Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.655 [SLACK_000869] · slack_pm:msg:06853

Date: 2021-03-29 16:29
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Kristian G. Andersen
Topics: Wuhan Institute of Virology collaboration Lab-leak / accidental release hypothesis

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

"*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.

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
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.	quoted / not their view	quoted_external inside quotation marks	asserts

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

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.

quoted / not their view

quoted_external inside quotation marks

asserts

In context

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

2021-03-29 16:24 Kristian G. Andersen open

... but they again, she _would_ need to consider it a possibility - we did.
2021-03-29 16:25 Edward C. Holmes open

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.
2021-03-29 16:26 Edward C. Holmes open

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 open

"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?
2021-03-29 16:29 Kristian G. Andersen

"*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.
2021-03-29 16:32 Edward C. Holmes open

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.
2021-03-29 16:32 Edward C. Holmes open

Dominic also said that it clear that the intelligence services have nothing.
2021-03-29 16:33 Kristian G. Andersen open

Yeah, maybe they're just referring to this? https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4797993/
2021-03-29 16:34 Kristian G. Andersen open

A lot of the conspiracy theories mention the "GOF Research" at WIV and how they made these scary recombinant viruses - but that work was in DeepThroat's lab, not at WIV - so maybe that's what they're pushing against.

Full conversation →