And now for the interesting part: Of the remaining 8 who are relatively independent, 5 have modified or reversed their positions with regard to a lab leak: Considering they started by signing a statement that called it a "conspiracy theory", this is truly remarkable. We have:
-
Show this thread
-
First author Charles Calisher considers the use of "conspiracy theory" to have been "over the top". He now tells people he needs more information before he can opine: https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/03/18/1021030/coronavirus-leak-wuhan-lab-scientists-conspiracy/ …pic.twitter.com/FjdSQxFJEU
2 replies 34 retweets 256 likesShow this thread -
Christian Drosten considers a lab leak within the realm of possibility, though extremely unlikely. He now has his own hypothesis, to do with serial passage through the fur farming practice. This is the first I've heard of this one, but this is why we need an open conversation.pic.twitter.com/YE1kBEzK2n
6 replies 32 retweets 233 likesShow this thread -
Stanley Perlman believes that the "lab leak" is now "on the table", due to our failure to find the intermediate host thus far. https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/03/18/1021030/coronavirus-leak-wuhan-lab-scientists-conspiracy/ …pic.twitter.com/k4DAifUAqK
1 reply 30 retweets 221 likesShow this thread -
Peter Palese has gone a step further and is demanding a full investigation. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9652589/One-original-lab-leak-deniers-calls-thorough-investigation-Covids-origin.html …pic.twitter.com/zswBX0Z4OQ
3 replies 31 retweets 231 likesShow this thread -
Perhaps the longest distance of all has been crossed by Bernard Roizman. He is now convinced “that the virus was brought to a lab … and some sloppy individual brought it out”. “They can’t admit they did something so stupid.” https://www.wsj.com/articles/wuhan-lab-leak-question-chinese-mine-covid-pandemic-11621871125?mod=hp_lead_pos5 …pic.twitter.com/VDFkq4Iip4
2 replies 51 retweets 275 likesShow this thread -
Even Daszak now concedes he can't disprove the lab leak hypothesis. This may sound obvious, or mundane, but the letter sang a different tune. https://www.modernhealthcare.com/technology/bat-cave-search-covids-origins-scientists-reignite-polarizing-debate-wuhan-lab-leak …pic.twitter.com/HxYJd5hVdy
3 replies 46 retweets 252 likesShow this thread -
The only signers unaccounted are Ronald B Corley, Kanta Subbarao, and Sai Kit Lam. The latter is essentially retired and has not published since the Lancet letter. The other two work for governmental and intenrational organizations respectively, and have kept a low profile.
2 replies 21 retweets 172 likesShow this thread -
The remarkable fact is that out of the 8 signatories that have not been somewhat directly implicated in the research at hand, 6 have modified or completely reversed their positions, considering a lab leak anywhere from possible but unlikely to convincing.
3 replies 41 retweets 253 likesShow this thread -
*typo*: I meant to write 5, as in the tweet above.
@jack, I'll pay you good money for an edit button. We don't have to tell anyone. You and me bro.2 replies 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.