Intelligence on Sick Staff at Wuhan Lab Fuels Debate on Covid-19 Origin
By: Michael R. Gordon, Warren P. Strobel and Drew Hinshaw (WSJ)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
WASHINGTON—Three researchers from China's Wuhan Institute of Virology became sick enough in November 2019 that they sought hospital care, according to a previously undisclosed U.S. intelligence report that could add weight to growing calls for a fuller probe of whether the Covid-19 virus may have escaped from the laboratory.
The details of the reporting go beyond a State Department fact sheet, issued during the final days of the Trump administration, which said that several researchers at the lab, a center for the study of coronaviruses and other pathogens, became sick in autumn 2019 "with symptoms consistent with both Covid-19 and common seasonal illness."
The disclosure of the number of researchers, the timing of their illnesses and their hospital visits come on the eve of a meeting of the World Health Organization's decision-making body, which is expected to discuss the next phase of an investigation into Covid-19's origins.
Current and former officials familiar with the intelligence about the lab researchers expressed differing views about the strength of the supporting evidence for the assessment. One person said that it was provided by an international partner and was potentially significant but still in need of further investigation and additional corroboration.
Another person described the intelligence as stronger. "The information that we had coming from the various sources was of exquisite quality. It was very precise. What it didn't tell you was exactly why they got sick," he said, referring to the researchers.
November 2019 is roughly when many epidemiologists and virologists believe SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind the pandemic, first began circulating around the central Chinese city of Wuhan, where Beijing says that the first confirmed case was a man who fell ill on Dec. 8, 2019.
The Wuhan Institute hasn’t shared raw data, safety logs and lab records on its extensive work with coronaviruses in bats, which many consider the most likely source of the virus.
China has repeatedly denied that the virus escaped from one of its labs. On Sunday, China’s foreign ministry cited a WHO-led team’s conclusion, after a visit to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or WIV, in February, that a lab leak was extremely unlikely. “The U.S. continues to hype the lab leak theory,” the foreign ministry said in response to a request for comment by The Wall Street Journal. “Is it actually concerned about tracing the source or trying to divert attention?”
The Biden administration declined to comment on the intelligence but said that all technically credible theories on the origin of the pandemic should be investigated by the WHO and international experts.
“We continue to have serious questions about the earliest days of the Covid-19 pandemic, including its origins within the People’s Republic of China,” said a spokeswoman for the National Security Council.
“We’re not going to make pronouncements that prejudge an ongoing WHO study into the source of SARS-CoV-2,” the spokeswoman said. “As a matter of policy we never comment on intelligence issues.”
Beijing has also asserted that the virus could have originated outside China , including at a lab at the Fort Detrick military base in Maryland, and called for the WHO to investigate early Covid outbreaks in other countries.
Most scientists say they have seen nothing to corroborate the idea that the virus came from a U.S. military lab, and the White House has said there are no credible reasons to investigate it.
China’s National Health Commission and the WIV didn’t respond to requests for comment. Shi Zhengli, the top bat coronavirus expert at WIV, has said the virus didn’t leak from her laboratories . She told the WHO-led team that traveled to Wuhan earlier this year to investigate the origins of the virus that all staff had tested negative for Covid-19 antibodies and there had been no turnover of staff on the coronavirus team.
Marion Koopmans, a Dutch virologist on that team told NBC News in March that some WIV staff did fall sick in the autumn of 2019, but she attributed that to regular, seasonal sickness.
“There were occasional illnesses because that’s normal. There was nothing that stood out,” she said. “Maybe one or two. It’s certainly not a big, big thing.”
It isn’t unusual for people in China to go straight to the hospital when they fall sick, either because they get better care there or lack access to a general practitioner. Covid-19 and the flu, while very different illnesses, share some of the same symptoms, such as fever, aches and a cough. Still, it could be significant if members of the same team working with coronaviruses went to hospital with similar symptoms shortly before the pandemic was first identified.
David Asher, a former U.S. official who led a State Department task force on the origins of the virus for then-Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, told a Hudson Institute seminar in March that he doubted that the lab researchers became sick because of the ordinary flu.
“I’m very doubtful that three people in highly protected circumstances in a level three laboratory working on coronaviruses would all get sick with influenza that put them in the hospital or in severe conditions all in the same week, and it didn’t have anything to do with the coronavirus,” he said, adding that the researchers’ illness may represent “the first known cluster” of Covid-19 cases.
Long characterized by skeptics as a conspiracy theory, the hypothesis that the pandemic could have begun with a lab accident has attracted more interest from scientists who have complained about the lack of transparency by Chinese authorities or conclusive proof for the alternate hypothesis: that the virus was contracted by humans from a bat or other infected animal outside a lab.
Many proponents of the lab hypothesis say that a virus that was carried by an infected bat might have been brought to the lab so that researchers could work on potential vaccines—only to escape.
While the lab hypothesis is being taken more seriously, including by Biden administration officials, the debate is still colored by political tensions, including over how much evidence is needed to sustain the hypothesis.
The State Department fact sheet issued during the Trump administration, which drew on classified intelligence, said that the “U.S. government has reason to believe that several researchers inside the WIV became sick in autumn 2019, before the first identified case of the outbreak, with symptoms consistent with both Covid-19 and seasonal illnesses.”
The Jan. 15 fact sheet added that this fact “raises questions about the credibility” of Dr. Shi and criticized Beijing for its “deceit and disinformation” while acknowledging that the U.S. government hasn’t determined exactly how the pandemic began.
The Biden administration hasn’t disputed any of the assertions in the fact sheet, which current and former officials say was vetted by U.S. intelligence agencies. The fact sheet also covered research activities at the WIV, its alleged cooperation on some projects with the Chinese military and accidents at other Chinese labs.
But one Biden administration official said that by highlighting data that pointed to the lab leak hypothesis, Trump administration officials had sought “to put spin on the ball.” Several U.S. officials described the intelligence as “circumstantial,” worthy of further exploration but not conclusive on its own.
Asked about the Jan. 15 statement, State Department spokesman Ned Price said: “A fact sheet issued by the previous administration on January 15 did not draw any conclusions regarding the origins of the coronavirus. Rather, it focused on the lack of transparency surrounding the origins.”
