries to identify the zoonotic source of the virus and the route of introduction to the human population. The next phase of origins study should comply with this request and be led by member states. We hope that the WHO will have full communication and consultation with member states, listen to and take the advice of all parties, and ensure that the drafting process of the work plan is open and transparent.
Second, in January this year, international experts from the WHO and Chinese experts formed a joint team and conducted joint research for 28 days in China. On March 30, the WHO issued a joint report, which includes clear conclusions and science-based recommendations for the next phase global origins study. It concluded that lab leak is extremely unlikely, and recommended conducting further research around earlier cases globally and further understanding the role of cold chains and frozen foods in the transmission of the virus. The conclusions and recommendations of the report should be respected and upheld, and fully reflected in the work of the next phase origins study. The joint letter of 54 countries to the WHO Director-General the other day also stressed this point.
Last but not least, origins study is a serious scientific issue that requires cooperation of global scientists. We are concerned about certain countries’ politicization of the issue. We hope the WHO can adhere to the spirit of science, professionalism and objectivity and work with the international community to jointly uphold the seriousness and scientific nature of origins study, resist the backlash of politicization and safeguard the sound atmosphere of global anti-epidemic cooperation.
...
Reuters: I just want to ask a follow-up question on the World Health Organization second phase. You said China's position was inconsistent with that brought up by the World Health Organization on the second phase investigation. Are you saying China feels that the second phase investigation should not take place in China, but should fall in other places globally, or are you saying that China would permit in some form of a second phase investigation in China?
Zhao Lijian: I have just elaborated on China's position. As for the work plan on the second-phase origins study proposed by WHO, relevant experts on the Chinese side are studying it carefully.
...
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1893359.shtml
...
Reuters: The World Health Organization on Friday proposed a second phase study into the origin of the coronavirus in China, including all the laboratories and markets in Wuhan. And they called for transparency from the Chinese authorities. Will China commit this second phase specifically? If so, does it have a timeline? Will it make an order on the laboratories as part of this second phase?
Zhao Lijian: The work plan on the second phase origins study proposed by the WHO Secretariat is at odds with the position of China and many other countries on the issue. At the briefing of WHO member states on July 16, China and many other countries have elaborated their views on this issue. Here, I would like to stress the following points:
First, a resolution of the 73rd session of the World Health Assembly clearly requests the WHO Director-General to continue to work closely with countries to identify the zoonotic source of the virus and the route of introduction to the human population. The next phase of origins study should comply with this request and be led by member states. We hope that the WHO will have full communication and consultation with member states, listen to and take the advice of all parties, and ensure that the drafting process of the work plan is open and transparent.
Second, in January this year, international experts from the WHO and Chinese experts formed a joint team and conducted joint research for 28 days in China. On March 30, the WHO issued a joint report, which includes clear conclusions and science-based recommendations for the next phase global origins study. It concluded that lab leak is extremely unlikely, and recommended conducting further research around earlier cases globally and further understanding the role of cold chains and frozen foods in the transmission of the virus. The conclusions and recommendations of the report should be respected and upheld, and fully reflected in the work of the next phase origins study. The joint letter of 54 countries to the WHO Director-General the other day also stressed this point.
Last but not least, origins study is a serious scientific issue that requires cooperation of global scientists. We are concerned about certain countries’ politicization of the issue. We hope the WHO can adhere to the spirit of science, professionalism and objectivity and work with the international community to jointly uphold the seriousness and scientific nature of origins study, resist the backlash of politicization and safeguard the sound atmosphere of global anti-epidemic cooperation.
...
Reuters: I just want to ask a follow-up question on the World Health Organization second phase. You said China's position was inconsistent with that brought up by the World Health Organization on the second phase investigation. Are you saying China feels that the second phase investigation should not take place in China, but should fall in other places globally, or are you saying that China would permit in some form of a second phase investigation in China?
Zhao Lijian: I have just elaborated on China's position. As for the work plan on the second-phase origins study proposed by WHO, relevant experts on the Chinese side are studying it carefully.
...
https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/xwfw_665399/s2510_665401/2511_665403/t1893359.shtml
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
This was originally posted in 2020 in another forum but I wanted to make a reference to it on this thread:
China reportedly lobbied the EU to dial down criticism of its Covid-19 disinformation campaigns - April 25, 2020
China reportedly lobbied the EU to dial down criticism of its Covid-19 disinformation campaigns - April 25, 2020
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
China Sees WHO COVID-19 Origin Report as Exoneration of Lab. WHO Disagrees.
BY JENNI FINK ON 7/19/21 AT 2:58 PM EDT
Beijing has vehemently denied the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic but the report officials often cite as an exoneration of the lab is the same one that the World Health Organization sees as inconclusive.
...
Zhao wouldn't comment on whether China would cooperate with additional investigations but if they do, it's likely to come with many stipulations. Although easier to investigate the origin with China on board, if they're not willing to cooperate, some scientists still believe an investigation can happen thanks to global samples and conversations agencies had with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
https://www.newsweek.com/china-sees-who-covid-19-origin-report-exoneration-lab-who-disagrees-1611161
BY JENNI FINK ON 7/19/21 AT 2:58 PM EDT
Beijing has vehemently denied the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the origin of the COVID-19 pandemic but the report officials often cite as an exoneration of the lab is the same one that the World Health Organization sees as inconclusive.
...
