This article represents everything that journalism should be: open-minded, exacting, thorough and above all – at least as far as it’s possible to discern – independent.
Any UK government that signs up to unfettered liability to the dictates of the WHO under the likes of Farrar deserves to be condemned, as history surely will condemn.
One simple but chilling question stands out. Why – for what purpose – would scientists wish to bio-engineer a form of virus designed specifically to overcome our bodies defences? Perhaps some scientists among Unherd readers could put forward a valid research explanation.
And moreover: why would anyone trust the Chinese to carry out that programme?
It is, unless someone can proffer a valid humanitarian rationale, e g. bio-defence. We know that toxins are produced for chemical weaponry, but they’re not contagious.
The possible argument was that, if all the major players were involved in the research and received the results, then no country would have an advantage.
Are you seriously suggesting that any research conducted in Chinese lab would be open to scrutiny and results available to all?
Come on, it is communist dictatorship we are taling about.
Are you seriously suggesting that any research conducted in Chinese lab would be open to scrutiny and results available to all?
Come on, it is communist dictatorship we are taling about.
One would only need to drop a test tube of it in Times Square or Oxford Circus in the tourist season…
But just like during the Cold War the real threat is stupidity/bureaucratic brain freeze/the madness of generals and scientists/Murphy’s Law. And politicians.
Keep in mind that millions of people have died from this “in progress” version, which was not optimized for lethality, but was merely the current level of progress to date.
Keep in mind that millions of people have died from this “in progress” version, which was not optimized for lethality, but was merely the current level of progress to date.
It is, unless someone can proffer a valid humanitarian rationale, e g. bio-defence. We know that toxins are produced for chemical weaponry, but they’re not contagious.
The possible argument was that, if all the major players were involved in the research and received the results, then no country would have an advantage.
One would only need to drop a test tube of it in Times Square or Oxford Circus in the tourist season…
But just like during the Cold War the real threat is stupidity/bureaucratic brain freeze/the madness of generals and scientists/Murphy’s Law. And politicians.
An excellent read! I think the immediate total shut down of the Wuhan population gave the game away! The meticulously researched ‘Viral – The Search for the Origin of Covid-19” (Alina Chan and Matt Ridley’) also makes a compelling case pointing to weaponisation.
Why? Essentially as I understand it. Develop a better bullet so you can develop a better bullet proof vest.
Fauci has said that if you you didn’t do GOF tests you couldn’t develop the flu vaccine.
Why China?
More bang for your buck.
Less regulation than US – probably not got go ahead in US (obviously rightly).
All configured to do in lab.
As I remember it the guy from Kings College (a specialist in this area) pointed out that just because they didn’t get the original funding doesn’t mean they didn’t do it. This happens all the time in such research. He also said ( this was several years back) that it was likely a lab leak because the virus had changed in a way that was very unlikely to have happened in the wild.
Would I trust China to do this testing ?
Obviously not – what sane person who cared anything about other people would?
If you recall the Wuhan Lab was built by the French who were keen to work with the Chinese on virus research but were quickly shown the door. So they were basically novices at working in high security labs. That they were found to be carrying out GOF in BS2 labs by people who were not fully qualified could have lead to the ultimate mistake. The lab assistants who fell ill could never be traced.
If you recall the Wuhan Lab was built by the French who were keen to work with the Chinese on virus research but were quickly shown the door. So they were basically novices at working in high security labs. That they were found to be carrying out GOF in BS2 labs by people who were not fully qualified could have lead to the ultimate mistake. The lab assistants who fell ill could never be traced.
GOF work is supposed to arrive at a vaccine before the created virus can leap from an animal host. Nicholas Wade reported that the GOF work was being done at a lessor safety level than recommended; thus, a possible leak. If science is allowed to dabble in such efforts, the highest possible safety level in certified facilities should be required.
The Wuhan lab had a number of issues related to poor / defective construction as well, such as problems with the ventilation system (rather important, given what they’re doing in there).
It was built by BioMérieux. Stéphane Bancel then skipped from that CEO gig, right over to running Moderna (a move that raised eyebrows, given he has no relevant experience in mRNA or even drug dev).
It is interesting how many of these players seem to fail upwards, and keep rotating around and reappearing in the story in different roles.
The Wuhan lab had a number of issues related to poor / defective construction as well, such as problems with the ventilation system (rather important, given what they’re doing in there).
It was built by BioMérieux. Stéphane Bancel then skipped from that CEO gig, right over to running Moderna (a move that raised eyebrows, given he has no relevant experience in mRNA or even drug dev).
It is interesting how many of these players seem to fail upwards, and keep rotating around and reappearing in the story in different roles.
That is the kind of argument that would make me prefer Farrar and Danczig, lies, suppression of the truth, and all included. COVID would clearly make a totally useless biological weapon, since you can neither control it nor stop ists spread – as we have clearly seen. Like all the blather about the ‘Chinsese Flu’ and the ‘Wuhan Virus’, that the Orange Man indulged in, it just uses a serious wordwide health emergency as a handy excuse for China-bashing and firing up the base. It is still true that the lab origin seems to be about 50:50 on current evidence, and that it was wrong to claim we knew otherwise, but you could almost understand how people might think it was better to quash that discussion and get on with dealing with the emergency, rather than indulge in starting a mutual blame game.
Why do you claim that covid virus lab origin is only 50:50?