Though the first known case was Dec. 8, several analyses of the virus’s rate of mutation concluded that it likely began spreading several weeks earlier.
The WHO-led team that visited Wuhan concluded in a joint report with Chinese experts in March that the virus most likely spread from bats to humans via another animal , and that a laboratory leak was “extremely unlikely.”
However, team members said they didn’t view raw data or original lab, safety and other records. On the same day the report came out, WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said the team hadn’t adequately examined the lab leak hypothesis, and called for a fuller probe of the idea.
The U.S., European Union and several other governments have also called for a more transparent investigation of Covid-19’s origins, without explicitly demanding a lab probe. They have called in particular for better access to data and samples from potential early Covid-19 cases.
Members of the WHO-led team said Chinese counterparts had identified 92 potential Covid-19 cases among some 76,000 people who fell sick between October and early December 2019, but turned down requests to share raw data on the larger group. That data would help the WHO-led team understand why China sought to only test those 92 people for antibodies.
Team members also said they asked for access to a Wuhan blood bank to test samples from before December 2019 for antibodies. Chinese authorities declined at first, citing privacy concerns, then agreed, but have yet to provide that access, team members say.
Tags
Who is online
71 visitors
This is one of those stories the left and even some "scientists" don't want us to think about. No questions permitted. It's a conspiracy theory to even wonder if the treacherous virus was created in a lab.
It won't be long until we know the answer.
We know the answer Vic. The lack of transparency or cooperation by the Chinese authorities, in addition to their ongoing coverup is pretty good evidence the virus originated in the Wuhan lab...which was researching these very types of virus at that time.
There is always common sense, isn't there? This time we had a virus that didn't take it's time going from animal to human. It went immediately to humans as if by design.
Another question we need to know is if there was American funding for these risky studies?
Was Flip-Flop Fauci involved?
How does an absence of contrary evidence establish a premise?
More good news
Who decided this. Can you document this decision?
How about this:
"In its final days, President Donald Trump’s State Department made a series of highly controversial claims about the Wuhan Institute of Virology in Wuhan, China, and its possible connection to the covid-19 outbreak. Now, the Biden administration has reviewed those claims, and is confirming some of the facts within them — but not, a senior State Department official has told me, the Trump team’s theory of how the pandemic broke out. These facts suggest that more investigation is needed into the lab’s possible connection to the outbreak."
The Washington Post is finally getting it - Maybe Trump was right!
Historians will record it all.
There’s a good reason it’s called the China virus.
My question was, 'can you document this decision' that questions on the aforesaid subject were inadmissible.
'There’s a good reason it’s called the China virus.'
Of course there is. The vast resources of Asia can hardly be accessed unless China is reduced -- a long-term goal of the US bourgeoisie ruling class. The COVID-19 novel coronavirus was designated a 'China virus' as part of an anti-China propaganda campaign as part of our already far advanced preparations for war on China, WW III, and inevitably thermonuclear holocaust.
I personally doubt that you will ever know the answer, which is why wild theories will continue to abound.
That should not be a conspiracy theory. Seems like a very logical assumption.
A conspiracy theory would be something like "China extemporaneously took advantage of the COVID-19 accidental outbreak to intentionally infect the entire planet by letting international travel continue on the hope that it would infect the USA and thus might cause Trump to lose the election ... and that China does not care about being known as the source of a worldwide pandemic.". Now that is a conspiracy theory!
But TiG, there are NT members who swear by that conspiracy theory.
For some life is a never-ending conspiracy theory. One of the fascinating aspects of social media (to me) are the characters. It just is amazing to observe how other minds can dream up hard theory from mere whiffs and hints and then actually believe this is true. The mother of all conspiracy theories still, however, is the flat Earth conspiracy theory.
I can understand why some people might believe in a flat Earth theory when where they went to school all they ever saw tacked up on the wall or in books was this....
But surely once the astronauts started circling the earth, they should have realized that it was a globe.
Alternatively, one could argue what after the virus was developed, the Trump reichadistration weaponized it against the US population.
Clearly people can and do invent the craziest scenarios (and then apparently believe them).
Labeling it a "conspiracy theory" in their rush to defend China is just another black eye for progressives and the MSM.
They shill for China, shill for the corrupt WHO and there's never any accountability.
Another interesting article
Indeed it is. Now even dear leaders Fauci and Collins are coming around on this issue now that they used the virus to get Trump out of office.
And there are those who accuse others of being a shill for China in order to deflect from their own country's total incompetence in dealing with a pandemic leading to an unbelievable number of deaths and to deflect from having become a virtual national shooting gallery with unspeakable gun violence and a hotbed of racism, notwithstanding a continuously widening obstructionist political divide designed to forstall progress. They haven't the balls to look in a mirror before they call out others, while criticizing those others for not being just like them.
A survivor of one of China 's modern-day concentration camps has revealed the beatings, rapes and 'disappearances' she witnessed behind the barbed wire.
Sayragul Sauytbay was born in China's north-western province and trained as a doctor before being appointed a senior civil servant...
Sauytbay saw evidence of organ harvesting and recounts an 84-year-old woman having her fingernails pulled out after she denied making an international phone call.
She was made to watch guards pack-rape a woman in her early 20s after she had confessed to texting Muslim holiday greetings a friend when she was in Year 9.
Sauytbay was literally forced to sign her own death warrant, agreeing she would face the death penalty if she revealed what happened in the prison or broke any rule.
Having revealed what Sauytbay describes as 'the biggest systematic incarceration of a single ethnic group since the Third Reich', she still lives with the constant threat of reprisals. ..
The stairwell was also near the 'black room', where they tortured people in the most abominable ways. After two or three days at the camp, I heard the screams for the first time, resonating throughout the enormous hall and seeping into every pore of my body. I felt like I was teetering on the edge of some dizzying chasm.
I 'd never heard anything like it in all my life. Screams like that aren't something you forget. The second you hear them, you know what kind of agony that person is experiencing. They sounded like the raw cries of a dying animal.
Go to work...
