COVID-19 Records

Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.825 [SLACK_001039] · slack_pm:msg:08598

Page text: p.825 · original PDF

Date
2021-05-17 10:25
Type
chat message · slack
recipient
Kristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker
Robert F. Garry
Topics
Biosafety and biosecurityLab-leak / accidental release hypothesisNatural origin / zoonotic spilloverProximal Origin paper

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

Lipkin is in the DM longread as well "I spoke about Nick's article last week with Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, the renownedColumbia University virus hunter who was one of the five co-authors on the seminal "proximal origin" paper.He favored a natural origin theory, he said, in part because he had assumed that all the Wuhan Institute's 2019 work with SARS-like viruses had been done in its top-level BSL-4 lab, which was cleared to operate in 2017. (State Department cables from 2018 raised questions about how well-run the lab was.) But later he learned of studies with Dr. Shi's name on them showing that work he considers dangerous had been done in level BSL-2 labs, which he considers highly porous to leaks, not just in 2016, but in 2020."That's screwed up," he said. "It shouldn't have happened. People should not be looking at bat viruses in BSL-2 labs. My view has changed." That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. There _is no proof_ of a leak. But the Occam's Razor argument -- what's the likeliest explanation, animal or lab? -- keeps shifting in the directionof the latter."

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.

StatementGradeAttributionStance
Ian Lipkin, the renownedColumbia University virus hunter who was one of the five co-authors on the seminal "proximal origin" paper.He favored a natural origin theory, he said, in part because he had assumed that all the Wuhan Institute's 2019 work with SARS-like viruses had been done in its top-level BSL-4 lab, which was cleared to operate in 2017. quoted / not their view quoted_external inside quotation marks asserts
Shi's name on them showing that work he considers dangerous had been done in level BSL-2 labs, which he considers highly porous to leaks, not just in 2016, but in 2020."That's screwed up," he said. quoted / not their view quoted_external inside quotation marks asserts
People should not be looking at bat viruses in BSL-2 labs. quoted / not their view quoted_external inside quotation marks asserts
My view has changed." That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. 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.

  1. 2021-05-17 10:25 Robert F. Garry
    Lipkin is in the DM longread as well "I spoke about Nick's article last week with Dr. W. Ian Lipkin, the renownedColumbia University virus hunter who was one of the five co-authors on the seminal "proximal origin" paper.He favored a natural origin theory, he said, in part because he had assumed that all the Wuhan Institute's 2019 work with SARS-like viruses had been done in its top-level BSL-4 lab, which was cleared to operate in 2017. (State Department cables from 2018 raised questions about how well-run the lab was.) But later he learned of studies with Dr. Shi's name on them showing that work he considers dangerous had been done in level BSL-2 labs, which he considers highly porous to leaks, not just in 2016, but in 2020."That's screwed up," he said. "It shouldn't have happened. People should not be looking at bat viruses in BSL-2 labs. My view has changed." That is still not, as he pointed out, direct evidence of a lab leak. There _is no proof_ of a leak. But the Occam's Razor argument -- what's the likeliest explanation, animal or lab? -- keeps shifting in the directionof the latter."
  2. 2021-05-17 10:28 Kristian G. Andersen open
    "But later he learned of studies with Dr. Shi's name on them showing that work he considers dangerous had been done in level BSL-2 labs, which he considers highly porous to leaks, not just in 2016, but in 2020." Is the daft? All of that has been known for years and we discussed it at length...'
  3. 2021-05-17 10:30 Kristian G. Andersen open
    It's extremely damaging coming from Butt Lesion though - what an idiot. And the "Occam's Razor" argument is just uninformed.

Full conversation →