There is zero evidence that it was transmitted by bats to some animals and then to humans.
So, the other 50% of your covid origin theory is what exactly?
AFAIAC there is not really any hard evidence either way. And the more extraordinary the claim (and the consequences of adopting it), the more you need hard evidence. The default assumption would be the natural origin, since that kind of thing has happened repeatedly. The existence of the virus center in Wuhan working on bat virus, and there being some people in the scientific world interested in gain-of-function research means there is a plausible route also here, but that does not prove it actually happened, only that it might have. Of the several attempts to show that the virus does not ‘look natural’, only one seems to have stood up, the one about the distribution of enzyme cleavage sites through the virus genome. And it is hard to be sure what the probability is of *something* fishy-looking being found in a random virus genome when many people are eagerly searching for it. Anyway, a very large fraction of the scientific world firmly believe in the natural origin. The US intelligence agencies, collectively got it right – some believe in one hypothesis, some in the other, none of them is particularly certain either way. For the scientific world both hypotheses seem to be viable. That is a lot of smart people in both fields, knowing more than I do, who could not to to a clear decision. The only way I can see to certainty would be if you jump to a conclusion, and arbitrarily decide that all those who disagree with you are part (or dupes) of a conspiracy. And I, for one, am not jumping on that wagon.
Well said. It’s a very good article with a lot of balance about the truth of the origins. Where it fails is absolutely condemning those who theorized “natural”. The science and investigation is still on-going. We will probably never know for certain. At the time, tensions were high. The “truth” of its source was not the highest priority. It was handling it regardless of origin. Many in the world of politics were looking to bash China using the “science” when the science was and remains inconclusive.
Great article – very poor and unsupported conclusions.
But that is precisely the wagon that those scientists, physicians, health officials and others jumped on when they ridiculed and/or demonized scientists who supported the lab leak theory and journalists who wanted to investigate rather than blindly accept the word from on high.
Well said. It’s a very good article with a lot of balance about the truth of the origins. Where it fails is absolutely condemning those who theorized “natural”. The science and investigation is still on-going. We will probably never know for certain. At the time, tensions were high. The “truth” of its source was not the highest priority. It was handling it regardless of origin. Many in the world of politics were looking to bash China using the “science” when the science was and remains inconclusive.
Great article – very poor and unsupported conclusions.
But that is precisely the wagon that those scientists, physicians, health officials and others jumped on when they ridiculed and/or demonized scientists who supported the lab leak theory and journalists who wanted to investigate rather than blindly accept the word from on high.
AFAIAC there is not really any hard evidence either way. And the more extraordinary the claim (and the consequences of adopting it), the more you need hard evidence. The default assumption would be the natural origin, since that kind of thing has happened repeatedly. The existence of the virus center in Wuhan working on bat virus, and there being some people in the scientific world interested in gain-of-function research means there is a plausible route also here, but that does not prove it actually happened, only that it might have. Of the several attempts to show that the virus does not ‘look natural’, only one seems to have stood up, the one about the distribution of enzyme cleavage sites through the virus genome. And it is hard to be sure what the probability is of *something* fishy-looking being found in a random virus genome when many people are eagerly searching for it. Anyway, a very large fraction of the scientific world firmly believe in the natural origin. The US intelligence agencies, collectively got it right – some believe in one hypothesis, some in the other, none of them is particularly certain either way. For the scientific world both hypotheses seem to be viable. That is a lot of smart people in both fields, knowing more than I do, who could not to to a clear decision. The only way I can see to certainty would be if you jump to a conclusion, and arbitrarily decide that all those who disagree with you are part (or dupes) of a conspiracy. And I, for one, am not jumping on that wagon.
Danielle, your indiscriminate use of the term “Unherders” says far more about certain limitations on the part of someone using that term than it does about the diverse contributors to Comments.
There are very many intelligent, worthwhile and often original contributions from across the political spectrum, plus from those with no particular affiliation but expertise in their respective fields.
You’re more than welcome to try to refute any of the Comments – we’re a pretty robust bunch in general – but simply throwing insults around is a waste of your time.
Danielle, your indiscriminate use of the term “Unherders” says far more about certain limitations on the part of someone using that term than it does about the diverse contributors to Comments.
There are very many intelligent, worthwhile and often original contributions from across the political spectrum, plus from those with no particular affiliation but expertise in their respective fields.
You’re more than welcome to try to refute any of the Comments – we’re a pretty robust bunch in general – but simply throwing insults around is a waste of your time.
Why do you claim that covid virus lab origin is only 50:50?
There is zero evidence that it was transmitted by bats to some animals and then to humans.
So, the other 50% of your covid origin theory is what exactly?
I agree. The Chinese just hadn’t developed the antidote or learnt how to control its mutation, otherwise it is the perfect biological weapon: crippling to the economy and polity of ‘enemy’ nations but not so deadly as to be world-ending. Like all such Weapons of Mass Destruction, the wound effect is more devastating than a KIA.
Unfortunately for the Chinese, it got out before they had the means in place to control it.
That is the kind of argument that would make me prefer Farrar and Danczig, lies, suppression of the truth, and all included. COVID would clearly make a totally useless biological weapon, since you can neither control it nor stop ists spread – as we have clearly seen. Like all the blather about the ‘Chinsese Flu’ and the ‘Wuhan Virus’, that the Orange Man indulged in, it just uses a serious wordwide health emergency as a handy excuse for China-bashing and firing up the base. It is still true that the lab origin seems to be about 50:50 on current evidence, and that it was wrong to claim we knew otherwise, but you could almost understand how people might think it was better to quash that discussion and get on with dealing with the emergency, rather than indulge in starting a mutual blame game.
