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 …
-
-
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 -
-
-
When you say November cases, do you mean Chinese media reports that the first known case was November 19th outside of Wuhan? I’ve wondered what happened with tracing on that report. Was it ever shown to be right/wrong?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Why isn’t Connor Reed part of the discussion on first case? Has his case already been definitely dated later than Nov 2019?https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-wales-51369217.amp …
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.