Zhao wouldn't comment on whether China would cooperate with additional investigations but if they do, it's likely to come with many stipulations. Although easier to investigate the origin with China on board, if they're not willing to cooperate, some scientists still believe an investigation can happen thanks to global samples and conversations agencies had with the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
https://www.newsweek.com/china-sees-who-covid-19-origin-report-exoneration-lab-who-disagrees-1611161
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
Dr. Lawrence Sellin interview. (Note the caption below the video isn't accurate. He didn't say he was sure this virus was intentionally released.)
https://www.bitchute.com/video/asLf01kF4Qma/
https://www.bitchute.com/video/asLf01kF4Qma/
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
bump this
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
[FONT=微软雅黑]After 18 months it is probable that a intermediate animal source for COVID-19 will be announced. My guess is raccoon dogs. link
I am not posting the article below as truth. In fact, there are many disputed facts below. But, as I have said many times, it is important to look at both sides of an issue. And, there is always a lot of insight gained in these government denials. [/FONT]
[FONT=微软雅黑]Where does the new crown virus come from? The Chinese government introduces the traceability of the new crown virus[/FONT]
[FONT=微软雅黑]Release time: 19:21, July 22, 2021 Source: China News[/FONT]
[Explanation] Where does the new coronavirus come from? On July 22, the Chinese government held a press conference to introduce the traceability of the new crown virus.
[Explanation] At the beginning of 2021, the WHO international expert group came to China to carry out virus traceability work, and on March 30, released the report on the China section of the global traceability study of the new crown virus convened by the WHO. The joint expert group finally determined several possibilities for the virus to appear.
[Concurrent] Zeng Yixin, Deputy Director of the National Health Commission
The first type is that the direct overflow of zoonotic diseases is "probable to more likely", and the direct overflow of zoonotic diseases, that is, direct overflow from animal hosts to humans is "probable to more likely".
Then, the introduction through an intermediate host is "more likely to very likely". In layman's terms, the natural host of the virus is a certain animal, and the animal passes through the intermediate host and then transitions to humans. This is "more likely to very likely". This is the second Kind.
The third type is the introduction of cold chains. It was discovered that cold chain transmission may introduce viruses in some sporadic epidemics in various places last year, so it is considered "possible."
The last possibility is that laboratory introduction is "extremely impossible."
[Explanation] Experts said that the natural origin of the new crown virus has become a general consensus in the academic community. Many well-known experts have repeatedly published articles on related platforms such as The Lancet, refuting the conspiracy theory of "laboratory leaks" with scientific evidence. .
[Concurrent] Yuan Zhiming, Director of Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Researcher of Wuhan Institute of Virology
What I want to emphasize here is that, first, before December 30, 2019, Wuhan Institute of Virology had not contacted, preserved, or studied the new coronavirus.
Second, Wuhan Institute of Virology has never designed, manufactured, or leaked the new coronavirus.
Third, the staff and graduate students of Wuhan Institute of Virology have maintained "zero infection" of the new crown virus so far.
[Explanation] Talking about China's failure to provide the original data of early-stage COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, Liang Wannian, the Chinese leader of the China-WHO Joint Research Expert Group on the Traceability of New Coronavirus, who had participated in the traceability work, explained that, in fact, during the traceability work in Wuhan, All the members of the Chinese expert group showed the case data, and the expert group conducted analysis and research on the case data.
[Concurrent] Liang Wannian, the Chinese leader of the China-WHO Joint Research Expert Group on the Traceability of New Coronavirus
Just to protect the privacy of patients, we do not agree to provide original data, nor do we allow them to copy or take photos. When working at that time, international experts also gave a full understanding and deeply felt that this was an international practice, which is not only the case in China.
[Explanation] Zeng Yixin said that the traceability of the new coronavirus is a scientific issue. The Chinese government has always supported scientific traceability of the virus, but opposed the politicization of traceability.
[Concurrent] Zeng Yixin, Deputy Director of the National Health Commission
We believe that the second phase of virus traceability should be extended on the basis of the first phase of virus traceability. It should be guided by World Health Assembly Resolution 73.1 and carried out after thorough discussion and consultation. We have already carried out the first phase of virus traceability, especially if we have reached a clear conclusion, we should not repeat it. On the basis of full and extensive consultations among member states, we should promote early case search, molecular epidemiology, and animal (intermediate) host traceability in multiple countries and regions around the world.
zhttps://www.chinanews.com/gn/shipin/cns/2021/07-22/news895493.shtml
I am not posting the article below as truth. In fact, there are many disputed facts below. But, as I have said many times, it is important to look at both sides of an issue. And, there is always a lot of insight gained in these government denials. [/FONT]
[FONT=微软雅黑]Where does the new crown virus come from? The Chinese government introduces the traceability of the new crown virus[/FONT]
[FONT=微软雅黑]Release time: 19:21, July 22, 2021 Source: China News[/FONT]
[Explanation] Where does the new coronavirus come from? On July 22, the Chinese government held a press conference to introduce the traceability of the new crown virus.
[Explanation] At the beginning of 2021, the WHO international expert group came to China to carry out virus traceability work, and on March 30, released the report on the China section of the global traceability study of the new crown virus convened by the WHO. The joint expert group finally determined several possibilities for the virus to appear.
[Concurrent] Zeng Yixin, Deputy Director of the National Health Commission
The first type is that the direct overflow of zoonotic diseases is "probable to more likely", and the direct overflow of zoonotic diseases, that is, direct overflow from animal hosts to humans is "probable to more likely".
Then, the introduction through an intermediate host is "more likely to very likely". In layman's terms, the natural host of the virus is a certain animal, and the animal passes through the intermediate host and then transitions to humans. This is "more likely to very likely". This is the second Kind.
The third type is the introduction of cold chains. It was discovered that cold chain transmission may introduce viruses in some sporadic epidemics in various places last year, so it is considered "possible."
The last possibility is that laboratory introduction is "extremely impossible."
[Explanation] Experts said that the natural origin of the new crown virus has become a general consensus in the academic community. Many well-known experts have repeatedly published articles on related platforms such as The Lancet, refuting the conspiracy theory of "laboratory leaks" with scientific evidence. .
[Concurrent] Yuan Zhiming, Director of Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Researcher of Wuhan Institute of Virology
What I want to emphasize here is that, first, before December 30, 2019, Wuhan Institute of Virology had not contacted, preserved, or studied the new coronavirus.
Second, Wuhan Institute of Virology has never designed, manufactured, or leaked the new coronavirus.
