Pinned Tweet
[Thread of threads] #originsofSARSCoV2 #DRASTIC
Compilation of relevant findings. Live thread.
Let's start with the Addendum and the 7896 clade recently confirmed to come from the Mojiang mineshaft
teapawt.net/franciscodeasis/status…
Replying to @luigi_warren @babarlelephant @AntGDuarte @MonaRahalkar @BillyBostickson @flavinkins @KevinMch3 @_coltseavers @rowanjacobsen @RolandBakerIII @TheSeeker268 @still_a_nerd @jjcouey @Harvard2H @ydeigin @CarltheChippy @real_adam_b @nerdhaspower @scottburke777 @JJ2000426 @BahulikarRahul @AliMhaider @antonioregalado @Ayjchan @R_H_Ebright @BretWeinstein @sanchak74 @JCalvertST
[Thread] Addendum of WIV in Nature.
What we know about the samples and the visits to the mineshaft of TG?
TLDR: 7 trips: 4 already known (Ge et al., 2016), plus other 3 with massive sampling until 2015, including 7896-clade. All already in Latinne et al. (2020)
#originsofSARSCoV2
Francisco de Asis retweeted
Fauci Senior Advisor David Morens pleads guilty to "Conspiracy to Commit Offenses and to Defraud the United States" in connection with conspiring with Fauci, Daszak, Keusch, and others to defraud the public about NIH-funded gain-of-function research and the origin of COVID.
Sí había una conspiración para ocultar los orígenes del COVID. Morens (brazo derecho de Fauci) acaba de declararse culpable de exactamente eso.
David Morens, a former adviser to infectious disease expert Anthony Fauci, pleaded guilty to conspiring to evade public records laws and conceal government documents related to grant research funding and the COVID-19 pandemic reut.rs/4wHAoKF
Francisco de Asis retweeted
When you've lost even the @guardian, the game is up.
"Lab leak likely" is now all but universally conceded except in a few diehard corners of the BBC, @Nature etc.
A little credit to those who made it possible would be nice.
100 % agree with David Relman, professor of medicine and microbiology at Stanford University: the pandemic was most likely started by a lab leak, but no definitive evidence exists (in public). We need better answers through a thorough and independent investigation. Those that argue it would be a waste of time or wish to prevent such an investigation, put us all at greater peril because we cannot learn from past failures, regardless of the origin.
[Thread] New WIV theses found by @TheSeeker268. Let's make some comments on very important findings
teapawt.net/TheSeeker268/status/13…
Addendum. We overlooked this in Zeng’s thesis: “I would like to thank […] Lisa E Gralinski for her guidance on animal experiments” (动物实验). Gralinski (@lisagralinski, now deleted) is from Baric’s lab. What animal experiments? The thesis does not describe any.
For the record: Zeng's thesis credits its Figure 3.1 — the construction scheme for the chimeric recombinant viruses, i.e. the experimental design of the entire chapter — to "Hu Ben et al., unpublished results".
Ben Hu is the first author of Hu et al. 2017 (PLoS Pathogens).
So the thesis and the paper are not two independent studies that happen to share sample names. They are one experimental set, described twice.
Thesis signed 2 June 2017. The paper was under review from 10 February to 17 October 2017.
Incidentally, Ben Hu is not thanked anywhere in the acknowledgements. BingJie Hu is, warmly.
teapawt.net/franciscodeasis/status…
Any news on this article?
Hu et al. (2017)
teapawt.net/franciscodeasis/status…
Any news on this article?
Hu et al. (2017)
teapawt.net/franciscodeasis/status…
[Thread] The mystery of “live isolate” Rs4874 with no WIV number assigned.
TLDR: Probably not a [pure] live isolate but a mere infectious clone. Just another case of academic cheating, to make sure the article was accepted by PLoS Pathog (Hu et al., 2017)
teapawt.net/franciscodeasis/status…
[Thread] The mystery of “live isolate” Rs4874 with no WIV number assigned.
TLDR: Probably not a [pure] live isolate but a mere infectious clone. Just another case of academic cheating, to make sure the article was accepted by PLoS Pathog (Hu et al., 2017)
teapawt.net/franciscodeasis/status…
Replying to @franciscodeasis @Ayjchan
Hu et al. (2017)
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article…
Rs4874 should have something special for not following the WIV series of isolates...
Btw, what is the point of inserting WIV16 spike in WIV1 backbone when you already have WIV16 as a live isolate?
Update: The S7 Fig file itself (a pptx) still contains the
full source mosaics. The published figure is a set of crop windows over them.
Anyone can check: rename .pptx to .zip, open ppt/media/image1.tiff. Or just open the pptx and try to "crop" the pictures again (the full picture will show up).
teapawt.net/franciscodeasis/status…
Replying to @franciscodeasis
Also, for reference:
Hu et al. (2017) Fig S7 vs Zeng (2017) Figs 3.2 & 3.3
Note: rWIV1-Rs4874S was not included in Hu et al. (2017). rWIV1-SHC014S was being published in another article (Zeng et al., 2017).
Francisco de Asis retweeted
Still true today. Where is the mammal-borne precursor of SARS-CoV-2?
Replying to @ydeigin
7/end
PS: As an aside, the fact that within months of the SARS1 outbreak, 5 different civet SARS1 progenitor strains were identified, but 3.5 years after the SARS2 outbreak we have nothing even remotely close to an intermediate host strain or even a potential bat progenitor — despite an additional two decades of progress in sequencing technology — only keeps adding to my skepticism about a natural origin of SARS2.
Francisco de Asis retweeted
I want to hail one of the great unsung heroes of the Covid origins story: Rossana Segreto.