I agree. The Chinese just hadn’t developed the antidote or learnt how to control its mutation, otherwise it is the perfect biological weapon: crippling to the economy and polity of ‘enemy’ nations but not so deadly as to be world-ending. Like all such Weapons of Mass Destruction, the wound effect is more devastating than a KIA.
Unfortunately for the Chinese, it got out before they had the means in place to control it.
One in an urban centre containing more than a million people.
The other, in a very low population-density area within a facility under military control.
One in an urban centre containing more than a million people.
The other, in a very low population-density area within a facility under military control.
As for the “why” – scientists have great trouble asking the question WHETHER something should be done; if it’s possible, the scientific imperative is to do it.
You can see this in the testimony of the Nazi doctors justifying their horrific experiments: Scientific knowledge ranks higher than human life. This is a problem medicine has grappled with since at least the Middle Ages, and is a key reason why the Nuremberg Code explicitly sets out the opposite position.
The question of “whether” is not raised in STEM education. You need the humanities for that. Stop teaching the humanities, and we’ll lose just that.
Clemenceau said that war is too important to be left to the generals. Gain of function research is too important to be left to the virologists. As we have seen, to our cost – nearly 7 million dead.
Clemenceau said that war is too important to be left to the generals. Gain of function research is too important to be left to the virologists. As we have seen, to our cost – nearly 7 million dead.
The Chinese Government was trusted to carry out the programme because they have less concern for their own environment and for their own people. The fallacy in the position of people such as Fauci who collaborated with the Chinese Government is that the escaped virus spread globally. Presumably these people thought that any escape of a virus could be controlled.
Actually, it’s because only China has the right monkeys and mice to experiment on. The animal rights activists in the West are the cause of that, and Covid is the unintended consequence.
Classic SARS CoV was more deadly than SARS CoV 2 but had poor transmission and so was controlled. The cleavage site that should not have been there for this supposed Zoonotic virus overcome that problem. The closest coronavirus with a cleavage site had only 39% identity to SARS CoV2. And these eminent scientists have yet to understand how it got there except to say it definitely didn’t come from a Lab.
Actually, it’s because only China has the right monkeys and mice to experiment on. The animal rights activists in the West are the cause of that, and Covid is the unintended consequence.
Classic SARS CoV was more deadly than SARS CoV 2 but had poor transmission and so was controlled. The cleavage site that should not have been there for this supposed Zoonotic virus overcome that problem. The closest coronavirus with a cleavage site had only 39% identity to SARS CoV2. And these eminent scientists have yet to understand how it got there except to say it definitely didn’t come from a Lab.
In 2020 Fauci and Collins suppressed the Great Barrington Declaration, a prospectus for how to respond to Covid. It recommended targeted care and support for the vulnerable (obese, compromised immune, fragile), and advocated that the rest of us should go on with our lives, keep the lights on. It turns out the pandemic was more of a panic demic–fueled by Fauci’s single minded desire to enrich big pharma by insisting that vaccines were the only sensible approach. We now know he was lying and self serving.
Covid disinformation, fueled by in-the-toilet, servile media panic, was the dress rehearsal for crowd control–for compelling frightened surrender to the lies. This surrender helped pave the way for the current wave of disinformation regarding NATO’s, and America’s provocation of Putin, all in the interest of empire. And as with Covid, we see many here and elsewhere spouting those lies fed to them by a media that is no longer interested in bringing truth to power. Truly, the West is busy destroying itself as we speak, and much of this can be traced back to the Covid overkill.
A final note. Covid was a disease, an affliction like a flu. It sweeps away the vulnerable, but over 90% of those who caught it experience mild symptoms. The danger it presented did not justify masks, shutdowns and all the rest.
“Ultimately, much of the media ended up presenting a collective idea that there was settled consensus, sweeping aside the voices of bravely-dissenting scientists.”
Exactly as they are now doing with the ‘climate emergency’. The playbook is identical. Not just the Guardian and the BBC, the worst offenders, but the entire MSM are complicit in this conspiracy of silence to stifle debate and impose a single narrative on a (for the most part) blissfully supine populace. What will it take for people to wake up and smell the coffee?
Yes, Ukraine is a different issue. No dissenting scientific voices to suppress, just a complete absence of historical context while bleating on about Putin’s ‘unprovoked’ invasion.
Yes, Ukraine is a different issue. No dissenting scientific voices to suppress, just a complete absence of historical context while bleating on about Putin’s ‘unprovoked’ invasion.
I suspect many people are aware of questions surrounding the climate hypothesis, but feel they don’t have enough knowledge or verbal dexterity to refute the argument. They will also have watched from afar, the pile-ons, the ridicule and the vitriol aimed at those brave enough to stick their heads up.
So they stay quiet, but that doesn’t mean they agree.
I suspect many people are aware of questions surrounding the climate hypothesis, but feel they don’t have enough knowledge or verbal dexterity to refute the argument. They will also have watched from afar, the pile-ons, the ridicule and the vitriol aimed at those brave enough to stick their heads up.
So they stay quiet, but that doesn’t mean they agree.