Third, the staff and graduate students of Wuhan Institute of Virology have maintained "zero infection" of the new crown virus so far.
[Explanation] Talking about China's failure to provide the original data of early-stage COVID-19 patients in Wuhan, Liang Wannian, the Chinese leader of the China-WHO Joint Research Expert Group on the Traceability of New Coronavirus, who had participated in the traceability work, explained that, in fact, during the traceability work in Wuhan, All the members of the Chinese expert group showed the case data, and the expert group conducted analysis and research on the case data.
[Concurrent] Liang Wannian, the Chinese leader of the China-WHO Joint Research Expert Group on the Traceability of New Coronavirus
Just to protect the privacy of patients, we do not agree to provide original data, nor do we allow them to copy or take photos. When working at that time, international experts also gave a full understanding and deeply felt that this was an international practice, which is not only the case in China.
[Explanation] Zeng Yixin said that the traceability of the new coronavirus is a scientific issue. The Chinese government has always supported scientific traceability of the virus, but opposed the politicization of traceability.
[Concurrent] Zeng Yixin, Deputy Director of the National Health Commission
We believe that the second phase of virus traceability should be extended on the basis of the first phase of virus traceability. It should be guided by World Health Assembly Resolution 73.1 and carried out after thorough discussion and consultation. We have already carried out the first phase of virus traceability, especially if we have reached a clear conclusion, we should not repeat it. On the basis of full and extensive consultations among member states, we should promote early case search, molecular epidemiology, and animal (intermediate) host traceability in multiple countries and regions around the world.
zhttps://www.chinanews.com/gn/shipin/cns/2021/07-22/news895493.shtml
Pathfinder
Editor, Senior Moderator
Covid: China rejects WHO plan for second phase of virus origin probe
Published 3 hours ago
Zeng Yixin said he was shocked by the proposal and that the terms were "impossible" to accept
China has rejected terms proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) to further investigate the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic.
WHO head Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus called on China to be more co-operative about the early stages of the outbreak, including with audits of laboratories.
Zeng Yixin, deputy health minister, said it showed "disrespect for common sense and arrogance towards science".
He said the plan was politicised and that China could not accept it.
...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57926368
Published 3 hours ago
Zeng Yixin said he was shocked by the proposal and that the terms were "impossible" to accept
China has rejected terms proposed by the World Health Organization (WHO) to further investigate the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic.
WHO head Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus called on China to be more co-operative about the early stages of the outbreak, including with audits of laboratories.
Zeng Yixin, deputy health minister, said it showed "disrespect for common sense and arrogance towards science".
He said the plan was politicised and that China could not accept it.
...
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-57926368
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
A denial rant...a lot of topics...Australia...Iraq war issues...democracy is terrible....
We have made a major discovery for the traceability of the United States!
July 22, 2021 20:29 World Wide Web
6,613
Original title: We have made a major discovery for the traceability of the United States!
We also need to trace the source of the fake news in the Wall Street Journal.
On the morning of the 22nd, the State Council Information Office held a press conference to introduce the traceability of the new crown virus.
At the press conference, many experts said that there was no leak in the Wuhan P4 laboratory, and it was "very unlikely" to introduce the virus. At the same time, China will not accept the second-stage traceability investigation of China proposed by the World Health Organization.
"Fix a knife" noticed that when answering questions from foreign journalists, Zeng Yixin, deputy director of the National Health Commission, Yuan Zhiming, director of the Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and a researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, all specifically mentioned a report-"Wuhan virus All three researchers in the study visited the hospital in November 2019, and their symptoms were consistent with the new coronavirus."
Yuan Zhiming said that this report was "completely out of nothing." He said that if we want to find out the truth of this fact, it is actually very simple. It only needs these media reporters to tell us the names of these three people, and the truth will be revealed. "In fact, we put forward this proposal very early, but until now we have not received any response."
How did this "report" come from nothing? Has it been spread so far? Who is behind it?
We also need to trace the source of fake news.
01
First of all, regarding the issue of “researchers of Wuhan Institute of Virology infected with the disease”, as early as March 31 this year, Tong Yigang, the dean of the School of Life Sciences of Beijing University of Chemical Technology and the Chinese leader of the Animal and Environmental Sciences Group of the Joint Expert Group, publicly clarified this issue. .
Tong Yigang reviewed some meeting records of the WHO-China Joint Expert Group's visit to the Wuhan Institute of Virology on February 3, 2021, and restored the entire process of facts.
"The process is like this. A researcher from Wuhan Institute of Virology was responding to the situation of Wuhan Institute of Virology's participation in the influenza surveillance system in cooperation with hospitals mentioned by foreign members of the WHO expert group. At that time, he clearly responded to the foreign party regarding the year of 2019. The Wuhan Institute of Virology and a hospital in Wuhan cooperated to carry out a research work on influenza epidemic monitoring.
"This research work involves sample collection from January 2019 to January 2020. A total of 1,001 samples were collected. These samples were tested by the Wuhan Institute of Virology in March 2020 because they (foreigners) Party members) have the testing capabilities in this area. They carried out retrospective screening of these samples and found that in January 2020, there were 700 samples. These 700 samples were between January 2019 and January 2020. Part of the 700 samples collected in January 2020, 4 positive nucleic acid samples were found, that is, 4 influenza and new crown co-infections were found, which appeared in January 2020 because they were monitoring influenza The data".
"Of these 4 positive standards, 3 cases are adults and 1 case is an elderly person. They are patients of cooperative hospitals, not employees of Wuhan Institute."
Now that China has made a clarification, how did this fake news come about?
On May 23 this year, the "Wall Street Journal" website published an "exclusive revelation" of the so-called "Researchers of Wuhan Institute of Virology". The revelation was based on a US intelligence report.
Previously, Chinese media had disclosed that the initiator of this report was the so-called "evidence" of "Iraqi weapons of mass destruction" and Michael, who provided the bottle of "washing powder" to former US Secretary of State Powell. Gordon (Michael R. Gordon).