I can hear the screams of the thousands of innocent civilians fried in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and those napalmed in Vietnam, I can hear the screams from Guantanamo Bay. I can hear the screams of the "Casualties of War". (Have you ever watched that movie? - It's based on a true story.) I can feel the pain of loyal Japanese Americans forced to sell their homes and businesses for much less than their worth or just lose them and having to live in internment camps. I can feel the terror felt by the Asian Americans in America TODAY.
Although there is no proof, no collaborating evidence of what Sauytbay says is true, I can't deny its possibility, but I don't think that the situations I've indicated can be denied for lack of evidence.
Okay, now let's hear it for Tianenmen Square and the great famine....
[deleted]
Whatever....but the faults and depravity of the China communist government is much, much worse.
It's a shining example of the moral equivalence fallacy. Those who embrace untenable positions, (justifying and excusing genocide) are then forced to rely on logical fallacies to deflect from the depravity of their position.
Point out that China murdered tens of millions of it's citizens between a government induced famine and the cultural revolution and the reply is well, your country dropped bombs on another during a war and killed thousands of civilians (ignoring those bombs saved hundreds of thousands of lives by ending the war without an invasion of Japan). The dishonest argument is than, since civilians died in both occurrences, they are the same. .
Or a unit in Vietnam committed war crimes and was punished for it. That's supposedly the equivalent as the CCP implementing a policy of forcibly sterilizing Uighers, raping them and committing genocide.
Exactly! Well stated.
While the above may be true, if I remember correctly, no one was allowed to further explore the theory in a manner that would either disprove or confirm the theory and I believe it's too late to actually put the puzzle pieces together now.
To be clear, I'm not placing blame on any one person or body of people. I'm simply looking at this from a quality perspective and inspections are necessary for root cause analysis.
A lot of evidence has been destroyed and people have disappeared, however science will eventually give us the answer.
Maybe, but I have my doubts.
We will most likely know the truth long after the deniers are gone. The historians will record all of it.
We'll see... or at least I might since I'm only 42.
I'm sure you'll find out. Me - probably not!
And if I never do... I will still remember this conversation.
I don't think they can keep it covered up much longer
Evidence? Where?
This is like contending that old television sets were operated by mice. Every television set had a mouse in it. The mouse drew pictures which people saw as 'action' on their sets. When challenged, the proof was to take a hammer and break into the back of the television tube. That way you could see whether or not what people saw on television was being sketched by a mouse. So the hammer busts the tube.
And when no mouse is to be found?
The obvious answer is that when the tube was broken, the mouse ran off and escaped.
The absence of the escaped mouse actually demonstrates its presence thereby confirming that what we saw on our old television sets was sketched by mice.
My undergrad Philosophy 101 prof. [several aeons ago] used the TV mouse story to illustrate one of a number of false arguments. I remember his wry smile and his observation, 'people who fall for this form of argument will believe anything.'
We laughed.
Thanks for the memory recollected from antiquity.
[deleted]
And we say "they" it is not just the CCP, it's the WHO and a few other individuals.
I'll overlook the gratuitous aspersions and give you a second opportunity to interact with the antecedent post. Failing that, you're welcome to explain how Kapital can exist at all without a proletarian class.
Cheers!
It would be interesting to observe you and Sean discuss actual principles of Marxism without gratuitous personal attacks. Who knows, it might happen.
So you ask how it is possible for capitalism to exist without a proletarian class (those who have no choice but to work to survive) to supply the human work.
'It would be interesting to observe you and Sean discuss actual principles of Marxism without gratuitous personal attacks.'
Interesting? Perhaps. Possible? That seems unlikely. LOL!
China’s role in covering up the leak of the virus and then their effort to spread it to the rest of the world while cornering the world wide supply of PPE’s. There is no low that that regime can be counted upon to not sink below.
Flat out lie.
no one was allowed to further explore the theory in a manner that would either disprove or confirm the theory and I believe it's too late to actually put the puzzle pieces together now.
Destruction of evidence and the refusal to allow any independent investigation into the origins of the virus is very strong circumstantial evidence of what happened. Combine that with the absence of the evidence you would expect to find if the virus had naturally jumped from animals to humans, Occam's razor suggests the virus was almost certainly a lab leak. All of the circumstantial evidence points in one direction. And the country that would have the evidence to put the theory of a lab leak to rest, destroyed it.
There may never be a smoking gun to prove unequivocally that it was a lab leak, but the circumstantial evidence is getting to be hard to refute.
That was the first thing I thought when I read the article... Occam's Razor.
However, there's still that possibility that it didn't start as you've laid out too. I just don't make assumptions. Lord knows, the US has screwed up enough times... any country or people for that matter can screw up and most often will try to make it disappear if they can get away with it. History has shown that, but again I still don't make assumptions.
"Former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo on Monday said that it is "outrageous" top government epidemiologist Anthony Fauci and others early in the pandemic dismissed the possibility that COVID-19 could have escaped from a the Wuhan Institute of Virology, a lab located in Wuhan, China , where the outbreak began.
Pompeo's comments came after a former State Department official told Fox News on Sunday that about a month before COVID-19 was first reported in Wuhan, foreign government contacts told State Department officials that several workers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology had fallen ill in mid-November 2019.
"It was outrageous to see scientists, even government, U.S. government scientists who were denying this when they surely must have seen the same information that I had seen," Pompeo said. "That includes certainly Dr. Fauci as well."
I cannot find a quote where Fauci denies the possibility that the virus could have escaped from Wuhan. Fauci does not believe the virus was engineered by Wuhan since there are no biological markers suggesting human engineering; his opinion is that it was natural. But that does not preclude it from being in Wuhan under study.
Do you have a quote directly from Fauci where he denies the possibility as Pompeo has charged?
Then you must be one of the few who doesn't know. That is so strange for such a believer in the progressive icon. Let me take you back a year.
Enjoy:
What matters are Fauci's actual words. Mostly what we get are ' interpretations ' of his words.
Here is a quote from Fauci :
Fauci's hypothesis was that the virus was not a result of human intervention but that the virus evolved naturally. In the second question, he does not deny that the virus was brought into the lab. He simply believes it evolved naturally.
