It's a long piece, and it really doesn't fit into "camps" around the "origin" question. I've come away with one key lesson: we were due for a bat coronavirus outbreak, one way or another. We failed in many ways, and the way forward should be to address *all* the potential paths.
-
-
Show this thread
-
I've left out a lot of detail—given the audience and the length, already—and I'll write the geekier/detailed parts eventually as well. But I believe we know a lot, already: enough to realize how we were on the knife-edge for this pandemic, and it tipped over—one way or another.
Show this thread -
Thank you! Indeed, asking the right questions is often the most important part of the effort.https://twitter.com/JamesGleick/status/1408405792118673412 …
Show this thread -
This is as good a time as any, I guess, to declare my own conflict-of-interest. I am, indeed, in the pocket of Big Civet. Big Pangolin also promised grant—but they have been less solid, just promises so far. Big Civet? Cash on delivery. So here you go.
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/25/opinion/coronavirus-lab.html …pic.twitter.com/WXXWy32vMm
Show this thread -
-
Also, much gratitude again to the research team I work with—the stellar
@avizvizenilman and@isaacscher duo. After editing the original piece down from 20K words to this 5500+ word version—still so long for traditional media!—we went through a very detailed fact-checking grind.Show this thread -
Absolutely. As the piece tries to detail, the response may well be the most important lever we have. That perspective can help shape our risk/benefit analyses for broader research as well.https://twitter.com/RuthReader/status/1408428895897063433 …
Show this thread -
Former Nature reporter who had written many (very useful) articles on biosafety which, he notes correctly, ha taken a backseat to this debate even though it is crucial—it is important no matter may have happened. Yet, such experts are rarely interviewed.https://twitter.com/Declan_M_Butler/status/1408452780772188162 …
Show this thread -
An apology and explanation: My draft, with full sourcing, was in to my editor before
@KatherineEban’s excellent piece covering especially the sleuthing—which wasn’t my focus—at great length was published. (The material had been ignored by US media!). Still, I should’ve linked.https://twitter.com/KatherineEban/status/1408782784378908674 …Show this thread -
I also didn’t write much about the media angle—and how much fairy basic stuff was essentially unreported in traditional western media—with US media lagging more than most.
@KatherineEban’s piece was key to breaking through and deserves extra appreciation for that.
Show this thread -
I don’t know how many times this would work but here you go…
https://twitter.com/rednfiery/status/1409122317326688259 …Show this thread -
Another attempt at a gift link.
https://twitter.com/rednfiery/status/1409124414684233735 …Show this thread -
As an example of really poor state of claims made in traditional media and high-prestige outlets. On the left, latest from an SF Chronicle editorial on the location of the Wuhan lab. On the right, reality. This shouldn't pass the most elementary fact-check—but it gets repeated.pic.twitter.com/jhwB8l83fX
Show this thread -
Chinese scientists, Lancet, Jan 2020: "bat virus but local bats hibernating." Dr. Shi, Nature, Feb 2020: guilty bats in Yunnan, ~1000km away. Repeats later she thinks zoonosis but not in Hubei—let alone Wuhan. Western media 16 months later: The lab was where the viruses were!
Show this thread -
Treating us all like we're idiots with really poor arguments isn't helping convince anyone and, if anything, just makespeople who can assess basic facts more suspicious of *everything*, including things that, imo, are genuinely far-fetched like bioweapon scenarios etc.
Show this thread -
A good thread full of key—but often overlooked—points about all this. https://twitter.com/holden/status/1409224657316638721 …
This Tweet is unavailable.Show this thread -
I see people are debating me as a science communicator. Hah! On the contrary, if there are errors or if I’m wrong, they are on *me* because everything I publish are my own analyses—of course based on empirical evidence as best I can—not communication of some predigested science.https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1409481518205046791 …
Show this thread -
I would be thrilled if somebody wanted to actually look at my track record this pandemic. I took a risk because I thought I had a skillset that could contribute. I’m more than comfortable with the output that resulted. I should go make a chronological list. (Never bothered
).Show this thread -
This is a great thread full of crucial biosafety articles that had been published Nature, and, as a topic, have been sorely missing from this discussion.https://twitter.com/Declan_M_Butler/status/1408458284827357191 …
Show this thread -
Ralph Baric has said you can’t rule things out or prove them just by looking at the genome. And yet people debate the furin cleavage site on Twitter. Meanwhile, biosafety—a basic, structural and forward-looking issue—is elided. (But this is the thread for FCS, if you insist.
)https://twitter.com/wanderer_jasnah/status/1394247714024660994 …Show this thread -
This is an amazing piece, featuring quotes from Dr. Ralph Baric—one of world’s foremost scientists on bat coronaviruses, and co-author of Dr. Shi of WIV on that 2015 paper with the chimeric virus. *Really* worth your time. By
@rowanjacobsen in@techreview. https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/ …pic.twitter.com/OSSCrcC8JB
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.