I’m guessing all those upvoting this comment skimmed over the nonsense about NATO causing Putin’s unprovoked (and badly miscalculated) war. At least I hope so.
Yes, I upvoted it and no, I didn’t overlook the comments about NATO’s shameful behaviour. One can think what one wants about that issue, but the lack of historical context in the media does not allow readers the chance to make up their own minds.
Yes, I upvoted it and no, I didn’t overlook the comments about NATO’s shameful behaviour. One can think what one wants about that issue, but the lack of historical context in the media does not allow readers the chance to make up their own minds.
“Ultimately, much of the media ended up presenting a collective idea that there was settled consensus, sweeping aside the voices of bravely-dissenting scientists.”
Exactly as they are now doing with the ‘climate emergency’. The playbook is identical. Not just the Guardian and the BBC, the worst offenders, but the entire MSM are complicit in this conspiracy of silence to stifle debate and impose a single narrative on a (for the most part) blissfully supine populace. What will it take for people to wake up and smell the coffee?
I’m guessing all those upvoting this comment skimmed over the nonsense about NATO causing Putin’s unprovoked (and badly miscalculated) war. At least I hope so.
V much agree. Excellent article.
As regards was it part of a deliberate biological ‘weaponisation’ strategy, we just don’t know. Might possibly be some free-lancing, unchecked scientists in that lab but CCP tentacles run deep so wouldn’t they have known and tacitly approved?
One suspects the reluctance to state it was a distinct possibility part of the embedded western Group-think that has wanted to believe the CCP is/was not as malign a force as it is. We are now awakening at apace over so many domains of western life. Let us hope it is not too late.
The lack of transparency is most acute as regards the CCP and the blanket resistance to a proper investigation. Farrar et al do now seem compromised but the bigger demon here must be seen as the CCP.
The explanation I read somewhere is that by creating a more dangerous virus the researchers could then find a way to kill that virus, and that way could also be used to kill less dangerous viruses. The great danger in this approach is that they may create a very dangerous virus and not find a way to kill it, especially risky if the virus escaped from the lab.
So that thy know what to look for (as part of general genomic surveillance of possible pathogens) in terms of genomic sequences that may produce a potentially harmful pathogen for animals that we use for food or for ourselves.
This is the main purpose of what is called “gain of function research “. It’s an early warning system for the next pandemic.
Like an asteroid watch.
Thanks for this, and to others who’ve added to the understanding of a layperson with regard to the methodologies employed by virologists.
Greater clarity is never wasted.
Isn’t the genome sequencing and monitoring of potentially dangerous viruses, sensible as that is, a very different thing to active gain of function research?
Personally I think the term “gain of function research” is a very unforutnate term given all the baggage it has acquired over the last 3 years.
For a better understanding of what this research is for and the benefits that accrue one would be better off reading :
Virology under the Microscope—a Call for Rational Discourse Jan 2023 https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jvi.00089-23
Everything from pepped up oncolytic viruses, to faster computers using improved electrical conductance facilitated by an engineered M13 bacteriophage to increased nitrogen fixation by plants using a manipulated Klebsiella etc…etc.
All of these are “gain of function”
Also, as this paper points out, “Gain-of-function research with pathogens of pandemic potential established that avian influenza viruses have the capacity to acquire mammalian transmissibility and that bat-associated coronaviruses posed a danger to humans, years before COVID-19”
Generally I am quite proud when I find that I have said things similar to you, because you are so much better informed than I am. But this article is not convincing. It could be summarised as ‘We are the authorities, and we say that virology is a good thing, so leave us to do our work in peace’. Which may be true, but which does not address the actual problems.
When people say ‘gain-of-function research’ what they actually mean is engineering particularly dangerous pathogens for research purposes. Possibly the term technically includes using phages to improve electricity transmission in computers (etc.) and surely that is a ‘good thing’ – but it is irrelevant because that is not what people are (quite understandably) worried about. In effect it is a strawman argument.
Similarly, it is beside the point to give the long list of formal safeguards and permissions required to make certain virology experiments in the US. What people actually worry about is not whether there is a safety bureaucracy in place, but whether the scientists (and bureaucrats) involved are getting it right and respecting the necessary precautions, or whether they just pay lip service and try to find a way to get around the rules and do what they feel they should be doing. In particular, boasting of US safety protocols is not a good answer to those who claim that US researchers may deliberately have promoted – and funded – research in China exactly because that made it possible to do research that was not allowed under US rules.
The paper concludes that “Regulations that are redundant with current practice or overly cumbersome will lead to unwarranted constraints on pandemic preparation and response and could leave humanity more vulnerable to future disease outbreaks.” In itself that is a platitude. But it rather translates as ‘We are already being sufficiently careful on our own initiative, and you had better not limit our freedom to work, because that will lose you the very important fruits of our research’. Which may very well be true, but the problem is exactly that some people doubt whether the research community – or parts of it – has its priorities right and can be trusted to make these decisions without more oversight. The paper is arguing for freedom to continue as before without actually addressing the real preoccupations this raises. That approach decreases trust, rather than increasing it. If they want to be trusted to continue – and quite likely that is the best thing to do – they would be better advised to take people’s worries seriously and address them directly.
Thanks for the sentiments of support. It does feel to me sometimes that UnHerd is a fact free zone.
I agree with you that the authors of this commentary are unashamed of their biases and that this almost rant is insensitive to some people’s current concerns about science in general and virology in particular but I can understand why they may have chosen to write this piece in this way.