As noted in my prior comment:
Note what I wrote. I have not found a quote directly from Fauci where he denies the possibility that the virus could have escaped from Wuhan . Of course, I am actually trying to read his words for comprehension rather than confirm a bias.
Are you telling us that you have no bias? Then why defend someone who has made a sham of science for the past year?
Here are Fauci's own words before congress:
"Dr. Fauci, do you still support funding of the NIH funding of the lab in Wuhan?" he asked the NIH chief.
"Senator Paul, with all due respect, you are entirely, entirely, and completely incorrect," a clearly irritated Fauci shot back. "The NIH has not ever and does not now fund gain of function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology."
While speaking to co-host Bill Hemmer, Paul elaborated on his allegation and claimed that Dr. Shi Zhengli, the Wuhan-based ‘bat woman’ virologist who researched coronavirus variants in animals, wrote a paper that MIT scientists surmised was referencing gain-of-function research (making pathogens deadlier or more easily transmissible).
Paul claims that the paper acknowledged that their funding came from the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (NIAID), a subset of the NIH where Dr. Fauci is the director.
Paul added that he has looked at the grant application for the Wuhan lab research, which he says also references gain-of-function research, based on the analysis of a Rutgers cellular biologist."
Do you believe that the NIH may have funded risky experiments at the Wuhan lab?
Fauci seems to be trying to use a technical term to dismiss that fact. I don't like people who are dishonest in that fashion - what you might call the educated elitist fashion.
I have countered your over-the-top animosity against Fauci. Clearly you go out of your way to attempt to discredit Fauci at every turn. That is obvious bias. Countering your attacks is not bias, it is simply putting forth rational counters to your attacks. I never seed any articles about Fauci. My contribution has been limited to dealing with your attacks on the man.
See if Fauci is wrong that is fine with me. I do not know the guy. He means nothing to me. What I care about is intellectual honesty. My motivation for challenging your attacks on Fauci is to hold you accountable for honesty.
So now you move the goalposts to funding. Surely you understand that the question of research funding is not what we are discussing. Fauci's hypothesis is that there was no gain-of-function research at Wuhan funded by the USA. That means he does not believe the USA funded any initiative to add functionality to coronavirus.
Anything is possible. Fauci could be wrong. Don't go on emotion or bias, follow the facts. Do you have any facts that show the USA funded coronavirus gain-of-function research at Wuhan?
Seems to me that you are trying to sculpt his words into a form of your choosing. That is a great way to get things wrong ... to operate in a reality of your choosing instead of the real world.
No? He managed the entire response to the pandemic.
Tell us how he did?
Fauci is an advisor. He advises those who manage. Trump was the lead manager.
Just Fine considering he was working with the ultimate incompetentence, abrand new(Novel) virus with a clown who gave out vital information backwards and upside down for the Lesdyxic to consume whence turned around all while advising and pushing drugs with no benefit besides he and associates bank accounts and accounting on the FACT the DICk LIED. He LIED over and OVER about it "would just disappear", "we have it contained" and Bullshit along those LYING LINES.
Faucci approached it as it SHOULD have been, a brand NEW virus without any history to predict its unpredictability. My major criticism would be he was required to downplay mask use in the beginning due to the shortage of them for our first responders and caregivers. Common Sense tells anyone that filtering what enterd your orifices is going to curtail transmission, but you knwew this, just need to moan anmd piss, asz usual...
I believe I've been fair to him. He was the man who managed the pandemic. We have the right to rate his performance.
My motivation for challenging your attacks on Fauci is to hold you accountable for honesty.
I really question that TiG, especially after 4 years of specious claims in newspapers and right here on NT that went mostly unchallenged.
Surely you understand that the question of research funding is not what we are discussing.
We are discussing the man's integrity, of which he has none.
That means he does not believe the USA funded any initiative to add functionality to coronavirus.
Believe? He is in an absolute position to know. First he was skeptical of the virus beginning in a lab (where it now looks like is exactly where it began), now he is claiming that "he does not believe the USA funded any initiative to add functionality to coronavirus. I have a gut feeling that was part of this. If that becomes fact, how will you defend him then? Will you tell us he wasn't sure that the organization he heads did fund such a risky experiment? You mentioned "intellectual dishonesty." Using words to avoid the truth is the epitome of intellectual dishonesty. Wasn't that the Buckley warning?
Anything is possible. Fauci could be wrong. Don't go on emotion or bias, follow the facts. Do you have any facts that show the USA funded coronavirus gain-of-function research at Wuhan?
There is one way to know that answer, isn't there? The declassification of all intelligence related to the U.S.’s funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology’s Coronavirus research. Are you in favor of that? Or are we going to have to wait for a Republican President?
didn't we have one during the first full year of the damn pandemic ?
If he did just fine, we would still have a booming economy and Donald Trump would still be President. Then again, maybe doing just fine means nothing when the media keeps saying it wasn't fine. You'll have to choose!
The President got us a vaccine - the same one that Fauci doubted could be ready before the end of 2020!
i'll choose to believe Trump FCKD up our response immensly, not Faucci
Fauci ran the response. You can't have it both ways.
I don't like welshers.
You chose to believe that Trump wouldn't make it though his term.
You bet on it.
You welshed on the bet.
Fauci is an advisor. He was not in charge of managing the virus. Trump was the lead manager.
Question all you wish. I gave you the facts.
Now that reveals your bias quite nicely.
You seem to never grasp that science never knows anything about the real world with 100% certainty. But more importantly, you seem to expect Fauci to be omniscient. He is a human being who sometimes must operate on sketchy facts. In his opinion, based on the facts at his disposal, Fauci has stated that he does not believe the USA funded gain-of-function research for coronavirus at Wuhan. You truly go out of your way to eek out any fault you can.
I am always in favor of getting the facts. And then I follow the facts to their logical conclusion. Try that.
[DELETED]
[r][emoved]
And he advised for a temporary open-ended shut down and he got it. Take responsibility for it!
I gave you the facts.
Where?
Now that reveals your bias quite nicely.
[deleted]
You seem to never grasp that science never knows anything about the real world with 100% certainty.
Then why speak of something you don't know?
But more importantly, you seem to expect Fauci to be omniscient.
