Chat message

Slack / Private Message Drop, p.1033 [SLACK_001247] · slack_pm:msg:10797

Date: 2021-11-26 13:47
Type: chat message · slack
recipient: Robert F. Garry, Edward C. Holmes, Andrew Rambaut
speaker: Kristian G. Andersen
Topics: Biosafety and biosecurity Lab-leak / accidental release hypothesis

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

We have known this since the very beginning - I mentioned it on our very first call that I was concerned about themcollecting and growing sampling from bats under BSL-2. This work is exactly that.To be clear, this type of work is approved under BSL-2 almost universally - I can do it at my lab here at Scripps (and,in fact, we have). I'm fully in agreement that further precautions are required, but a single paper like this changes nothing - again, it's no secret this is how it has been done and I/we flagged it on day 1. Adds credence to the fact that we should consider a lab leak, but doesn't change any of the data showing it isn't.

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
We have known this since the very beginning - I mentioned it on our very first call that I was concerned about themcollecting and growing sampling from bats under BSL-2.	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts
This work is exactly that.To be clear, this type of work is approved under BSL-2 almost universally - I can do it at my lab here at Scripps (and,in fact, we have).	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	asserts
Adds credence to the fact that we should consider a lab leak, but doesn't change any of the data showing it isn't.	own voice, substantive	speaker_own	instructs

Statement

Grade

Attribution

Stance

We have known this since the very beginning - I mentioned it on our very first call that I was concerned about themcollecting and growing sampling from bats under BSL-2.

own voice, substantive

speaker_own

asserts

This work is exactly that.To be clear, this type of work is approved under BSL-2 almost universally - I can do it at my lab here at Scripps (and,in fact, we have).

own voice, substantive

speaker_own

asserts

Adds credence to the fact that we should consider a lab leak, but doesn't change any of the data showing it isn't.

own voice, substantive

speaker_own

instructs

In context

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

2021-11-26 13:43 Edward C. Holmes open

We have something else to discuss. Andrew & I were on a call with Jeremy and Greg Towers from UCL. The short story is that Greg was interviewing a postdoc from WIV and was very concerned about their biosafety. It relates to the attached paper. Basically, they have collected saliva and tissue samples from bats across China which are then stored in VTM. They then culture them to look for rhabdoviruses and Greg is worried that they could have cultured a CoV at the same time. He asked the postdoc what they did to prevent this and he said that they deep sequenced the samples and found no CoV which Greg doesn't think is good enough. Personally, I agree with Greg that this sort of procedure is no longer acceptable. However, I find this a weak theory for the origin of SC2 as itrequires a whole series of unlikely events: (i) the bat sample has the virus; (ii) the virus grows in culture; (iii) that virus is then transmitted to the lab worker in an accident; (iv) the furin cleavage site is retained despite culture inVeroE6 and an R. affinis cell line; (v) there is a virus in the sample despite there being no sequence evidence; (v)the infected lab worker then has to pass it on. And of course we now have all the market stuff. That said, they clearly need have a lot of bat tissues at WIV. I know the French authors on the paper and I will follow up with them. Interested in your thoughts. [shared file(s): Luo_viruses-13-00064-v2.pdf]
2021-11-26 13:47 Kristian G. Andersen

We have known this since the very beginning - I mentioned it on our very first call that I was concerned about themcollecting and growing sampling from bats under BSL-2. This work is exactly that.To be clear, this type of work is approved under BSL-2 almost universally - I can do it at my lab here at Scripps (and,in fact, we have). I'm fully in agreement that further precautions are required, but a single paper like this changes nothing - again, it's no secret this is how it has been done and I/we flagged it on day 1. Adds credence to the fact that we should consider a lab leak, but doesn't change any of the data showing it isn't.
2021-11-26 13:50 Edward C. Holmes open

I agree. Greg was definitely worried about a lab leak but was more concerned about putting in procedures to improve biosafety and I agree with that.
2021-11-26 13:53 Kristian G. Andersen open

I think we all agree: • Lab leak a potential concern • Actual data strongly pointing to no lab leak • Biosafety needs to be strengthened given how widespread SC1-like and SC2-like viruses are across SE Asia I don't think anybody with expertise would disagree on any of these points
2021-11-26 13:54 Edward C. Holmes open

Totally agree.
2021-11-26 13:55 Robert F. Garry open

Me too - consistent from day 1.

Full conversation →