Slack / Private Message Drop — page 793

What it gets wrong is that the WHO report significantly adds to the large volume of epidemiological and genomic data that support emergence of SARS-CoV-2 from a zoonotic reservoir, either wildlife or farmed animals. I've written a little about that here: https://virological.org/t/early-appearance-of-two-distinct-genomic-lineages-of-sars -cov-2-in-different-wuhan-wildlife-markets-suggests-sars-cov-2-has-a-natural-origin/691 It presents a naive plan for next steps. No nation, including the United States, would ever permit the type of "forensic" investigation of their laboratories as proposed in the letter. The letter damages prospects for cooperation with China that may actually permit further productive investigation of SARS-CoV-2 origins by WHO or other groups of international scientists. The Lab Leak hypotheses are based on the supposition of a major cover up and complex conspiracy perpetrated by some of the world's leading virologists. It is disappointing to find some leading scientists supporting these unfounded accusations. The letter risks adding to antiAsian xenophobia and inadvertently supports even more outrageous conspiracy theories about COVID-19 [example: Dr. Fauci and the NIH funded Gain-of-Function research that produced SARS-CoV-2]. The letter DISTRACTs from important work needed to identify the source of SARS-CoV-2 and by extension help to prevent the next pandemic caused by an emergent coronavirus. [2021-05-13 04:58:35] [Robert Garry] Relman argues that all the evidence is circumstantial and indirect. He forgot that: Circumstantial evidence is occasionally very convincing, as when you find a trout in the milk, to quote Thoreau's example." Sherlock Holmes in Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, _The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes_ (1892) "The Adventure of the Noble Bachelor" [2021-05-13 05:00:07] [Robert Garry] I would argue that @Eddie Holmes "raccoon dog in the wildlife market" is equivalent to Thoreau's "trout in the milk." [2021-05-13 07:23:29] [Kristian Andersen] :100: [2021-05-13 07:30:09] [Kristian Andersen] (please keep this ultra confidential) [2021-05-13 07:46:04] [Robert Garry] :+1::100: good for her! [2021-05-13 08:26:40] [Robert Garry] Some thoughts (incomplete) on Relman: I would suggest that there is no direct evidence to support either hypothesis, i.e., to my knowledge, no one has reported finding SARS-CoV-2 in "nature" anywhere, aside from in humans starting towards the end of 2019 and thereafter from human spillover, and no one has reported finding SARS-CoV-2 in a laboratory. Everything in support of both hypotheses (natural spillover and lab spillover) is circumstantial. There is a difference. If you believe that SARS-CoV-2 or a close progenitor was in WIV and being actively worked on then you are supposing a major cover up and complex conspiracy perpetrated by some of the world's leading virologists. It is disappointing to find scientists providing support for these unfounded accusations.