I have no idea where she is now or what she is doing, but she was treated horrendously for being honest from the very beginning. In February 2020, before most people had even heard of the fraudulent Proximal Origin paper, she was already dismantling its arguments on a virology message board, publicly and under her own name.
That took extraordinary courage, or perhaps a certain kind of innocence. But it is the kind of innocence we should cherish, because it comes from assuming that science is about truth rather than power, prestige, and protecting the right people.
I thought of Rossana recently when I saw one of Kristian Andersen’s private Slack messages. A central Proximal Origin argument involved something called O-linked glycans, which Andersen claimed excluded lab origin. Rossana immediately explained why that argument did not work. As the Slack messages now show, privately Andersen too did not believe his own argument.
In other words, Rossana saw the problem from the start. She said so publicly, along with many other brilliant observations, while the supposed experts misled the world. Yet they received the grants, accolades, prestige, and institutional protection, while Rossana has disappeared into obscurity.
That is the unbearable unfairness of this entire story. A random postdoc in Innsbruck understood all of this in February 2020, while Fauci paraded a handpicked circle of supposedly eminent virologists before the public as if they held a monopoly on truth. In reality, they lied, protected one another, and still no one has been held to account.
Francisco de Asis retweeted
Dr. @ashishkjha, former White House Covid-19 Response Coordinator, says he now believes the origin of the coronavirus pandemic was likely the Wuhan labs.
“This is going to surprise some people. When I went into the White House, my view was this was almost surely a natural outbreak, maybe a lab leak. Based on information I’ve learned and based on information I’ve seen, I have come to conclude it is more likely to have been a lab leak… We still need transparency and accountability on this.”
“My best assessment is that it probably was a lab leak.”
@CNNSOTU @DanaBashCNN
Francisco de Asis retweeted
We now finally have the story of the behind-the-scenes crisis management by Peter Daszak and Shi Zhengli regarding RaTG13 (and other unpublished viruses).🧵👇
The story begins in May 2021, when yours truly posted Yu Ping's 2019 WIV thesis on Twitter. It listed, among other things, "Ra4991" with lower spike identity to SARS (75.4%) than the published RaTG13 (76.6%).
About a month later, on 23 June 2021, Clare Thomas (Nature Senior Editor) emails Shi Zhengli, saying she had been "contacted by someone" but had "not looked at the thesis itself," and requests clarification regarding the discrepancy.
Francisco de Asis retweeted
Just grotesque how Wikipedia has become a top-down editorial propaganda transmitter rather than a bottom-up knowledge compendium when it comes to anything remotely uncomfortable for the establishment. @jimmy_wales
Wikipedia just deleted the DEFUSE proposal from the COVID lab-leak article because an editor called it “unnecessary detail.”
In 2018, EcoHealth, WIV, and UNC asked DARPA to fund inserting furin cleavage sites into bat coronaviruses. The proposal was rejected as too risky. 18 months later, SARS-CoV-2 showed up with exactly that feature, which no natural relative has.
That's DEFUSE, and Wikipedia gatekeepers just decided that readers shouldn't know about it. @lsanger
Francisco de Asis retweeted
Just in the last five days:
- Slack messages show the Proximal Origin authors privately acknowledged errors in their paper, recognized that their arguments had weakened ober time, accepted that GoF work was taking place at Wuhan, considered it plausible that someone at WIV proceeded with the FCS insertion proposed in DEFUSE, and discussed staying off email and curating records for FOIA purpose.
- In a transcribed interview, Ralph Baric acknowledged that the Wuhan Institute possessed unpublished SARS-related viruses including from Mojiang, had the technical capability to perform the FCS experiments proposed in DEFUSE, and undercut some of the central arguments for COVID natural origin.
- Emails show Fauci's NIH staff and NIH-funded scientists helped nominate him for awards.
- Documents show undeclared coronavirus-related materials moving between US and Chinese labs as early as 2018, with a courier being intercepted twice (once with hidden vials, later with 132 more plus a laptop).
Further information on these explosive topics will surely be available on AP, Reuters, BBC, CNN, NBC, NYT, WaPo, Guardian.....
Oh wait, probably not.
Francisco de Asis retweeted
The claim--repeated literally thousands of times by journalists--that most scientists favor a natural origin of COVID and oppose a lab origin of COVID always was a lie. And almost always was a deliberate lie.
Kristian Andersen: "most scientists I talk to believe there is a likely connection to the lab" #OriginOfCovid
Francisco de Asis retweeted
Francisco de Asis retweeted
Let it sink in that when he said
'That’s obviously not to say that somebody _*did*_, but we can’t rule it out. Our paper was pretty strong in saying “there’s no way”, but I have less confidence in that statement at this stage."'
he was referring to a laboratory accident.
Wow
Proximal Origins was published 17 Mar 2020
Here is Kristian Andersen 20 June 2020:
"The part I’m really struggling with is that at the end of the day, we really don’t have any hard evidence one way or the other - and especially given some of the recent evidence, we also can’t rule out that somebody actually put it in there. That’s obviously not to say that somebody _*did*_, but we can’t rule it out. Our paper was pretty strong in saying “there’s no way”, but I have less confidence in that statement at this stage."
paul.senate.gov/readingroom/
From the latest Slack release, p. 855.
Garry, same morning: "Seems to me that Shi herself had enough and put the sequences out there."
Glad to have been helpful. Thank you, Dr. Garry.
New pre-print from WIV:
RaTG15, which it seems it is former Ra7909
biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/…
More, p. 294.
Andersen, Dec 2020: "Looks like the medium post has been removed…"
Nope. Still there:
mygenomix.medium.com/the-ori…


































