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!
-
-
First one: the problem has always been lack of a simple and obvious acknowledgment to 4991 and the outbreak in the initial Nature paper. Whatever else was/wasn’t acknowledged elsewhere hasn’t been the issue raised.
-
Agreed that the 2020 nature paper didn’t make any connection to 4991, the bat sample id (Ge XY 2016 Virological Sinica) which the Shi team consistently made use of to construct names in prior publications for this particular coronavirus they sampled from the mojiang mine.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think you mean the July 2020 interview in Science. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/369/6503/487 … I see. Makes sense.
-
- Show replies
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.
, I’ll still link here the three things I tagged you with, which I don’t think are factually incorrect. Two are critiques of specifics, one takes inspiration from your discussion of civets. By the way, I read your piece and thought it very helpful