A single line often inverts meaning once you see what it
answers, so neighbouring messages are always shown.
-
"Shi told them she was very worried about a lab escape and they did 2 internal audits and found nothing". This bit bothers me - and I mentioned this back when she made a similar comment to SciAm. It clearly shows she found it a likely explanation.
-
... but they again, she _would_ need to consider it a possibility - we did.
-
As did we Kristian. I think I would be more bothered if she had not considered the possibility. To me, she comes across as honest.
-
What do you make of that ACE2 stuff? If all their staff are negative then it's game over....unless there's been massive cover-up.
-
2021-03-29 16:28
Kristian G. Andersen
"her laboratory used recombinant viruses to test whether bat CoVs could use ACE2 to bind but used bat spike protein on *a bat-CoV backbone*, not human SARS" Which backbone?
-
"*other researchers* engineered SHC014 spike so did not need isolates for mouse experiments. WIV began recombinant work in 2015 with WIV-1. It received ACE2 mice in 2016 and *started recombinant experiments with WIV +SHC014* in 2018 but did not finish them owing to the COVID outbreak" This might all just be bad writing, but there's a lot of wiggle room in these statements. I'm not really sure how tointerpret them.
-
Yes, I couldn't quite follow it either. I guess she means SCH014 which is a SARS-like virus. This accords with her comments to John Cohen that they were only working on SARS-like viruses.
-
Dominic also said that it clear that the intelligence services have nothing.
-
Yeah, maybe they're just referring to this? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4797993/