Slack / Private Message Drop — page 908
of 1123 pages
← p.907 p.909 → · this page in the original PDF · package
SLACK_001122
But, that also doesn't matter - it's all about the long-game and hence that paper is important. I'll get back to it
tomorrow.
[Eddie Holmes]
I see Trevor is pontificating again
He is forgetting all the zoonotic IAVs
[Eddie Holmes]
I like the Fauci ink blot test at the bottom: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-57336280
[Kristian Andersen]
Hah, yeah, that ink blot test is :100: spot on. These emails fit whatever narrative you believe.
[Kristian Andersen]
I don't know what Trevor is on about - the first tweet in that thread is outright false:
"We now have mainstream scientific opinions that largely range between "lab leak can be dismissed" and "both
zoonosis and lab leak are viable"
Eh, no - nobody said we could dismiss anything. We said it was unsupported and highly unlikely. Also, we're not
talking about uninformed priors here - there's _actual_ data, which Trevor knows well.
[Andrew Rambaut]
[thread - ID: 2021-06-02 15:59:03]
Confidentially - it will be in the next PHE Tech Brief - but it is not good. Modellers have really consolidated around a
50% transmissibility advantage over B.1.1.7 (I am not sure I am quite comfortable with that yet because there is
large heterogeneity of R in time and place - which makes less sense if it is all due to an inherent advantage). Also
evidence of higher rate of hospital admissions from two independent studies. And evidence of a significant vaccine
effect. Really not good. I just hope some of this is not the case.
Is there any evidence of growth in the USA? If the above is true I would imagine it is going to flare up all over the
place.
[Andrew Rambaut]
"Hello,
My name is Daniel Payne. I'm a reporter with Just the News. I hope you're well.
I have been reviewing the major release of Dr. Anthony Fauci's emails from last year. In one sequence of emails I
noticed you were part of an early February 2020 conference call involving several experts discussing what appears
to be, at least in part, gain-of-function research.
Can you offer any insight into what that conversation was about? What was discussed in it? What was concluded?
Are you able to provide any documentation from the phone call?
Thanks so much. I'm also at i.
Daniel
Yeah right.
This is our OCR of the page, with running headers and footers removed. The
Committee's PDF
is authoritative; quote from it. Machine-readable, including the uncleaned
text: /api/page/slack_pm/908
Records on this page
| Record | Date | Type | Pages |
|---|---|---|---|
| slack_pm:msg:09422 | 2021-06-02 | chat message | 907–908 |
| slack_pm:msg:09423 | 2021-06-02 | chat message | 908 |
| slack_pm:msg:09424 | 2021-06-02 | chat message | 908 |
| slack_pm:msg:09425 | 2021-06-02 | chat message | 908 |
| slack_pm:msg:09426 | 2021-06-02 | chat message | 908 |
| slack_pm:msg:09427 | 2021-06-02 | chat message | 908 |
| slack_pm:msg:09428 | 2021-06-02 | chat message | 908 |