I expected him to be measured and non-political.
He is a human being who sometimes must operate on sketchy facts.
Yet he did operate, make statements and advise. You say we cannot judge him on his record. Why not?
In his opinion, based on the facts at his disposal, Fauci has stated that he does not believe the USA funded gain-of-function research for coronavirus at Wuhan.
That is most likely a lie and I suspect you know it.
[deleted]
So you do recognize the difference between an advisor and those you make and execute decisions. Fauci was not the man who managed the pandemic. Where is your criticism of the head manager Trump? Trump called the shots.
Now you are just flailing away. Get a grip.
You should try to resist the temptation to make shit up in desperation.
If you think Fauci is lying then show me the evidence that leads you to that conclusion.
Vic, your comments are devoid of facts, riddled with conspiracy theory and are increasingly personal. Get some facts and present a case. That is far better than throwing out claims and failing to back same.
Of course he can say this, there was no gene splicing or other genetic human manipulation. Through gain of function a virus was found in bats and forced on ferrets until ferrets became infected and those ferrets were introduced to non-infected ferrets until those ferrets became infected, once that happened then it was an easy jump to human because we share the same receptors as ferrets, so the case can be said that the mutations naturally evolved its just that the scientists in Wuhan accelerated it.
stepwise evolution over time strongly indicates that it evolved in nature and then jumped species.
He doesn't elaborate how much time and if it evolved naturally through gain of function.
And if so then there should be evidence to support that hypothesis. If there is evidence to support the hypothesis that the virus evolved naturally and no evidence of human induced gain of function then the most logical hypothesis based on the facts is natural evolution. That hypothesis might be invalidated when we have evidence to the contrary. Do you think it is wise to follow the evidence or simply leap to conclusions regardless of evidence?
Yeah, so what? Do you expect Fauci to dictate a scientific paper in each of his interviews? Do you presume he cannot back up his statements with a science-based argument or citing of findings by other scientists? If so, based on what? If not, why would you expect so much detail to be included in a quote?
But all the shots called were based on Fauci's recommendations, with the exceptions of cutting the red tape on getting a vaccine before the end of the year and bending over backwards for certain blue state governors. The most consequential of all decisions was that spring shut down, which Fauci claimed was only going to be for a short time so hospitals wouldn't be overwhelmed. Trump went along with it and Fauci never wanted to re-open. The Trump economy was destroyed right then and there. So, if your'e asking where my criticism of Trump is - I have none. He trusted Fauci, who really had no idea how to deal with the pandemic and aside from the elderly who were killed because blue state governors put infected individuals into nursing homes, not much more could have been done. Do you understand me? That means that if JFK or LBJ or Ronald Reagan were President the results would have been the same. The media had the narrative all planned out and ready early on - they were going to blame Trump for whatever happened. The bottom line for the election was that many people lost their jobs/ businesses. We are paying for that now.
Now you are just flailing away. Get a grip.
[ deleted - meta ]
Y ou should try to resist the temptation to make shit up in desperation.
Make shit up? You have been a staunch defender of Fauci, no matter what the facts are.
If you think Fauci is lying then show me the evidence that leads you to that conclusion.
He has admitted to lying in the past. You even defended him then. (we've been through this)
"March 16, 2021 ( LifeSiteNews ) — The inventor of the PCR test, which has been widely used in detecting COVID-19, previously slammed Dr. Anthony Fauci by calling him a liar. He also strongly criticized Fauci’s understanding of science, while revealing that the PCR test is not suitable as a diagnostic tool, in the way it is being used for COVID-19.
Dr. Kary Mullis was awarded the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 1993, along with Dr. Michael Smith, for inventing the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) test, which has recently sprung to the forefront of conversation across the world, due to its prominent usage as a way to detect COVID-19."
As to the issue at hand today, It can be argued that Dr Fauci is preparing us for something:
“We had a big scare with SARS-CoV-1 {SARS] back in 2002, 2003 where that particular virus unquestionably went from a bat to an intermediate host to start an epidemic and a pandemic that resulted in 8,000 cases and close to 800 deaths,” he said. “It would have been almost a dereliction of our duty if we didn’t study this, and the only way you can study these things is you’ve got to go where the action is.”
Fauci added: “You don’t want to study bats in Fairfax County, Virginia, to find out what the animal-human interface is that might lead to a jumping of species.”
If you still want to defend this narcist liar, be my guest.
Vic, your comments are devoid of facts, riddled with conspiracy theory and are increasingly personal.
First of all TiG, I only get personal with you when you get personal with me. Calling me biased is outrageous. The fact that you can do it and I can't is the problem around here.
Second: The idea that the virus may have begun in the Wuhan lab is no longer considered a "conspiracy theory." Even the lying left wing media who called it that a year ago are finally conceding that is possible or even probable. Even your beloved Dr Fauci recently had to admit: that COVID-19 could have originated in a lab in Wuhan, China.
.
We all know why it was called a conspiracy theory in the first place - because Donald Trump answered a question on the lab idea a year ago:
"Asked if he had seen anything giving him a high degree of confidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was the source of the outbreak, the president replied, "Yes, I have."
He refused to give details."
And of course it meant he just had to be wrong! Where were you then TiG?
Get some facts and present a case. That is far better than throwing out claims and failing to back same.
[ deleted ]
Vic, I am not going to explain to you the fundamentals of management. I am sure you understand the concept of advisory roles to executive management. Why do you pretend to not understand that calling the shots means making the final decision? Advisors can make recommendations but the executives call the shots and the managers execute.
Are you not aware that the Governors are the one's calling those shots? Further, you apparently think that the shut-down was an incorrect decision. Based on what, exactly? When a pandemic hits it is prudent to take emergency action. It is like fighting a fire. One does not scrimp on manpower, equipment and water until the fire is under control (understood and manageable). Then one takes actions to better align the resources and tactics with the situation.
Your expectations remain entirely unrealistic.
The 'Trump economy' was going to take a hit no matter what. A worldwide pandemic is going to damage world economies. Trump should have focused on fighting the problem head on (short term economy be damned) and worry about economic recovery later. Instead he tried to talk down the pandemic and gave countless millions all the excuses they needed to not take precautions.
