Acting NIH director Lawrence Tabak's testimony to Congress on Covid-19 origins, and media coverage of it, was a perfect storm of all that has gone wrong with the origins debate.
This is another thoughtful and important report on a subject of major public importance by Michael Balter, this time devoted to the origins of the coronavirus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. I sense a definite shift in informed conclusions regarding this issue over the past year. For some time, it seemed that the laboratory-origin hypothesis did not fit with available evidence, and that the coronavirus had probably jumped from an animal host of some kind to humans. However, there is mounting skepticism regarding the supposed "refutation" of the laboratory-origin hypothesis, and my judgement is that the issue is now wide open once again. Indeed, I believe that the laboratory-origin hypothesis needs careful re-examination. I find it very worrisome that the Chinese authorities have still not provided crucial evidence, which raises suspicions of some kind of cover-up. Millions of people around the world died because of the pandemic, and we deserve to see full disclosure of any relevant information that has so far been withheld.
Thanks Robert, this is just the kind of careful approach to the issue I have been advocating. Despite my exasperation with the natural origins side of the debate and those reporters who have shown clear bias in that direction, we just don’t know—and that’s the whole problem.
Stolberg's wording is misleading. If you watch the footage, Tabak wasn't referring generally to "viruses being studied at a laboratory in Wuhan", as Stolberg paraphrases him - https://archive.is/H6shg - but confined himself to a specific sub-project:
2:47:56 "... how did the agency fail to notice that the annual report and research done by Ecohealth and the WIV was overdue for two years?"
2:48:06 Tabak: "The most important point to appreciate here is that the viruses that were under study in that sub-project bear no relationship to SARS-CoV-2. They are genetically distinct. They are absolutely unrelated to SARS-CoV-2"
Thanks for your comment. I listened to that segment and I think it is ambiguous, that his second remark is worded in such a way that it could--and was by other reporters, not just Stolberg--interpreted as a blanket denial the WIV was working on possible progenitor viruses. What I want to do is listen to the entire hearing when I get a chance, because it may be that this topic also came up earlier.
How are you, Michael?
Not bad, how about you? I’m still on the Covid origins beat, clearly, and am now contributing to Truthdig which is a good progressive site.
This is another thoughtful and important report on a subject of major public importance by Michael Balter, this time devoted to the origins of the coronavirus responsible for the COVID-19 pandemic. I sense a definite shift in informed conclusions regarding this issue over the past year. For some time, it seemed that the laboratory-origin hypothesis did not fit with available evidence, and that the coronavirus had probably jumped from an animal host of some kind to humans. However, there is mounting skepticism regarding the supposed "refutation" of the laboratory-origin hypothesis, and my judgement is that the issue is now wide open once again. Indeed, I believe that the laboratory-origin hypothesis needs careful re-examination. I find it very worrisome that the Chinese authorities have still not provided crucial evidence, which raises suspicions of some kind of cover-up. Millions of people around the world died because of the pandemic, and we deserve to see full disclosure of any relevant information that has so far been withheld.
Thanks Robert, this is just the kind of careful approach to the issue I have been advocating. Despite my exasperation with the natural origins side of the debate and those reporters who have shown clear bias in that direction, we just don’t know—and that’s the whole problem.
Stolberg's wording is misleading. If you watch the footage, Tabak wasn't referring generally to "viruses being studied at a laboratory in Wuhan", as Stolberg paraphrases him - https://archive.is/H6shg - but confined himself to a specific sub-project:
2:47:56 "... how did the agency fail to notice that the annual report and research done by Ecohealth and the WIV was overdue for two years?"
2:48:06 Tabak: "The most important point to appreciate here is that the viruses that were under study in that sub-project bear no relationship to SARS-CoV-2. They are genetically distinct. They are absolutely unrelated to SARS-CoV-2"
https://www.c-span.org/video/?525878-1/cdc-fda-nih-leaders-testify-covid-19-response
Thanks for your comment. I listened to that segment and I think it is ambiguous, that his second remark is worded in such a way that it could--and was by other reporters, not just Stolberg--interpreted as a blanket denial the WIV was working on possible progenitor viruses. What I want to do is listen to the entire hearing when I get a chance, because it may be that this topic also came up earlier.