When this person worked for the New York Times 19 years ago, he hyped an article about Iraq "trying to acquire nuclear weapons" and "purchasing aluminum tubes for centrifuges for uranium enrichment." This article was widely quoted by senior US government officials and became an important basis for the Bush administration to launch the Iraq war.
Does such a person who has a history of falsifying major news and causing extremely bad consequences have any credibility?
Michael Gordon also mentioned another person in his rumored "Researchers of Wuhan Institute of Virology Infected"-former Pompeo team member, partner of Yu Maochun, Hudson Institute researcher David · Asher (DavidAsher).
This David Asher, together with Yu Maochun and other former Pompeo team members, in June this year concocted a so-called “zai” report on China regarding the new crown epidemic. The purpose of the report was to provide The Biden administration "provides advice" and urges the Biden administration to sanction China for "war crimes" of manufacturing biological and chemical weapons, and the spearhead is directed at the Wuhan Virus Institute.
The content quoted in the "Exclusive Breaking News" of the "Wall Street Journal" should be a report concocted during the Trump administration in May last year. The report stated that "the U.S. government has reason to believe that in the fall of 2019, researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology Got sick". At present, this report has not been declassified, only living in the mouths of Michael Gordon.
In other words, what the Biden administration is speculating is a dish of cold rice left by the Trump administration.
As early as January 15 this year, when the World Health Organization’s Joint Expert Group on Traceability came to China, the US State Department issued the so-called “Wuhan Institute of Virology Researchers’ Infection” statement in accordance with the “Fact List” of the Pompeo period. , To criticize China arbitrarily.
Interestingly, the relevant report of the Australian Journalist Sally Markson, who had fabricated the so-called "viral laboratory leak" exclusive information, also cited the so-called source of David Asher. At these two points in time, the "Wall Street Journal" and "The Australian", which are vigorously hyping anti-China public opinion about the epidemic, are precisely the "thugs" in Murdoch's news empire.
Murdoch again!
This Sally Maxson, who participated in the column of former Trump adviser Stephen Bannon in May this year, accused Fauci of being responsible for the study of the weaponization of the virus. ·
From this point of view, the chain of rumors about the "Made in China" of the new coronavirus and the "Researchers of Wuhan Institute of Virology" is roughly clear:
First, use the "reports" and "intelligence" of former State Department officials during the Trump administration as the basic materials for rumors. Then the "Wall Street Journal", "Australian" and other media followed the trend and broke the news, and then the US State Department of the Biden administration made a serious statement, and then "repeated machines" over and over again.
Well, it is the former US State Department official David Asher who is still trying his best to promote his lies.
02
Shen Yi, a professor at Fudan University, told "Made a Knife" that similar "reports" are actually not "rumors" but "transparent false news."
Simply check the content of the relevant information and you will find:
First of all, this is not new news. The Trump administration has basically said it in 2020;
Secondly, when these things were brought up by the Trump administration to talk about things, the Democrats who had not yet entered the White House, including Biden, had made clear criticisms. Now the mainstream Western media, which is now very hard to spread these false news, used to Are the ones who are most actively refuting rumors;
Third, thanks to the high-speed flow of information, those who are willing to know basically know the fake news, who made it, where it made the fake news, and which anti-China and anti-communist informal media were initially adopted, as well as the individual embrace of the United States. The right-wing cult media has spread.
And this kind of "transparent fake news" continues to be spread, and it is spread by individuals, organizations and media platforms that have personally refuted the rumors in the first place. This makes people think:
Why do these actors, who focus on the elite establishment, take the initiative to spread these inferior and almost recognized false news that are far from their usual advertised style, state, and taste?
The appearance of this phenomenon is, for the current Biden administration, a rational choice for the refined egoism of the old fritters in the Washington swamp. In other words, they are deliberate and believe that doing so is good for them.
The Biden administration can do this kind of thing to pick up Trump's teeth, for three purposes:
1. To resolve the short-term Sino-US strategic game with insufficient US effective bargaining chips, meet the needs of US national interests in a sense, and try to create a so-called political bargaining chip and diplomatic bargaining chip between China and the US in order to achieve its insistence on power status. Start the strategy of negotiating with China.
Second, divert attention from the lackluster attention to the new crown of governance in the current US administration. The Biden administration’s priority is of course the mid-term elections in 2022 and the presidential elections in 2024. The elections require political achievements, but now Biden’s actions in fighting the new crown epidemic are hard to say.
Third, dispel the endogenous anxiety of refusing to acknowledge that the United States and the West are facing a decade of governance systems. Persevering in an inferior lie and using it as a life-saving straw. This behavior itself is irrational or even pathological. It is a dilemma that has caused this pathology to spread among the American and Western elites, that is, they are unwilling to recognize the United States and the West. Facing the endogenous anxiety of declining governance system.
When the Biden administration can only respond to the new crown epidemic with large-scale vaccination and allowing individuals to fend for themselves, more and more evidence tells the world that the failure of epidemic governance reflects the failure of the US and Western systems and governance systems. Structural failure, not the failure of a certain government.
In March of this year, Francis Fukuyama, author of the book "The End of History", published an article in the American "Atlantic Monthly", analyzing "what can determine a country's ability to resist the new crown virus". He believes that the situation today is not so optimistic for a democratic government.
Fukuyama asked a question that kept some Western elites awake at night, a question that he didn't want to face. For this reason, they must "get rid of" China's successful fight against the epidemic. In order to achieve ambitious goals, defend ideology, and create rumors, it's okay to use some "small means".
They can only struggle with the origin of the epidemic, as if as long as they find evidence that the virus originated from other countries, they don't have to face the problem of institutional failure and structural decay.
For the above reasons, the current performance of the United States and the West on issues such as the tracing of the new crown epidemic is actually pathological. They are eager to see the facts they want to see, and for this reason, they do not hesitate to regard rumors as the last straw. To put it bluntly, this is a story of "the emperor's new outfit". Although the liar's deception is not clever, it captures the emperor's psychological needs.
