Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.883 [SLACK_001097] · slack_pm:msg:09155

Date: 2021-05-27 14:17
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Kristian G. Andersen, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Robert F. Garry

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

27-May-2021 Dear Dr. Garry, Manuscript number: abj5092 Thank you for submitting your manuscript "Comment: Investigate the origins of COVID-19" to Science. We will not be publishing any follow-up letters to the Bloom et al. letter given that arguments for one theory or the other remainspeculative. We are therefore notifying you so that you can seek publication elsewhere.Sincerely,Jennifer SillsScience

In context

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

2021-05-27 13:54 Edward C. Holmes open

It will be messy, but there should be enough to identify the dominant host and at least to exclude humans
2021-05-27 13:58 Robert F. Garry open

You're the man @Eddie Holmes
2021-05-27 13:59 Kristian G. Andersen open

(we should add this suggestion to the letter)
2021-05-27 14:09 Kristian G. Andersen open

"metaphorical disco club during a pandemic". Pretty accurate :wink: [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-05-27 at 14.09.12.png]
2021-05-27 14:17 Robert F. Garry

27-May-2021 Dear Dr. Garry, Manuscript number: abj5092 Thank you for submitting your manuscript "Comment: Investigate the origins of COVID-19" to Science. We will not be publishing any follow-up letters to the Bloom et al. letter given that arguments for one theory or the other remainspeculative. We are therefore notifying you so that you can seek publication elsewhere.Sincerely,Jennifer SillsScience
2021-05-27 14:19 Robert F. Garry open

Well so much for a "dispassionate science-based discourse."
2021-05-27 14:21 Edward C. Holmes open

I thought they wanted a debate?!
2021-05-27 14:24 Andrew Rambaut open

```The goal of Science's Insights section is to be the best place for scientists to talk to each other about science. So,given the importance of this issue and the breadth of expertise and outstanding qualifications of the authors, it wasan easy decision to publish the Letter. The authors acknowledged that demanding transparency from China--whileacknowledging the important role of Chinese researchers in tackling the virus--is a nuanced and important task given the discouraging rise of anti-Asian sentiment over the past 18 months.```
2021-05-27 14:24 Robert F. Garry open

This actually makes no sense - if both arguments are "speculative," then why the hell did they publish the Bloomshit, which they just called speculative?

Full conversation →