Origins of covid:: Above your pay grade, is it, Isaac? Well, it is not above my pay grade. My wife and I have the education, the credentials, and the experience. Here is a true fact: Covid, which originated in bats, was collected and cultured in the Wuhan lab for peaceful "gain of function" research (partly funded by Fauci et al through our NIH, incidentally), and it escaped from there to infect first the neighborhood, then the world.
So what's going on? Why are so many denying the obvious?
Because if the truth were acknowledged, then China would be liable for damages. Their legal and moral obligation to indemnify victims would be staggering. It would empty even their pockets, which are considerably deeper than ours.
They would have to default. This would be a disaster, not just for China, but for us and the rest of the world economy. It cannot be allowed to happen. We must therefore accept a status quo where everyone knows where the pandemic started but no one can actually "prove" it.
To think that this is the only truth we cannot acknowledge, nowadays, would be a big mistake.
I believe your discussion is very good. However you do not discuss the largest conflict of interest. The true believers. Those who believe in the global program to identify, collect, and study potential viruses. Good people who honestly believe this is the better approach (and they may be right or wrong, like you this might be above my paygrade). However the people who believe in this approach are not going to want to turn public opinion, and public funding, against this approach. Hence they are not likely to support a finding that COVID-19 originated with a lab. The conclusion of a recent NYT article summed this up by referring to the letter from the "Paris group" of scientists.
"That seems to strike at the heart of the concerns of the Paris group, which is the nature of future research. Dr. Ebright said that everyone in the group was concerned about both wildlife surveillance and laboratory research into viruses as potentially increasing, not lessening the likelihood of future pandemics.
If either collecting samples in the wild or work with those samples in labs were implicated in the origin of the pandemic, he said, the need would be urgent “to assess whether benefits outweigh risks and if not to restrict those activities.”
Origins of covid:: Above your pay grade, is it, Isaac? Well, it is not above my pay grade. My wife and I have the education, the credentials, and the experience. Here is a true fact: Covid, which originated in bats, was collected and cultured in the Wuhan lab for peaceful "gain of function" research (partly funded by Fauci et al through our NIH, incidentally), and it escaped from there to infect first the neighborhood, then the world.
So what's going on? Why are so many denying the obvious?
Because if the truth were acknowledged, then China would be liable for damages. Their legal and moral obligation to indemnify victims would be staggering. It would empty even their pockets, which are considerably deeper than ours.
They would have to default. This would be a disaster, not just for China, but for us and the rest of the world economy. It cannot be allowed to happen. We must therefore accept a status quo where everyone knows where the pandemic started but no one can actually "prove" it.
To think that this is the only truth we cannot acknowledge, nowadays, would be a big mistake.
I believe your discussion is very good. However you do not discuss the largest conflict of interest. The true believers. Those who believe in the global program to identify, collect, and study potential viruses. Good people who honestly believe this is the better approach (and they may be right or wrong, like you this might be above my paygrade). However the people who believe in this approach are not going to want to turn public opinion, and public funding, against this approach. Hence they are not likely to support a finding that COVID-19 originated with a lab. The conclusion of a recent NYT article summed this up by referring to the letter from the "Paris group" of scientists.
"That seems to strike at the heart of the concerns of the Paris group, which is the nature of future research. Dr. Ebright said that everyone in the group was concerned about both wildlife surveillance and laboratory research into viruses as potentially increasing, not lessening the likelihood of future pandemics.
If either collecting samples in the wild or work with those samples in labs were implicated in the origin of the pandemic, he said, the need would be urgent “to assess whether benefits outweigh risks and if not to restrict those activities.”
William J. Broad contributed reporting.