Glad to see @nytimes belatedly but appropriately embed a link in @zeynep’s #COVID19 #LabLeak op-ed to my 11,000 word @VanityFair article of 3 weeks ago, which broke many elements of this story: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins …. Many wrote to me about the omission, which has been fixed.
-
-
That’s how it came to be overlooked because we didn’t use your piece and sourcing could be done with all the public stuff that—until you stepped up—was barely covered in US media. Really much credit to you on that! Of course, I should have linked because it was published earlier!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
That is how good professionals act.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A different perspective from another reliable source. I wonder whether the differences can be reconciled?https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2021-06-27/did-covid-come-from-a-lab-scientist-at-wuhan-institute-speaks-out …
-
This is UNRELIABLE. And misleading.Either from the journalist or her source. Level 4 protocol was followed for work on Ebola. But Coronavirus work was done in level 3 AND 2 labs!
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.