I think that the phrase “gain of function research” was a useful and accurate descriptor before Covid (witness the examples they quote) but it has become terminally contaminated and I think that they possibly felt the need to push back with some force to counter what they view as a fundamental misunderstanding of what is going on.
I agree with you too, that there has been a collapse of trust in science (with big and little “s”) over the last 3 years and counter arguments couched in this way (stone cold facts) don’t do anything to make people feel better.
From personal experience and from what I have read over the last 3 years, I think the majority of research scientists are honest, ethical, questioning (they wouldn’t be doing science otherwise), and self reflective. Sensibly, this solid majority have kept out of the limelight. We don’t hear about them at all. No headlines. No clickbait. I think that the 156 scientists that have put their name to this commentary are a sample of this group – pretty clueless as to how to engage effectively with an anxious / frightened general populace but desperate to tell it how it is.
Personally I don’t have a trust problem with the science side of Covid – politicians and the WHO is another kettle of (stinking) fish. There are bad apples in all walks of life and I would probably place Peter Daszak and EcoAlliance in that barrel at the moment. As for Farrar, Fauci, Whitty, Vallance et al I think they did the best they could with the information they had at the time.
To my mind, right now, there is an acute shortage of good science communicators in the biological sciences.
I have no problem with the science side of COVID either, and I agree in your judgement of scientists, both in the mass and for the individuals you mention. What I do think could be a problem is that scientists are strongly biased against ever deciding that some promising line of research should *not* be carried out. It is not so much desire for fame and fortune – they share that with everybody else – but a genuine desire for improving human knowledge, coupled with a desire to prove themselves and win in the game they have dedicated their life to. Like the mountaneer said about Everest ‘ I want to climb it because it is there’. And, of course, if you do not do it, you risk that someone else will just do it instead of you, and get their name in the history books. Anyone who has ever written a grant application will also have a well-earned cynicism about official goals, and a habit of finding insincere ways to make it look like the things you want to do anyway for rather different reasons actually fulfil the goals of promoting SMEs, increasing diversity, or whatever.
Anecdote 1: The bioscientist, back when AIDS was an urgent (and well-financed) study subject who commented that of course we should be working on AIDS, but we should not forget that this was also an opportunity to do things that were good science.
Anecdote 2: The people who did the first test-tube babies amid considerable controversy – doing things that had not been possible on planet earth since God rested on the seventh day – but claimed as their only reason for doing this the desire to help poor women who could not have children. In the weakest language possible: I do not believe this was an accurate reflection of reality.
The article may well be understandable, but what would be more convincing, and calming, would be an accept in principle that maybe there could be experiments it was better not to do, a more specific evaluation of risks and rewards of particular experiment types, and a discussion of how we can make sure that people will actually abide by the rules set out rather than trying to circumvent them. That at least would show scientists who do not value their own freedom of action above the risk of creating man-made pandemics.
I have no problem with the science side of COVID either, and I agree in your judgement of scientists, both in the mass and for the individuals you mention. What I do think could be a problem is that scientists are strongly biased against ever deciding that some promising line of research should *not* be carried out. It is not so much desire for fame and fortune – they share that with everybody else – but a genuine desire for improving human knowledge, coupled with a desire to prove themselves and win in the game they have dedicated their life to. Like the mountaneer said about Everest ‘ I want to climb it because it is there’. And, of course, if you do not do it, you risk that someone else will just do it instead of you, and get their name in the history books. Anyone who has ever written a grant application will also have a well-earned cynicism about official goals, and a habit of finding insincere ways to make it look like the things you want to do anyway for rather different reasons actually fulfil the goals of promoting SMEs, increasing diversity, or whatever.
Anecdote 1: The bioscientist, back when AIDS was an urgent (and well-financed) study subject who commented that of course we should be working on AIDS, but we should not forget that this was also an opportunity to do things that were good science.
Anecdote 2: The people who did the first test-tube babies amid considerable controversy – doing things that had not been possible on planet earth since God rested on the seventh day – but claimed as their only reason for doing this the desire to help poor women who could not have children. In the weakest language possible: I do not believe this was an accurate reflection of reality.
The article may well be understandable, but what would be more convincing, and calming, would be an accept in principle that maybe there could be experiments it was better not to do, a more specific evaluation of risks and rewards of particular experiment types, and a discussion of how we can make sure that people will actually abide by the rules set out rather than trying to circumvent them. That at least would show scientists who do not value their own freedom of action above the risk of creating man-made pandemics.
Thanks for the sentiments of support. It does feel to me sometimes that UnHerd is a fact free zone.
I agree with you that the authors of this commentary are unashamed of their biases and that this almost rant is insensitive to some people’s current concerns about science in general and virology in particular but I can understand why they may have chosen to write this piece in this way.
I think that the phrase “gain of function research” was a useful and accurate descriptor before Covid (witness the examples they quote) but it has become terminally contaminated and I think that they possibly felt the need to push back with some force to counter what they view as a fundamental misunderstanding of what is going on.
I agree with you too, that there has been a collapse of trust in science (with big and little “s”) over the last 3 years and counter arguments couched in this way (stone cold facts) don’t do anything to make people feel better.
