A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
Who was it?
-
I would say it's more likely to be Peter Daszak.
-
Okay. So was that something that Peter Daszak expressed on the call?
-
I recall that people challenged the idea that it could be a lab leak.
-
2026-04-10 09:00
Christina Salazar
But at that point you were not -- I think you've rated it as more likely natural, but you weren't -- what would you rate it?
-
I never ruled out lab leak possibility. I don't see how anyone can. And the reason that is, is that they've published papers saying that they did their work at BSL-2. Biological Safety Level 2 is less stringent than Biological Safety Level 3. So there are many more laboratory-acquired infections at BSL-2 than at BSL-3. And so if you're working with viruses than use human receptors and growing human cells, and you're doing it at BSL-2, you DC.Scheduling@LexitasLegal.com cannot ever conclusively say that there was not a laboratory leak.
-
So you think that he was referring to Peter Daszak, so when he's saying, "I wonder if he, himself, is worried about this too."
-
I have absolutely no concerns about, no hesitation to tell you that I was not involved in the creation of this virus in any way. I'm 100 percent certain.
-
So that February 3rd call, what was the purpose of it?