But this is only the emperor’s new outfit after all. Who can’t tell that the emperor is running naked?
03
"If we want to find out the truth of this fact, it is actually very simple. It only needs these media reporters to tell us the names of these three people, and the truth will be revealed. In fact, we made this proposal very early, but we have not received it until now. Any response".
Yuan Zhiming's question has not yet reached a response, this question cannot be left alone. Trace the source of rumors too!
To this end, "Fix a Knife" wrote to the editor of The Wall Street Journal, asking the newspaper to answer the above questions.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board:
I am a Chinese media person from BUYIDAO, I noticed that your newspaper published an article on the website on May 23, 2021, call “Three researchers from Wuhan Virus Research Institute visited the hospital in November 2019, its symptoms are consistent with neocoronavirus ”
Relevant Chinese experts have made several clarification on this matter and refuted such claims. On Thursday, Yuan Zhiming, director of China's National Biosafety Laboratory and professor at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, said at a press conference that no employees or students at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were infected with the coronavirus, and before December 30, 2019, WIV did not contact, preserve or study the novel coronavirus, and it never designed, made or leaked the virus.
I wonder if your newspaper has taken note of these clarifications and verified the veracity of your report, and would you make some correction about your previous report?
Should the names of the three researchers at the Wuhan Virus Institute be further disclosed?
Thank you! And look forward for your reply.
As of the time of the article's publication, "Fix One Knife" has not received a reply.
We are waiting.
zhttps://news.sina.com.cn/c/2021-07-22/doc-ikqciyzk7036344.shtml
We have made a major discovery for the traceability of the United States!
July 22, 2021 20:29 World Wide Web
6,613
Original title: We have made a major discovery for the traceability of the United States!
We also need to trace the source of the fake news in the Wall Street Journal.
On the morning of the 22nd, the State Council Information Office held a press conference to introduce the traceability of the new crown virus.
At the press conference, many experts said that there was no leak in the Wuhan P4 laboratory, and it was "very unlikely" to introduce the virus. At the same time, China will not accept the second-stage traceability investigation of China proposed by the World Health Organization.
"Fix a knife" noticed that when answering questions from foreign journalists, Zeng Yixin, deputy director of the National Health Commission, Yuan Zhiming, director of the Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and a researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, all specifically mentioned a report-"Wuhan virus All three researchers in the study visited the hospital in November 2019, and their symptoms were consistent with the new coronavirus."
Yuan Zhiming said that this report was "completely out of nothing." He said that if we want to find out the truth of this fact, it is actually very simple. It only needs these media reporters to tell us the names of these three people, and the truth will be revealed. "In fact, we put forward this proposal very early, but until now we have not received any response."
How did this "report" come from nothing? Has it been spread so far? Who is behind it?
We also need to trace the source of fake news.
01
First of all, regarding the issue of “researchers of Wuhan Institute of Virology infected with the disease”, as early as March 31 this year, Tong Yigang, the dean of the School of Life Sciences of Beijing University of Chemical Technology and the Chinese leader of the Animal and Environmental Sciences Group of the Joint Expert Group, publicly clarified this issue. .
Tong Yigang reviewed some meeting records of the WHO-China Joint Expert Group's visit to the Wuhan Institute of Virology on February 3, 2021, and restored the entire process of facts.
"The process is like this. A researcher from Wuhan Institute of Virology was responding to the situation of Wuhan Institute of Virology's participation in the influenza surveillance system in cooperation with hospitals mentioned by foreign members of the WHO expert group. At that time, he clearly responded to the foreign party regarding the year of 2019. The Wuhan Institute of Virology and a hospital in Wuhan cooperated to carry out a research work on influenza epidemic monitoring.
"This research work involves sample collection from January 2019 to January 2020. A total of 1,001 samples were collected. These samples were tested by the Wuhan Institute of Virology in March 2020 because they (foreigners) Party members) have the testing capabilities in this area. They carried out retrospective screening of these samples and found that in January 2020, there were 700 samples. These 700 samples were between January 2019 and January 2020. Part of the 700 samples collected in January 2020, 4 positive nucleic acid samples were found, that is, 4 influenza and new crown co-infections were found, which appeared in January 2020 because they were monitoring influenza The data".
"Of these 4 positive standards, 3 cases are adults and 1 case is an elderly person. They are patients of cooperative hospitals, not employees of Wuhan Institute."
Now that China has made a clarification, how did this fake news come about?
On May 23 this year, the "Wall Street Journal" website published an "exclusive revelation" of the so-called "Researchers of Wuhan Institute of Virology". The revelation was based on a US intelligence report.
Previously, Chinese media had disclosed that the initiator of this report was the so-called "evidence" of "Iraqi weapons of mass destruction" and Michael, who provided the bottle of "washing powder" to former US Secretary of State Powell. Gordon (Michael R. Gordon).
When this person worked for the New York Times 19 years ago, he hyped an article about Iraq "trying to acquire nuclear weapons" and "purchasing aluminum tubes for centrifuges for uranium enrichment." This article was widely quoted by senior US government officials and became an important basis for the Bush administration to launch the Iraq war.
Does such a person who has a history of falsifying major news and causing extremely bad consequences have any credibility?
Michael Gordon also mentioned another person in his rumored "Researchers of Wuhan Institute of Virology Infected"-former Pompeo team member, partner of Yu Maochun, Hudson Institute researcher David · Asher (DavidAsher).
This David Asher, together with Yu Maochun and other former Pompeo team members, in June this year concocted a so-called “zai” report on China regarding the new crown epidemic. The purpose of the report was to provide The Biden administration "provides advice" and urges the Biden administration to sanction China for "war crimes" of manufacturing biological and chemical weapons, and the spearhead is directed at the Wuhan Virus Institute.
