--- type: Conversation title: Private channel session 1436 description: "slack conversation, 17 messages, 2021-05-25." tags: - conversation - slack medium: slack message_count: 17 started_at: "2021-05-25T12:42:12" ended_at: "2021-05-25T14:32:57" duration_seconds: 6645 sources: - { id: slack_pm, resource: /sources/slack-pm.md, title: Slack / Private Message Drop, author: "process:senate-hsgac-release" } generated: { by: randpaul-corpus-pipeline/1.0, at: "2026-08-01T12:42:27Z" } status: stable --- A slack conversation of 17 messages spanning 1h 50m. # Metadata - **Started:** 2021-05-25T12:42:12 - **Ended:** 2021-05-25T14:32:57 - **Duration:** 1h 50m - **Participants:** 4 - **Source:** [slack_pm](/sources/slack-pm.md) - **Pages:** 867-870 # Participants * [Andrew Rambaut](/people/andrew-rambaut.md) * [Edward C. Holmes](/people/edward-c-holmes.md) * [Kristian G. Andersen](/people/kristian-g-andersen.md) * [Robert F. Garry](/people/robert-f-garry.md) # Transcript **[2021-05-25T12:42:12] Kristian G. Andersen:** I'm now getting emails from the FBI. This could get interesting... Is everybody else being absolutely bombarded at the moment to respond about our conclusions from last year? It might be worth drafting something from the entire group - I'll work on it and have our comms folks take a look at it. **[2021-05-25T12:46:55] Robert F. Garry:** Newsweek **[2021-05-25T13:02:04] Kristian G. Andersen:** Same. The Epoch times too. BBC with a similar request - and just now NYTimes (their angle seems different). I just emailed our comms office - I'll share what they draft. The issue is that if we don't respond, they'll write whatever the fuck they want. **[2021-05-25T13:03:10] Robert F. Garry:** PO1 holds up extremely well! **[2021-05-25T13:05:47] Robert F. Garry:** Absolutely - The Proximal Origins papers has stood up very well since it was written, peer-reviewed and published. The only change since we wrote our manuscript on the Proximal Origins of SARS-CoV-2 is that I now consider any of the lab leak hypotheses to be extremely unlikely. There is currently no scientific (or other ) evidence for a lab origin of SARS-CoV-2. The intelligence "declassified" at the end of the Trump Administration suggesting that 3 WIV workers were ill {with something] is disputed by WIV. There is no evidence that one of them was "patient zero." As reported by the WHO team they were negative for SARS-CoV-2 antibodies.In contrast, there is significant scientific evidence… **[2021-05-25T13:05:47] Robert F. Garry:** Some variations on a hybrid (natural/lab leak) scenario suggest that SARS-CoV-2 is a natural virus that infected ascientist while doing field work resulting in mildly symptomatic or asymptomatic spread or that after being brought back to a laboratory SARS-CoV-2 was released unknowingly, but not successfully cultured or otherwise manipulated. Compared to the millions of worldwide encounters of humans with wildlife, including the trapping ofbats for food, the number of high-risk exposures of scientists doing field or laboratory work with samples from wildlifeis miniscule. **[2021-05-25T13:06:38] Robert F. Garry:** Certainly we need to continue to investigate the origins of SARS-CoV-2. My colleagues and I have not stopped doing so since we wrote Proximal Origins. Indeed a urgent international investigation, which perforce must include China (that's where the "interesting" bats are), is necessary to fill remaining gaps in our knowledge of coronaviruses diversity.We need to "follow the animals" and explore every possible point of entry of potentially coronavirus infected animals into Wuhan, especially focused on the wildlife trade for food and traditional medicine.If - as some have argued - we should focus attention on an unsubstantiated hypothesis of lab leak, this would be aserious mistake. The world… **[2021-05-25T13:07:56] Robert F. Garry:** Yes, eventually the origin of SARS-CoV-2 will be described. A close progenitor in a bat or perhaps more likely another animal host will eventually be uncovered. Sometimes you get lucky (as in the first SARS) and other times not. **[2021-05-25T13:13:02] Kristian G. Andersen:** This is great Bob! Let's have that be the response from you :wink:. I especially love this part: "Ironically, most "forensic" investigations at least those on TV involve looking at the DNA.Excepting the fact that it's RNA not DNA, we already did this in Proximal Origins" **[2021-05-25T13:23:46] Kristian G. Andersen:** Oh Marc. I think people have trouble reading. [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-05-25 at 1.22.31 PM.png] **[2021-05-25T13:49:45] Kristian G. Andersen:** Is she daft? [shared file(s): Screen Shot 2021-05-25 at 1.49.05 PM.png] **[2021-05-25T13:58:09] Robert F. Garry:** argh [shared file(s): Timeline_ How the Wuhan lab-leak theory suddenly became credible - The Washington Post.pdf] **[2021-05-25T14:24:03] Edward C. Holmes:** Sorry, I'm crook. Had a very bad reaction to my first AZ vaccine yesterday. Bed is soaked. I've not been this ill sinceI went to that cave in Yunnan a couple of years ago. **[2021-05-25T14:29:13] Robert F. Garry:** Sorry to hear it...pretty rare. **[2021-05-25T14:29:25] Andrew Rambaut:** Ooh. Bad luck. Had my second dose last week. Was a little bit under the weather with the first but fine for the second. Another week and I will be invincible. I will be eating bats for breakfast. **[2021-05-25T14:31:24] Robert F. Garry:** With a side of caterpillar on lightly done toast. **[2021-05-25T14:32:57] Kristian G. Andersen:** Guys, Eddie is hurting and all you do is making fun of him. Not cool man, not cool. Eddie, I'm sorry to hear that - I hope you feel better soon. Also, bad side effects is a sign of weakness. Buck up, man.