Unbelievable. That is blind partisanship plain and simple.
You think Fauci screwed up the nation. Okay, let's take that emotional position as your given. It is the job of the executive to verify the advice given before acting. Executives make decisions Vic. They do not simply follow the advice of an individual. Trump should have cross-verified the advice from ALL of his advisors to ensure he was making a sensible decision. This is obvious to anyone who has operated in an executive position: the buck stops with the executive; the executive gets paid the big bucks because s/he takes the steps to damn well be right. There is no blaming advisors. There is no blaming. The executive must succeed or the executive is replaced.
The economy would have been hit no matter who was PotUS. The degree of the hit depends upon the actions. I am confident that all three of those listed presidents would have taken aggressive action to keep the nation safe. I doubt any of them (well, maybe LBJ) would be narcissistic and stupid enough to talk down the pandemic ('it will pass','it is like the flu', ...) when what was needed was a confident leader instructing the nation to take precautions and encouraging them that the precautions are critical to containing the virus. (Again, just like a fire before it is under control.)
Irrelevant. The media was going to blame Trump for anything. That is a given. Trump's actions should have nothing whatsoever to do with the media reaction.
Yes. If the economy had remained strong then Trump likely would have been reelected.
That is a lie. The only time I deal with Fauci is with you. And it is always countering your over-the-top criticism of the man with facts and logic.
Yeah, Vic, I noted that Fauci did indeed mislead the nation when he suggested masks were not critical to mitigate a rush to hoard masks needed by medical providers. Never did I state that he told the truth. It is amazing that you are still harping on Fauci's early response. You exaggerate anything he does wrong and ignore all that he does right. And it is always Fauci as if he is the only one involved in the pandemic. Amazing.
You offer opinions from other scientist who disagree with Fauci on various points and this is what you call evidence that Fauci was lying when he stated that he does not believe the USA funded gain-of-function research for coronavirus at Wuhan.
Show me the evidence that Fauci lied about USA funded gain-of-function research for coronavirus at Wuhan. That was the question. Remember?
( fascinating )
Pay attention Vic. I have never suggested that the idea of a Wuhan sourced virus is a conspiracy theory. In fact, if you paid any attention whatsoever to what I write on this subject, my position is that the virus escaping the Wuhan lab is a logical hypothesis. I even noted same in this very seed in a reply directly to you:
The conspiracy theory that I challenge you on is your absurd notion that China extemporaneously took advantage of the outbreak of COVID-19 and decided to not halt international travel in the hope that a worldwide pandemic would also affect the USA and possibly cost Trump his reelection ... and that China (per you) does not care if the entire planet knows that they purposely plunged the planet into a pandemic. That is a conspiracy theory. The virus escaping (accidentally) from a Wuhan lab is a logical hypothesis.
See the difference?
See above. You are dead wrong on my position so your challenge is D.O.A.
[Deleted]
[r][emoved]
Please don't. Fauci gave advice and Trump took it. We covered it.
Are you not aware that the Governors are the one's calling those shots?
How else would you have it. We covered it.
The 'Trump economy' was going to take a hit no matter what.
No. Shutting small business was decisive, but we covered it.
Unbelievable.
Yes, to you it would be. Unfortunately, I'm not allowed to call you biased.
You think Fauci screwed up the nation.
No, I never said that. What I said was his recommendations were followed. He got hero status and Trump got blame for however one views the results. Maybe you should dwell on that before you call people biased.
The economy would have been hit no matter who was PotUS.
That's the first logical thing I've heard you say.
Irrelevant. The media was going to blame Trump for anything. That is a given.
I'm glad we found common ground. Now think how many would be dying right now if we were still waiting for the FDA to sign off on a vaccine as they normally would.
Yes. If the economy had remained strong then Trump likely would have been reelected.
But you avoided responding to what I actually said.
That is a lie.
No it's true. Consider where he has stood on masking. What position hasn't he at one time held on the issue? You get upset when I call him out for it. You want to tell those reading this that I'm the one who is bias. How many times have we covered this?
And it is always Fauci as if he is the only one involved in the pandemic.
He is the primary one involved - the very one, that I told everyone the incoming president Biden would keep. Biden seems to admire him as much as the media and almost as much as you.
Show me the evidence that Fauci lied about USA funded gain-of-function research for coronavirus at Wuhan. That was the question. Remember?
Do you remember what I said? I notice you didn't highlight that. I said he is most likely lying! He has already - as of yesterday admitted to a moderate of funding for pandemic study in cooperation with China. As I pointed out only declassifying information will give us that answer. As long as Joe Biden and his handlers control the White House, I don't expect that to happen. That point was well covered. You want keep playing games by saying "where's the proof?" You are hardly making an argument, TiG.
The conspiracy theory that I challenge you on is your absurd notion that China extemporaneously took advantage of the outbreak of COVID-19
That is ancient history and has absolutely nothing to do with todays conversation which happens to be your defense of Fauci.
The virus escaping (accidentally) from a Wuhan lab is a logical hypothesis.
That was a conspiracy theory too, only a year ago. It was defined as such by the New York Times, the Washington Post, the AP, NPR, CNN, MSMBC, ABC, NBC and CBS. It is only now that the evidence is flowing out that all of the above have changed their tune and as of yesterday, even Dr Fauci found himself admitting that there was funding for experiments at the Wuhan Lab.
It's easy to charge people who come to logical conclusions with "conspiracy theories." It takes a long time to actually get the facts out (especially when they have been concealed) and finally verify a valid opinion.
Then again - we've covered all of these points ad nauseum. Keep coming back for more.
Do you recognize that Trump was the executive in charge, the lead manager and the person who called the shots? Do you recognize that Fauci was / is an advisor and does not make the decisions nor does he lead the execution of same? You repeat the obvious (Fauci gave advice) which has never been contested and ignore the counter to your false claim that Fauci managed the pandemic.
The point I made was that the governors, not Fauci, made the calls for shut-downs. They are the executives in charge for the states and they are the lead managers of the pandemic handling within their states. Again, you ignore the fact that you are wrong to claim that Fauci managed actions that the governors actually decided on and executed.