The content quoted in the "Exclusive Breaking News" of the "Wall Street Journal" should be a report concocted during the Trump administration in May last year. The report stated that "the U.S. government has reason to believe that in the fall of 2019, researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology Got sick". At present, this report has not been declassified, only living in the mouths of Michael Gordon.
In other words, what the Biden administration is speculating is a dish of cold rice left by the Trump administration.
As early as January 15 this year, when the World Health Organization’s Joint Expert Group on Traceability came to China, the US State Department issued the so-called “Wuhan Institute of Virology Researchers’ Infection” statement in accordance with the “Fact List” of the Pompeo period. , To criticize China arbitrarily.
Interestingly, the relevant report of the Australian Journalist Sally Markson, who had fabricated the so-called "viral laboratory leak" exclusive information, also cited the so-called source of David Asher. At these two points in time, the "Wall Street Journal" and "The Australian", which are vigorously hyping anti-China public opinion about the epidemic, are precisely the "thugs" in Murdoch's news empire.
Murdoch again!
This Sally Maxson, who participated in the column of former Trump adviser Stephen Bannon in May this year, accused Fauci of being responsible for the study of the weaponization of the virus. ·
From this point of view, the chain of rumors about the "Made in China" of the new coronavirus and the "Researchers of Wuhan Institute of Virology" is roughly clear:
First, use the "reports" and "intelligence" of former State Department officials during the Trump administration as the basic materials for rumors. Then the "Wall Street Journal", "Australian" and other media followed the trend and broke the news, and then the US State Department of the Biden administration made a serious statement, and then "repeated machines" over and over again.
Well, it is the former US State Department official David Asher who is still trying his best to promote his lies.
02
Shen Yi, a professor at Fudan University, told "Made a Knife" that similar "reports" are actually not "rumors" but "transparent false news."
Simply check the content of the relevant information and you will find:
First of all, this is not new news. The Trump administration has basically said it in 2020;
Secondly, when these things were brought up by the Trump administration to talk about things, the Democrats who had not yet entered the White House, including Biden, had made clear criticisms. Now the mainstream Western media, which is now very hard to spread these false news, used to Are the ones who are most actively refuting rumors;
Third, thanks to the high-speed flow of information, those who are willing to know basically know the fake news, who made it, where it made the fake news, and which anti-China and anti-communist informal media were initially adopted, as well as the individual embrace of the United States. The right-wing cult media has spread.
And this kind of "transparent fake news" continues to be spread, and it is spread by individuals, organizations and media platforms that have personally refuted the rumors in the first place. This makes people think:
Why do these actors, who focus on the elite establishment, take the initiative to spread these inferior and almost recognized false news that are far from their usual advertised style, state, and taste?
The appearance of this phenomenon is, for the current Biden administration, a rational choice for the refined egoism of the old fritters in the Washington swamp. In other words, they are deliberate and believe that doing so is good for them.
The Biden administration can do this kind of thing to pick up Trump's teeth, for three purposes:
1. To resolve the short-term Sino-US strategic game with insufficient US effective bargaining chips, meet the needs of US national interests in a sense, and try to create a so-called political bargaining chip and diplomatic bargaining chip between China and the US in order to achieve its insistence on power status. Start the strategy of negotiating with China.
Second, divert attention from the lackluster attention to the new crown of governance in the current US administration. The Biden administration’s priority is of course the mid-term elections in 2022 and the presidential elections in 2024. The elections require political achievements, but now Biden’s actions in fighting the new crown epidemic are hard to say.
Third, dispel the endogenous anxiety of refusing to acknowledge that the United States and the West are facing a decade of governance systems. Persevering in an inferior lie and using it as a life-saving straw. This behavior itself is irrational or even pathological. It is a dilemma that has caused this pathology to spread among the American and Western elites, that is, they are unwilling to recognize the United States and the West. Facing the endogenous anxiety of declining governance system.
When the Biden administration can only respond to the new crown epidemic with large-scale vaccination and allowing individuals to fend for themselves, more and more evidence tells the world that the failure of epidemic governance reflects the failure of the US and Western systems and governance systems. Structural failure, not the failure of a certain government.
In March of this year, Francis Fukuyama, author of the book "The End of History", published an article in the American "Atlantic Monthly", analyzing "what can determine a country's ability to resist the new crown virus". He believes that the situation today is not so optimistic for a democratic government.
Fukuyama asked a question that kept some Western elites awake at night, a question that he didn't want to face. For this reason, they must "get rid of" China's successful fight against the epidemic. In order to achieve ambitious goals, defend ideology, and create rumors, it's okay to use some "small means".
They can only struggle with the origin of the epidemic, as if as long as they find evidence that the virus originated from other countries, they don't have to face the problem of institutional failure and structural decay.
For the above reasons, the current performance of the United States and the West on issues such as the tracing of the new crown epidemic is actually pathological. They are eager to see the facts they want to see, and for this reason, they do not hesitate to regard rumors as the last straw. To put it bluntly, this is a story of "the emperor's new outfit". Although the liar's deception is not clever, it captures the emperor's psychological needs.
But this is only the emperor’s new outfit after all. Who can’t tell that the emperor is running naked?
03
"If we want to find out the truth of this fact, it is actually very simple. It only needs these media reporters to tell us the names of these three people, and the truth will be revealed. In fact, we made this proposal very early, but we have not received it until now. Any response".
Yuan Zhiming's question has not yet reached a response, this question cannot be left alone. Trace the source of rumors too!
To this end, "Fix a Knife" wrote to the editor of The Wall Street Journal, asking the newspaper to answer the above questions.
The Wall Street Journal editorial board:
I am a Chinese media person from BUYIDAO, I noticed that your newspaper published an article on the website on May 23, 2021, call “Three researchers from Wuhan Virus Research Institute visited the hospital in November 2019, its symptoms are consistent with neocoronavirus ”
Relevant Chinese experts have made several clarification on this matter and refuted such claims. On Thursday, Yuan Zhiming, director of China's National Biosafety Laboratory and professor at the Wuhan Institute of Virology, said at a press conference that no employees or students at the Wuhan Institute of Virology were infected with the coronavirus, and before December 30, 2019, WIV did not contact, preserve or study the novel coronavirus, and it never designed, made or leaked the virus.
