Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, pp.650-651 · slack_pm:msg:06811

Date: 2021-03-29 11:34 (hour precision)
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Robert F. Garry
Topics: Wuhan Institute of Virology collaboration Lab-leak / accidental release hypothesis Intelligence community assessments Vaccines WHO and international investigation

Recipients on this medium are inferred from channel membership, not per-message addressing.

Dear ColleaguesYou are among thirty colleagues with an interest in the origin of SARS-CoV-2 who is receiving this email. Attached please find an Open Letter to the WHO with respect to the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the COVID pandemic. The purpose of the Open Letter is to request that the WHO acknowledge five facts that scientists agree on and which support the conclusion that an accidental laboratory-acquired infection was responsible for the COVID pandemic. The five undisputed facts are: COVID-19 wasn't smoldering in the community before the epidemic broke out, as was observed with previous coronavirus epidemics.Despite an intense search, neither the COVID virus, nor any close relative, has yet been found in nature, unlike prior natural zoonoses. The closest viral relative is from the laboratories of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, near theepicenter of the first cases. The COVID virus had little genetic diversity at the outset, unlike prior natural zoonoses. It was genetically pure, like a man-made vaccine. The COVID virus's powerful infectious trigger isn't found anywhere inits related viral group in nature but has been repeatedly inserted into viruses by laboratory scientists, including at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The virus was highly adapted for infection of people from the start, unlike prior natural zoonoses.I look forward to any comments you might have on this Open Letter, especially if there is scientific evidence (not speculation) which I have missed that should be included here or if you think something is misstated. IfI receiveyour comments before this is published I will make changes, if appropriate.Regards, Steve Steven Quay, MD, PhDDr. Quay WebsiteBreast Cancer TEDx Talk STAY SAFE #1 Amazon Medical Book SLACK_000865*ORCID 2-D iD*

Extracted statements

Rule-extracted, not adjudicated. The grade says what may be done with each one; read the document above before relying on any of them.

Statement	Grade	Attribution	Stance
The closest viral relative is from the laboratories of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, near theepicenter of the first cases.	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts
The COVID virus's powerful infectious trigger isn't found anywhere inits related viral group in nature but has been repeatedly inserted into viruses by laboratory scientists, including at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

The closest viral relative is from the laboratories of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, near theepicenter of the first cases.

own voice, substantive

speaker_own

asserts

The COVID virus's powerful infectious trigger isn't found anywhere inits related viral group in nature but has been repeatedly inserted into viruses by laboratory scientists, including at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

own voice, substantive

speaker_own

asserts

In context

A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.

2021-03-29 11:34 Edward C. Holmes open

Seems that China pushed back on the inclusion of the raccoon dog stuff...plus I think Daszak wants to include it inhis own Lancet report and get more of the glory!
2021-03-29 11:34 Robert F. Garry open

Only if you deny where you got it :alien: [shared file(s): Annexes_20210328.pdf]
2021-03-29 11:34 Robert F. Garry open

Annexes.
2021-03-29 11:34 Edward C. Holmes open

Thanks! I will indeed.
2021-03-29 11:34 Robert F. Garry

Dear ColleaguesYou are among thirty colleagues with an interest in the origin of SARS-CoV-2 who is receiving this email. Attached please find an Open Letter to the WHO with respect to the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus and the COVID pandemic. The purpose of the Open Letter is to request that the WHO acknowledge five facts that scientists agree on and which support the conclusion that an accidental laboratory-acquired infection was responsible for the COVID pandemic. The five undisputed facts are: COVID-19 wasn't smoldering in the community before the epidemic broke out, as was observed with previous coronavirus epidemics.Despite an intense search, neither the COVID virus, nor any close relative, has yet been found in nature, unlike prior natural zoonoses. The closest viral relative is from the laboratories of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, near theepicenter of the first cases. The COVID virus had little genetic diversity at the outset, unlike prior natural zoonoses. It was genetically pure, like a man-made vaccine. The COVID virus's powerful infectious trigger isn't found anywhere inits related viral group in nature but has been repeatedly inserted into viruses by laboratory scientists, including at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. The virus was highly adapted for infection of people from the start, unlike prior natural zoonoses.I look forward to any comments you might have on this Open Letter, especially if there is scientific evidence (not speculation) which I have missed that should be included here or if you think something is misstated. IfI receiveyour comments before this is published I will make changes, if appropriate.Regards, Steve Steven Quay, MD, PhDDr. Quay WebsiteBreast Cancer TEDx Talk STAY SAFE #1 Amazon Medical Book SLACK_000865*ORCID 2-D iD*
2021-03-29 11:34 Robert F. Garry open

Dr. Quay, I dispute each of your "facts."-
2021-03-29 11:34 Kristian G. Andersen open

Yeah, I got that too - complete nonsense from start to finish.
2021-03-29 11:34 Edward C. Holmes open

First impression on the report is that they have pulled their punches and that this is going to go on for years which ishugely depressing.
2021-03-29 11:34 Robert F. Garry open

I agree with this read as well Eddie. They could have gone a lot further with the data they had. So much work put-in,some decent analyses and some useful stuff, but no real "punch lines."I can see where the fights took place - they did not want to admit that there were raccoon dogs or other such animals in the market becase this too would put the "blame" on China and their eating habits. Much better I guess in their judgement to leave open the possibilitySC2 came in on the frozen fish.

Full conversation →