Posted on 07/09/2021 12:14:55 PM PDT by CheshireTheCat
The Lancet on July 5 published a statement reasserting that there is no "scientifically validated evidence" to suggest COVID-19 escaped from a lab, signed mostly by the same team of scientists who dismissed the lab-leak hypothesis in a February 2020 statement. But the new statement is missing three signatories from the original one, including William Karesh, who has ties to the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Karesh is the executive vice president for health policy at EcoHealth Alliance, the group that was funding gain-of-function research at the Wuhan lab with grants from the National Institutes for Health. EcoHealth's president, Peter Daszak, organized the original statement, whose signatories included Karesh, Peter Palese of the Icahn School of Medicine, and Bernard Roizman of the University of Chicago. Those three signatures are all absent from the new statement, though Daszak signed both.
Asked whether he'd changed his mind about the likelihood of a lab leak, Palese replied: "NO COMMENT!" Karesh and Roizman did not respond to inquiries.
The missing signatures reflect the widening cracks in the scientific consensus about COVID-19's origins. Once dismissed as a far-right conspiracy theory, the lab-leak hypothesis became mainstream in May when former New York Times science reporter Nicholas Wade defended it at length in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Following Wade's piece, Nobel Prize-winning virologist David Baltimore said a lab leak was a serious hypothesis he "wouldn't rule out," while other biologists maintained that the scientific evidence supporting it was very weak.
The debate only grew more intense in June with the publication of Anthony Fauci's emails, which seemed to indicate that he and other government scientists had taken the lab leak seriously behind closed doors....
(Excerpt) Read more at freebeacon.com ...
Karesh is obviously trying to keep a low profile with the heat being on.
there are tons of books and movies about vigilante teams or people who dispense “justice” to bad people who are untouchable.
Never seen it happen in real life.
Peter Daszak is the same guy who claimed at the very beginning that SARS-CoV2 couldn't infect people, despite the leaks coming out of Wuhan that there was a new virus rampaging through the city.
Peter Daszak is the same buddy of Fauci's that helped funnel millions of US taxpayer dollars into the Wuhan Institute of Virology to fund gain of function research on bat coronaviruses. He was working with Ralph S. Baric of the University of North Carolina on coronavirus GoF until Trump banned such research, then worked with Shi Zhengli, aka the "Bat Woman" at WIV.
Fauci was the bagman in this research. He got the money and covered the tracks. Daszak is the Mad Scientist working with the Chinese to make the viruses infect humans.
there are tons of books and movies about vigilante teams or people who dispense “justice” to bad people who are untouchable.”
Didn’t that just happen in Haiti, or so we have been told?
As the curtains on this whole COVID BS continue to be drawn....
I don’t think third world countries count.
almost nothing that goes on in these places has global implications.
No “scientifically validated evidence” is quite a meaningless statement given the question.
It’s a very technical statement that of course could not exist without a certified audit or similar investigation.
So it’s meaningless at this time.
I do not understand how your response relates to my comment.
“If a scientist have changed his mind, he has a responsibility to explain why. Is there new evidence? What has changed?”
Pretty obvious answer. The document did it’s job (in helping defeat Trump), now the truth can come out so the ‘experts’ can get their reputations back.
One great service that Covid has done is expose the rotten underbelly of the for-profit pseudo-science “research” industry. These people simply cook data to come up with the pre-decided result being bought. While psychologists and psychiatrists have done this forever, many people thought that most areas of medical science were more honest. Wrong.
Another researcher and I left our jobs because of fraudulent data being submitted for publication with our names attached to it. I wrote the publisher to remove my name. So yes it happens even in non-controversial fields of science.
If the scientists’ reputations are or will be damaged as a result of signing the original Lancet statement, I am sure that saying “no comment” (or not responding) should not contribute to regaining said reputations. If there is a scientific basis for their actions (or inactions), they should provide it. Nonscientific reasons, like wanting to oppose Trump or like wishing to join a list of “big shots” on a statement, should not be compelling.
Lancet itself should be dropped. It is no longer reputable.
Quick, run for the hills!
They were perfectly willing to lie when they thought they wouldn’t be discovered. Jerks
It’s own editor said that half of all medical studies are bogus, several years ago.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.