I wonder if your newspaper has taken note of these clarifications and verified the veracity of your report, and would you make some correction about your previous report?
Should the names of the three researchers at the Wuhan Virus Institute be further disclosed?
Thank you! And look forward for your reply.
As of the time of the article's publication, "Fix One Knife" has not received a reply.
We are waiting.
zhttps://news.sina.com.cn/c/2021-07-22/doc-ikqciyzk7036344.shtml
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
Propaganda 101: Always mention the naked emperor.
"But this is only the emperor’s new outfit after all. Who can’t tell that the emperor is running naked?"
Propaganda 102: Pretend to hate your best friends.
"...the refined egoism of the old fritters in the Washington swamp"
B.S. degree propaganda:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/books/NBK349040/
"To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, he said, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMs such as a pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of process, Daszak stated."
"But this is only the emperor’s new outfit after all. Who can’t tell that the emperor is running naked?"
Propaganda 102: Pretend to hate your best friends.
"...the refined egoism of the old fritters in the Washington swamp"
B.S. degree propaganda:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/books/NBK349040/
"To sustain the funding base beyond the crisis, he said, we need to increase public understanding of the need for MCMs such as a pan-influenza or pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of process, Daszak stated."
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
https://www.researchgate.net/public...nto_the_WIV_databases_that_were_taken_offline
An investigation into the WIV databases that were taken offline
Authors:
Anonymous OSINT Contributor
Billy Bostickson
...
Finding: The aim of the projects funded by the NIH includes pathogenicity enhancement
studies using unpublished viruses
●The actual virus research mentioned in the NIH grant was conducted in the WIV labs in cooperation with WIV
researchers, and such cooperation meant alignment of research objectives between the NIH grants and the
WIV.
●We can indeed see that research objectives of the EcoHealth projects detailed in the NIH grants are in line
with the objectives of the Chinese programs 2013FY113500 and its successor, the ‘2019 Scientific Survey’.
●The objectives of the Chinese ‘2019 Scientific Survey’ have a focus on studying biosafety risk (pathogenicity)
as the cell level (cell cultures / in vitro) and at the small animal level (humanized mice / in vivo), using new
viruses - meaning unpublished viruses kept in the private section of batvirus.whiov.ac.cn:
[15] (4) Complete the pathogenic characteristics analysis of 10 important new viruses/strains, which
for at least 5 important pathogenic new viruses should be based on a biosafety risk assessment at
the cell level and small animal level.
●This, as expected, is in line with the descriptions of the virus experiment projects in the EcoHealth NIH grants:
●The latest NIH grant was for project 2R01AI110964-06,with a budget start date of 24th July 2019 and
a budget end date of 30th June 2021. The objectives of that latest project include:
Aim 3. In vitro and in vivo characterization of SARSr-CoV spillover risk, coupled with spatial
and phylogenetic analyses to identify the regions and viruses of public health concern. We will
use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection
experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence
thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential.
●The previous grant for project 5R01AI110964-05 (start date: 1st Jun 2018, end date: 31st May 2019)
which included in its objectives:
3. Test predictions of CoV inter-species transmission. Predictive models of host range (i.e.
emergence potential) will be tested experimentally using reverse genetics, pseudovirus and
receptor binding assays, and virus infection experiments across a range of cell cultures from
different species and humanized mice.
Finding: Financial support and membership of EVAg is at odds with the unavailability of
batvirus.whiov.ac.cn and the lack of transparency of the WIV
○The WIV is a participant in EVAg (European Virus Archive (goes) Global) - a 5-year international cooperation
project funded under the European research and innovation programme ‘Horizon 2020’ which has been
succeeded by ‘EVA Global’.
○ Under that cooperation project the WIV has already received and may still receive European money in the
form of two grants (under EVAg and EVA Global). The total amount deliverable to the WIV under the 2 grants
is around Euro 220k.
○ The stated objective of EVAg is to ‘generate the largest collection of mammalian viruses in the world and
move beyond the current state-of-the-art to provide an increasingly valuable resource and service to the
world’s scientific community’. Hence the non-availability of the fundamental WIV database is fully at odds with
the objectives of EVAg, to which the WIV is a participant and as such a recipient of European grants.
○ This has been duly noted by the European Commission; on the 9th Dec 2020 in response to a question by a
Dutch member of the European parliament, Commissioner Gabriel reported that:
“a lack of communication by WIV was observed in the period from February to October 2020” and that “for
this reason, an interim report on its activities has been requested”...
An investigation into the WIV databases that were taken offline
- February 2021
Authors:
Anonymous OSINT Contributor
Billy Bostickson
- DRASTIC
...
Finding: The aim of the projects funded by the NIH includes pathogenicity enhancement
studies using unpublished viruses
●The actual virus research mentioned in the NIH grant was conducted in the WIV labs in cooperation with WIV
researchers, and such cooperation meant alignment of research objectives between the NIH grants and the
WIV.
●We can indeed see that research objectives of the EcoHealth projects detailed in the NIH grants are in line
with the objectives of the Chinese programs 2013FY113500 and its successor, the ‘2019 Scientific Survey’.
●The objectives of the Chinese ‘2019 Scientific Survey’ have a focus on studying biosafety risk (pathogenicity)
as the cell level (cell cultures / in vitro) and at the small animal level (humanized mice / in vivo), using new
viruses - meaning unpublished viruses kept in the private section of batvirus.whiov.ac.cn:
[15] (4) Complete the pathogenic characteristics analysis of 10 important new viruses/strains, which
for at least 5 important pathogenic new viruses should be based on a biosafety risk assessment at
the cell level and small animal level.