We did cover it and you are ignoring my rebuttals and stubbornly holding to your false claims.
A consequence of the pandemic. There is no way the governors were going to NOT take actions within their states when faced with an out-of-control pandemic raging through the world (and their states).
Look Vic, this started when you wrote:
-and-
THE man who MANAGED the response to the pandemic. If you did not really mean what your words connote and really meant to say that he was an advisor to Trump (and ultimately to the governors) who were the ones who actually called the shots and executed their actions on the pandemic then that is fine. Stop pretending I am misrepresenting you and I will stop countering.
After all, I completely agree that he was an advisor to Trump. Never contested that.
How on Earth am I supposed to figure out what you are referring to here? Entirely vague. Also, I have been addressing each of your line items. You complain 'covered that' and now you complain I am ignoring you. Flailing.
You keep harping on bias, not me. I have been ignoring most but I will comment now (since you cannot seem to stop). If you do not want people to see you as biased then you would need to moderate your positions considerably. Statements like this:
You declare that Fauci has no integrity. Under normal circumstances that shows major bias against the man. No integrity ... none at all ... a 100% lying scoundrel?? Your disdain is dripping from your comments. Worse, though, is that you say this with a background of Trump. You rail on Fauci, elevate him to a position of executive decision making and execution on the pandemic only to blame him for all the missteps and inconveniences in handling the pandemic and then actually state that the chief executive who calls the shots and takes actions, Trump, the well-known liar and narcissist, is blameless:
Fauci has NO integrity but Trump is blameless. Such objectivity! Sure, Vic, that shows no bias.
You never delivered evidence that Fauci way lying (or even probably lying) about the USA funding gain-of-function research at Wuhan. Bullshit is not an argument.
The point (which you ignore) is that I have not declared the Wuhan origin a conspiracy as you claimed. You were obviously wrong but of course deflect.
Your mantra of ' covered that ' contradicts your attempts to counter my comments. If you are tired of covering the same ground then I suggest you stop making false claims because I will continue to rebut them. Especially if they are claims about what I have said or a position I have taken.
Your patience here Vic is commendable. Great seed and great responses above.
TiG, we covered it all. Making the same points only works on [Deleted] partisans who'll give you some silly clapping cartoon. Your only point is that you like the media hate the idea that Trump was most likely right about the lab. I don't have the same rights as you do, so I'll leave it at that.
I've worked on having patience. The worst part is those who don't think you have a right to an opinion, as you can see above. They honor liars and they try and defend the indefensible.
Nope. Haven't you been following? Hint: start reading where he calls me "biased."
I never made such a point. In fact I stated in this very seed (replying directly to you) the following (this is twice I have pointed this to you):
Not only do you fail to acknowledge this, but you now pretend that this is what we have been debating.
I can see why you would want to change the topic, but if you are going to lie about my position (and you clearly just made a baldfaced lie) you should at least invent something that I have not already countered (before you even made your allegation) right here in your seed.
Do you have any facts to support this? No? Then why do you make the claim.
And by what logic do you hold that gain-of-function research at Wuhan means they US funded the research? Just calling it idiotic to think otherwise is not an argument.
Oh the horror of noting an obvious bias:
You declare that Fauci has no integrity . Under normal circumstances that shows major bias against the man. No integrity ... none at all ... a 100% lying scoundrel?? Worse, though, is that you say this with a background of Trump. You rail on Fauci, blame him for all the missteps and inconveniences in handling the pandemic (as if he was running the show) and then actually state that the chief executive who calls the shots and takes actions, Trump, the well-known liar and narcissist, is blameless :
Fauci has NO integrity but Trump is blameless. Such objectivity! Sure, Vic, that shows no bias.
Read what you wrote in blue. In my usage of English you just claimed that IF Wuhan was performing gain-of-function research THEN the US funded it. And you added that it would be idiotic to think otherwise.
I can slow down my reading to a 1st grade level but the IF ... THEN logic you offered remains the same. If gain-of-function research was taking place at Wuhan you claim that the US funded it.
Not sure what you mean here. Are you arguing that since there is no way for the US to direct any money that finds its way to China then the US ipso facto funded whatever Wuhan was doing? Is that what you are arguing? If not, clear it up.
Then I read you correctly. You are indeed making a claim that the USA is funding Wuhan IF Wuhan is engaging in gain-of-function research. And you back that up by noting that any funds from the USA that goes to Wuhan is funding that specific research.
But you leave out the important factor: intent. If US funds wind up at Wuhan to fund finding a cure for a particular infectious disease then the US is not funding Wuhan's gain-of-function research for coronavirus. Your style of reasoning allows one to argue that the USA is funding anything (good or bad). This is so general as to be meaningless.
Under normal English semantics, the USA is funding gain-of-function research at Wuhan ONLY if it has expressed an intent to do so and allocated a specific channel of money for it. Do you have evidence of this intent? Do you have evidence of the channel of funds? If not, you have offered no real facts to back up your claim (and, you indeed made a claim).
No, it isn't.
Bias is universal. If you prefer baked beets to baked turnip, that is a bias. It seems to me that the only way to have no bias is to have no opinions.
I am biased. I accept Marx' explanation of class struggle. I am biased toward Marxian political economy and I believe that Leon Trotsky was the greatest political theoretician of the last century. I'm a Marxist and a Trotskyist. That is my bias. I want people to be aware of my orientation as they read my posts. Plenty of people disagree with much of what I say. But I can hardly be accused of writing on the sly. I acknowledge fully my bias.
Rather than being 'outraged' if someone has the audacity to call us 'biased,' won't it be better if we admit our biases upfront?
I do.
'Do you have evidence of this intent? Do you have evidence of the channel of funds?'
Exactly.
Participants on this and other forums make such claims continually. If they'd just stop and ask themselves 'how many people would have access to that information!' Even in Hubei Province, how many people would be in position to know that? The City of Wuhan alone has 11+ million people. How many of them are in position to access that information?
It's odd that those with least access to information sometimes manage to convince themselves that they are the most informed on their topic. With a simple, unmarked line diagram of China's provinces, I doubt 1 in 1,000 US citizens could identify Hubei Province even with a gun pointed at their head. Yet when articles by this or that writer meet skepticism, they seem astounded! How could anyone NOT see that? They must be truly incapable of resolving even the simplest of questions!
