Plot twist for the Science article that generated many headlines about the initial known case being connected to the Wuhan market. As author graciously acknowledges here, the internet researchers—so-called sleuths—have shown the claim to be wrong. Will there be new headlines?https://twitter.com/MichaelWorobey/status/1470159029997428736 …
-
-
There was credible reporting China knows of November cases. What little they told us of December cases is contradictory, incoherent and incomplete. I don’t think it’s possible to make sound conclusions. Their scientists long said market was an amplifying event. But we don’t know.
Show this thread -
So I don’t think known first case is decisive either way, given the ongoing coverup. But a study of how the initial report played out on social media and media, and see if it’s exactly reverse in visibility, tone and implication now that facts are reversed? That’d be interesting.
Show this thread -
For some reason there is very little interest in his case. Not sure why.https://twitter.com/Jane_of_art/status/1470246376550252544 …
Show this thread -
To emphasize: I don’t think first *known* case is dispositive either way. First known case could be non-market, but market still be the source and vice versa—even if there had been a real investigation. Cryptic transmission, lost chains. And we don’t even have that investigation.https://twitter.com/zeynep/status/1470243909007810564 …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think soon after South Africa was announced as the birthplace of Omicron, Nigeria confirmed they had cases there in October. But, that didn't make much of a dent in the narrative. So, probably not?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
Show additional replies, including those that may contain offensive content
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.