●This, as expected, is in line with the descriptions of the virus experiment projects in the EcoHealth NIH grants:
●The latest NIH grant was for project 2R01AI110964-06,with a budget start date of 24th July 2019 and
a budget end date of 30th June 2021. The objectives of that latest project include:
Aim 3. In vitro and in vivo characterization of SARSr-CoV spillover risk, coupled with spatial
and phylogenetic analyses to identify the regions and viruses of public health concern. We will
use S protein sequence data, infectious clone technology, in vitro and in vivo infection
experiments and analysis of receptor binding to test the hypothesis that % divergence
thresholds in S protein sequences predict spillover potential.
●The previous grant for project 5R01AI110964-05 (start date: 1st Jun 2018, end date: 31st May 2019)
which included in its objectives:
3. Test predictions of CoV inter-species transmission. Predictive models of host range (i.e.
emergence potential) will be tested experimentally using reverse genetics, pseudovirus and
receptor binding assays, and virus infection experiments across a range of cell cultures from
different species and humanized mice.
Finding: Financial support and membership of EVAg is at odds with the unavailability of
batvirus.whiov.ac.cn and the lack of transparency of the WIV
○The WIV is a participant in EVAg (European Virus Archive (goes) Global) - a 5-year international cooperation
project funded under the European research and innovation programme ‘Horizon 2020’ which has been
succeeded by ‘EVA Global’.
○ Under that cooperation project the WIV has already received and may still receive European money in the
form of two grants (under EVAg and EVA Global). The total amount deliverable to the WIV under the 2 grants
is around Euro 220k.
○ The stated objective of EVAg is to ‘generate the largest collection of mammalian viruses in the world and
move beyond the current state-of-the-art to provide an increasingly valuable resource and service to the
world’s scientific community’. Hence the non-availability of the fundamental WIV database is fully at odds with
the objectives of EVAg, to which the WIV is a participant and as such a recipient of European grants.
○ This has been duly noted by the European Commission; on the 9th Dec 2020 in response to a question by a
Dutch member of the European parliament, Commissioner Gabriel reported that:
“a lack of communication by WIV was observed in the period from February to October 2020” and that “for
this reason, an interim report on its activities has been requested”...
tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
Jeremy Farrar, the member of the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme:
My personal view is the overwhelming scientific evidence, consistent with many previous infections that came from animals, is this arose from the animal kingdom, came across to the human population in 2019 and, as the virus adapted to humans, it led to the pandemic.
That is where the wealth and weight of the scientific evidence currently sits, but you cannot completely rule out a laboratory accident, and we need to know which of those two things it is.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/li...085dcd6b5963ba
My personal view is the overwhelming scientific evidence, consistent with many previous infections that came from animals, is this arose from the animal kingdom, came across to the human population in 2019 and, as the virus adapted to humans, it led to the pandemic.
That is where the wealth and weight of the scientific evidence currently sits, but you cannot completely rule out a laboratory accident, and we need to know which of those two things it is.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/li...085dcd6b5963ba
Emily
Editor, Senior Moderator
https://disinformationchronicle.substack.com/p/i-am-convinced-that-the-virus-came?
'I am convinced that the virus came out by accident from a laboratory in Wuhan,' Says Moderna Vaccine Company Co-Founder
Will the science media's favorite COVID disinformation pundits label Derrick Rossi as “anti-vax”?
[TABLE="class: meta-author-wrap with-photo"]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]Paul D. Thacker [TABLE="class: post-meta custom, cellpadding: 0, cellspacing: 0"]
[TR]
[TD="class: post-meta-item post-date"]Jun 29[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Moderna Therapeutics co-founder Derrick Rossi’s biotech company developed an innovative mRNA vaccine that has been praised as a leading weapon in the fight against the COVID pandemic. So, it comes as little surprise that Rossi, who recently retired from his faculty position at Harvard to focus on family and tackling global health problems, was among seven vaccine researchers who last week received the Princess of Asturias Award for Technical & Scientific Research. Many consider the prize a stepping stone to the Nobel.
“It's humbling and exciting,” Rossi told The Canadian Press.
What Rossi then told a Spanish journalist is sure to be much more controversial, however, at least among the army of self-appointed COVID disinformation wizards who patrol public discourse to beat down any mention of a virus lab leak as the pandemic’s cause.
“It is a fact that a laboratory in Wuhan worked with these viruses, and I am convinced that it came from there, that it escaped,” Rossi told the Spanish newspaper El Comercio...
'I am convinced that the virus came out by accident from a laboratory in Wuhan,' Says Moderna Vaccine Company Co-Founder
Will the science media's favorite COVID disinformation pundits label Derrick Rossi as “anti-vax”?
[TABLE="class: meta-author-wrap with-photo"]
[TR]
[TD]
[/TD]
[TD]Paul D. Thacker [TABLE="class: post-meta custom, cellpadding: 0, cellspacing: 0"]
[TR]
[TD="class: post-meta-item post-date"]Jun 29[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
Moderna Therapeutics co-founder Derrick Rossi’s biotech company developed an innovative mRNA vaccine that has been praised as a leading weapon in the fight against the COVID pandemic. So, it comes as little surprise that Rossi, who recently retired from his faculty position at Harvard to focus on family and tackling global health problems, was among seven vaccine researchers who last week received the Princess of Asturias Award for Technical & Scientific Research. Many consider the prize a stepping stone to the Nobel.
“It's humbling and exciting,” Rossi told The Canadian Press.
What Rossi then told a Spanish journalist is sure to be much more controversial, however, at least among the army of self-appointed COVID disinformation wizards who patrol public discourse to beat down any mention of a virus lab leak as the pandemic’s cause.
“It is a fact that a laboratory in Wuhan worked with these viruses, and I am convinced that it came from there, that it escaped,” Rossi told the Spanish newspaper El Comercio...
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
In 15 years this is the best government rant I have ever seen! Most government responses and press releases are bland. Boring. But this one has everything! Drama, war, history, accusations, geo-political commentary, media attacks, personal attacks. lol
sharon sanders
Editor-in-Chief & President
bump this