From personal experience and from what I have read over the last 3 years, I think the majority of research scientists are honest, ethical, questioning (they wouldn’t be doing science otherwise), and self reflective. Sensibly, this solid majority have kept out of the limelight. We don’t hear about them at all. No headlines. No clickbait. I think that the 156 scientists that have put their name to this commentary are a sample of this group – pretty clueless as to how to engage effectively with an anxious / frightened general populace but desperate to tell it how it is.
Personally I don’t have a trust problem with the science side of Covid – politicians and the WHO is another kettle of (stinking) fish. There are bad apples in all walks of life and I would probably place Peter Daszak and EcoAlliance in that barrel at the moment. As for Farrar, Fauci, Whitty, Vallance et al I think they did the best they could with the information they had at the time.
To my mind, right now, there is an acute shortage of good science communicators in the biological sciences.
Generally I am quite proud when I find that I have said things similar to you, because you are so much better informed than I am. But this article is not convincing. It could be summarised as ‘We are the authorities, and we say that virology is a good thing, so leave us to do our work in peace’. Which may be true, but which does not address the actual problems.
When people say ‘gain-of-function research’ what they actually mean is engineering particularly dangerous pathogens for research purposes. Possibly the term technically includes using phages to improve electricity transmission in computers (etc.) and surely that is a ‘good thing’ – but it is irrelevant because that is not what people are (quite understandably) worried about. In effect it is a strawman argument.
Similarly, it is beside the point to give the long list of formal safeguards and permissions required to make certain virology experiments in the US. What people actually worry about is not whether there is a safety bureaucracy in place, but whether the scientists (and bureaucrats) involved are getting it right and respecting the necessary precautions, or whether they just pay lip service and try to find a way to get around the rules and do what they feel they should be doing. In particular, boasting of US safety protocols is not a good answer to those who claim that US researchers may deliberately have promoted – and funded – research in China exactly because that made it possible to do research that was not allowed under US rules.
The paper concludes that “Regulations that are redundant with current practice or overly cumbersome will lead to unwarranted constraints on pandemic preparation and response and could leave humanity more vulnerable to future disease outbreaks.” In itself that is a platitude. But it rather translates as ‘We are already being sufficiently careful on our own initiative, and you had better not limit our freedom to work, because that will lose you the very important fruits of our research’. Which may very well be true, but the problem is exactly that some people doubt whether the research community – or parts of it – has its priorities right and can be trusted to make these decisions without more oversight. The paper is arguing for freedom to continue as before without actually addressing the real preoccupations this raises. That approach decreases trust, rather than increasing it. If they want to be trusted to continue – and quite likely that is the best thing to do – they would be better advised to take people’s worries seriously and address them directly.
Personally I think the term “gain of function research” is a very unforutnate term given all the baggage it has acquired over the last 3 years.
For a better understanding of what this research is for and the benefits that accrue one would be better off reading :
Virology under the Microscope—a Call for Rational Discourse Jan 2023 https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jvi.00089-23
Everything from pepped up oncolytic viruses, to faster computers using improved electrical conductance facilitated by an engineered M13 bacteriophage to increased nitrogen fixation by plants using a manipulated Klebsiella etc…etc.
All of these are “gain of function”
Also, as this paper points out, “Gain-of-function research with pathogens of pandemic potential established that avian influenza viruses have the capacity to acquire mammalian transmissibility and that bat-associated coronaviruses posed a danger to humans, years before COVID-19”
Thanks for this, and to others who’ve added to the understanding of a layperson with regard to the methodologies employed by virologists.
Greater clarity is never wasted.
Isn’t the genome sequencing and monitoring of potentially dangerous viruses, sensible as that is, a very different thing to active gain of function research?
It is now obvious that the total responsibility for this disaster lies 100% with the Chinese Communist Party.
China lied to its own people in January, claiming the virus was not infectious. Then it silenced doctors in Wuhan from telling the truth about the virus and pressurised the WHO into agreeing it was not a dangerous epidemic. Chinese Communist Party officials then ordered the destruction of laboratory samples, while insisting there was no contagion. (The Sunday Times Nov 15 2020).
Knowing all this it allowed thousands of Chinese to return after the New Year to work and study in Europe and elsewhere, thus unleashing a global epidemic.
Whether this virus was unleashed in China by accident or design, you have to ask yourselves this: Who profits?
The economies of the Western world have been seriously damaged, confidence in governments shaken, there’s social instability, health systems at breaking point in many countries and there have been millions of unavoidable deaths. And all without one bullet having been fired.
Sun Tzu the Chinese general, military strategist, author of The Art of War, would have been impressed.
The elites envision a world where only they get to travel, eat proper food, heat their homes, drive their cars and have children. They want an underclass as slaves. If the slaves continue to ‘over-breed’ and vote against the aims of the elite class, a deadly virus released into the masses will distract them from wanting democracy and freedom . That’s why they are researching such viruses. They will need an antidote for themselves thus the trials of new vaccines on the plebs.
An excellent read! I think the immediate total shut down of the Wuhan population gave the game away! The meticulously researched ‘Viral – The Search for the Origin of Covid-19” (Alina Chan and Matt Ridley’) also makes a compelling case pointing to weaponisation.
Why? Essentially as I understand it. Develop a better bullet so you can develop a better bullet proof vest.
Fauci has said that if you you didn’t do GOF tests you couldn’t develop the flu vaccine.
Why China?
More bang for your buck.
Less regulation than US – probably not got go ahead in US (obviously rightly).