I never wrote the funds are contingent on doing gain-of-function. Read what I wrote (you quoted it):
Those words make no statement that the funds are contingent on doing gain-of-function. Indeed, your argument is that the mere availability of funds ipso facto funds whatever Wuhan is doing. I have expressed that. In fact, I have apparently understood your argument from the beginning.
It is unfair (and wrong) to claim that the USA is funding gain-of-function if we have no way to stop the misuse of funding from the USA. The USA funding gain-of-function means it is intentionally doing so.
You should if you want people to understand what you write.
Yes we have no control over the funds. Where do you see me stating otherwise? You are arguing that any funds from the USA are ipso facto funding whatever Wuhan chooses. That totally ignores intent in the concept of funding. That essentially is changing the meaning of the word 'funding'.
Intent! Did those $600,000 go to Wuhan to fund gain-of-function? Was that USA intent? As you note, it is impossible for the USA to control the internal accounting of Wuhan. If the funds were misused that goes against USA intent. That is not the USA funding it is the USA being robbed.
You are simply redefining the word 'funding' to mean: if a dollar intended by the USA to fund X winds up being improperly redirected and used instead for Y then that means Y is being funded by the USA.
That is not the meaning of 'funding' used by Fauci. He was talking about intentional allocation of funds; he was using the commonly accepted meaning of the word 'funding'. In other words, Fauci has made no statement about potential abuse by Wuhan of redirecting funds against the wishes of the USA.
Pompeo? Fox News?
Our former Secretary of State tells the truth unlike China's officials.
Vic, you've missed your calling.
Stand-up comedian?
Is the Borscht Belt still in business?
Wouldn't know. I've never been there. The only part of upstate NY I get to is the town of Saratoga.
I may have spent more time in Upstate NY than you. Went to the Fox Hollow Folk Festival in upstate three years in a row, made a baseball fan's pilgrimage with my family to Cooperstown, when I was a kid my parents took me to Grossingers in the Catskills. toured the Kodak plant museum in Rochester. If Buffalo is considered to be in upstate NY I've spent lots of time there.
Ahh, yes, that used to be America!
Exactly! Pompeo is a great American.🇺🇸 🗽🦅🇺🇸
A possible Presidential candidate in 2024.
Actually, I don't know which one I'd prefer to see nominated by the Republicans to run for POTUS in 2024 - Pompeo or Trump. If Americans want to reinstate the disaster that their nation experienced before Biden was inaugurated, more power to them..
If Ron DeSantis runs, he will have my vote.
He has a record as Governor - A record that I'm very fond of.
Yeah, that's true. I don't recall ever hearing or reading about shootings back then - just the racist problems in the south. Vic I've travelled and spent time from Provincetown in Cape Cod to Hawaii, from Big Sur (drove from Muir Woods north of San Francisco south to Long Beach visiting all the places in between) to Boston, from St. Louis to NYC, from Cincinatti to Florida's Disney World, from Chicago to Dallas and Fort Worth, from Palm Springs to Philadelphia, from Washington D.C. to Miami Beach, from Detroit to Baltimore, from Nantucket Island to Las Vegas, from attending festivals from the Newport Folk Festival, to Tanglewood Mass (to see Seiji Ozawa conduct the Boston Symphony - Seiji Ozawa who when conducting the Toronto Symphony had lived in the home that was the first one I ever bought and owned). from the Festival of American Folklife beside the Smithsonian to the Fox Hollow Folk Festival in upstate NY, my brother and I inherited a golf condo west of Hollywood, Florida, from our parents and I spent lots of time there. As said before I visited baseball's Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, watched a Red Sox game in Fenway Park, toured the White House and the Capital Building, stood in awe looking at the Lincoln Memorial, was driven by then mayor Marion Berry in his little Mercedes coupe to dinner with him, visited with Pete Seeger and his wife Toshi on board his sloop named Clearwater on the Hudson River, viewed Manhatten from the observation deck of the WTC while it was still there. The first TV station we were able to get was WBEN-TV from Buffalo. For 69 years of my life I lived next door to the USA. I think I have greater respect for the Star Spangled Banner anthem and the Stars and Stripes flag than a lot of Americans. Vic, I used to LOVE the USA. What happened to it? What happened to its citizens? When I speak of the USA I speak of the USA I loved and knew so well. WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO IT?
And yet I've been told I'm not an American so what right do I have to say anything about America (maybe by those who know less about America and Americans than I do). And when I point out that I have better knowledge of a country that my critics could possibly have because they've never even BEEN there while I've been living in it for almost 15 years, and have the nerve to indicate that there could be two sides to a story, a side they could not possibly admit to anyway, I'm called a shill, a mouthpiece. Even though I have clearly posted criticisms of a government, I'm called a shill, a mouthpiece for it. At least I know that I'm not the fool that they are.
Maybe because you constantly say that only people in China have the right to say anything about China?
Which is it? You claim America and Americans should keep their nose out of China's internal affairs, but you, a non American, constantly attack America. Which is it?
WOW!!!! UNBELIEVABLE!!!! I have NEVER said that only people in China have the right to say anything about China. What I said is that a person who lives in China would know more about China than a person who has never been there. Even a CHILD would have understood the point I was making. I just related the reasons why I am EXTREMELY familiar with America, because not only HAVE I been there, not only have I spent a good part of my time there, and in more places in America that a lot of Americans, I feel I CAN be critical of it, and I am critical of those who criticize a country they have never even VISITED who only read or hear about it.
A very good one! I’d put him up there with Tim Scott and Ron De Santis as a top choice. He’s who we need in any dealing with the evil empire that is the CCP 🇨🇳.
An ideology has corrupted & cheapened it. Right now they are winning.
This ' Wuhan laboratory ' lie was exposed [among others] by the World Health Organization.
Some will dismiss this exposure preferring Pompeo and Faux Spews rather in the way that some fundamentalist evangelicals prefer camp songs by the likes of Ira Sankey to the final chorus of JS Bach's Saint Matthew's Passion.
Oh boy!