I wrote a part of it for the NYT, and in all honesty, I wrote the least inflammatory version of the story I could bring myself to write, highlighting history and context rather than incompetence, ideological blinders and, yeah, corruption. It's not a benign "prior work" story.
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
they dismissed available evidence because they have different presuppositions. You're not saying anything different from Matt, just using different words.
-
He can update what he said, but this is what I objected to. "Nothing in particular" and "general presumption" is false, it was actual scientific work over a long period of time, especially for SARS but also for influenza. "General presumption" is hiding real scientific work.pic.twitter.com/HV0LS6jeJk
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Is there a book coming on this? No holds barred detailing of it all?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
-
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.