All configured to do in lab.
As I remember it the guy from Kings College (a specialist in this area) pointed out that just because they didn’t get the original funding doesn’t mean they didn’t do it. This happens all the time in such research. He also said ( this was several years back) that it was likely a lab leak because the virus had changed in a way that was very unlikely to have happened in the wild.
Would I trust China to do this testing ?
Obviously not – what sane person who cared anything about other people would?
GOF work is supposed to arrive at a vaccine before the created virus can leap from an animal host. Nicholas Wade reported that the GOF work was being done at a lessor safety level than recommended; thus, a possible leak. If science is allowed to dabble in such efforts, the highest possible safety level in certified facilities should be required.
As for the “why” – scientists have great trouble asking the question WHETHER something should be done; if it’s possible, the scientific imperative is to do it.
You can see this in the testimony of the Nazi doctors justifying their horrific experiments: Scientific knowledge ranks higher than human life. This is a problem medicine has grappled with since at least the Middle Ages, and is a key reason why the Nuremberg Code explicitly sets out the opposite position.
The question of “whether” is not raised in STEM education. You need the humanities for that. Stop teaching the humanities, and we’ll lose just that.
The Chinese Government was trusted to carry out the programme because they have less concern for their own environment and for their own people. The fallacy in the position of people such as Fauci who collaborated with the Chinese Government is that the escaped virus spread globally. Presumably these people thought that any escape of a virus could be controlled.
In 2020 Fauci and Collins suppressed the Great Barrington Declaration, a prospectus for how to respond to Covid. It recommended targeted care and support for the vulnerable (obese, compromised immune, fragile), and advocated that the rest of us should go on with our lives, keep the lights on. It turns out the pandemic was more of a panic demic–fueled by Fauci’s single minded desire to enrich big pharma by insisting that vaccines were the only sensible approach. We now know he was lying and self serving.
Covid disinformation, fueled by in-the-toilet, servile media panic, was the dress rehearsal for crowd control–for compelling frightened surrender to the lies. This surrender helped pave the way for the current wave of disinformation regarding NATO’s, and America’s provocation of Putin, all in the interest of empire. And as with Covid, we see many here and elsewhere spouting those lies fed to them by a media that is no longer interested in bringing truth to power. Truly, the West is busy destroying itself as we speak, and much of this can be traced back to the Covid overkill.
A final note. Covid was a disease, an affliction like a flu. It sweeps away the vulnerable, but over 90% of those who caught it experience mild symptoms. The danger it presented did not justify masks, shutdowns and all the rest.
V much agree. Excellent article.
As regards was it part of a deliberate biological ‘weaponisation’ strategy, we just don’t know. Might possibly be some free-lancing, unchecked scientists in that lab but CCP tentacles run deep so wouldn’t they have known and tacitly approved?
One suspects the reluctance to state it was a distinct possibility part of the embedded western Group-think that has wanted to believe the CCP is/was not as malign a force as it is. We are now awakening at apace over so many domains of western life. Let us hope it is not too late.
The lack of transparency is most acute as regards the CCP and the blanket resistance to a proper investigation. Farrar et al do now seem compromised but the bigger demon here must be seen as the CCP.
The explanation I read somewhere is that by creating a more dangerous virus the researchers could then find a way to kill that virus, and that way could also be used to kill less dangerous viruses. The great danger in this approach is that they may create a very dangerous virus and not find a way to kill it, especially risky if the virus escaped from the lab.
So that thy know what to look for (as part of general genomic surveillance of possible pathogens) in terms of genomic sequences that may produce a potentially harmful pathogen for animals that we use for food or for ourselves.
This is the main purpose of what is called “gain of function research “. It’s an early warning system for the next pandemic.
Like an asteroid watch.
It is now obvious that the total responsibility for this disaster lies 100% with the Chinese Communist Party.
China lied to its own people in January, claiming the virus was not infectious. Then it silenced doctors in Wuhan from telling the truth about the virus and pressurised the WHO into agreeing it was not a dangerous epidemic. Chinese Communist Party officials then ordered the destruction of laboratory samples, while insisting there was no contagion. (The Sunday Times Nov 15 2020).
Knowing all this it allowed thousands of Chinese to return after the New Year to work and study in Europe and elsewhere, thus unleashing a global epidemic.
Whether this virus was unleashed in China by accident or design, you have to ask yourselves this: Who profits?
The economies of the Western world have been seriously damaged, confidence in governments shaken, there’s social instability, health systems at breaking point in many countries and there have been millions of unavoidable deaths. And all without one bullet having been fired.
Sun Tzu the Chinese general, military strategist, author of The Art of War, would have been impressed.
The elites envision a world where only they get to travel, eat proper food, heat their homes, drive their cars and have children. They want an underclass as slaves. If the slaves continue to ‘over-breed’ and vote against the aims of the elite class, a deadly virus released into the masses will distract them from wanting democracy and freedom . That’s why they are researching such viruses. They will need an antidote for themselves thus the trials of new vaccines on the plebs.
Steve Murray
1 year ago
This article represents everything that journalism should be: open-minded, exacting, thorough and above all – at least as far as it’s possible to discern – independent.
Any UK government that signs up to unfettered liability to the dictates of the WHO under the likes of Farrar deserves to be condemned, as history surely will condemn.
One simple but chilling question stands out. Why – for what purpose – would scientists wish to bio-engineer a form of virus designed specifically to overcome our bodies defences? Perhaps some scientists among Unherd readers could put forward a valid research explanation.
And moreover: why would anyone trust the Chinese to carry out that programme?
Last edited 1 year ago by Steve Murray
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
The tragedy is that none of these people, Farrar, Fauci and Collins will ever be held to account. Instead they are lauded with prizes and awards from august bodies such as the US National Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society. and what’s worse is that those august bodies are full on supportive of the regime that was imposed in the US and UK (lockdowns, masks, vaccine mandates, school closures, etc….)
Perhaps even worse is that half the population, at least in the US, and perhaps even in the UK, are still fully supportive of the Government’s actions vis a vis Covid.
Mind-boggling, isn’t it? Even in the face of all the evidence, there remain those convinced it was for the greater good, nothing sinister was occurring, and suspicion about government intentions is mad tin foil hattery. I raised a skeptical right eyebrow back in early 2020 when our weirdo neighbor was going house to house handing out masks she made from old bathing suits. Gahhhh! Never wore one in any form, didn’t lock down, didn’t get the shot, and – surprise! – didn’t get the d*mn Chinese flu.
Very cool – and smart. We’re in a beautiful village just above Naples – itself a stunner of a city. Such a terrible shame that those of us who loved our former homes (my family had been in New England since 1634), had to leave because of disastrous mismanagement by political opportunists in the pay of ideologues.
If you visit your friend in Naples – and I strongly suggest you do – I have a few places on it’s gorgeous Fifth Avenue where we could meet for a drink!
Very cool – and smart. We’re in a beautiful village just above Naples – itself a stunner of a city. Such a terrible shame that those of us who loved our former homes (my family had been in New England since 1634), had to leave because of disastrous mismanagement by political opportunists in the pay of ideologues.
If you visit your friend in Naples – and I strongly suggest you do – I have a few places on it’s gorgeous Fifth Avenue where we could meet for a drink!
“Perhaps even worse is that half the population, at least in the US, and perhaps even in the UK, are still fully supportive of the Government’s actions vis a vis Covid.”
Yes, absolutely terrifying, but at the same time somewhat satisfying to realise that at least 50% of Western Society are nothing less than worthless, verminous dross. It rather reinforces what BR said many years ago:- “Most people would rather die than think and MOST do!”
Mind-boggling, isn’t it? Even in the face of all the evidence, there remain those convinced it was for the greater good, nothing sinister was occurring, and suspicion about government intentions is mad tin foil hattery. I raised a skeptical right eyebrow back in early 2020 when our weirdo neighbor was going house to house handing out masks she made from old bathing suits. Gahhhh! Never wore one in any form, didn’t lock down, didn’t get the shot, and – surprise! – didn’t get the d*mn Chinese flu.
“Perhaps even worse is that half the population, at least in the US, and perhaps even in the UK, are still fully supportive of the Government’s actions vis a vis Covid.”
Yes, absolutely terrifying, but at the same time somewhat satisfying to realise that at least 50% of Western Society are nothing less than worthless, verminous dross. It rather reinforces what BR said many years ago:- “Most people would rather die than think and MOST do!”
Johann Strauss
1 year ago
The tragedy is that none of these people, Farrar, Fauci and Collins will ever be held to account. Instead they are lauded with prizes and awards from august bodies such as the US National Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society. and what’s worse is that those august bodies are full on supportive of the regime that was imposed in the US and UK (lockdowns, masks, vaccine mandates, school closures, etc….)
Perhaps even worse is that half the population, at least in the US, and perhaps even in the UK, are still fully supportive of the Government’s actions vis a vis Covid.
Last edited 1 year ago by Johann Strauss
Ian McKinney
1 year ago
An absolute tour de force.
Brilliantly written.
Wish more journalists were like Ian Birrell.
Ian McKinney
1 year ago
An absolute tour de force.
Brilliantly written.
Wish more journalists were like Ian Birrell.
Nic Cowper
1 year ago
Farrar, at the head of WHO, this despot leading an unelected body which world governments have handed unprecedented power to? What could possibly go wrong? I am ashamed of my once most admired scientific body, Wellcome Trust, and terrified for the future. Somebody do something! Quick!
Nic Cowper
1 year ago
Farrar, at the head of WHO, this despot leading an unelected body which world governments have handed unprecedented power to? What could possibly go wrong? I am ashamed of my once most admired scientific body, Wellcome Trust, and terrified for the future. Somebody do something! Quick!
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago
The Guardian abandoned impartiality in favour of ideology, long ago. It is the nearest equivalent to that old Soviet chestnut, that there is no truth in The Truth and no news in The News; The Guardian does not guard us.
I read a Guardian article online from 2005 on libertarian bloggers. I’ve always found the paper, and its politics, risible but blimey! This piece was almost balanced. Readable. Well-written. 2005 is another planet as far as the Guardian is concerned.
I read a Guardian article online from 2005 on libertarian bloggers. I’ve always found the paper, and its politics, risible but blimey! This piece was almost balanced. Readable. Well-written. 2005 is another planet as far as the Guardian is concerned.
ben arnulfssen
1 year ago
The Guardian abandoned impartiality in favour of ideology, long ago. It is the nearest equivalent to that old Soviet chestnut, that there is no truth in The Truth and no news in The News; The Guardian does not guard us.
Last edited 1 year ago by ben arnulfssen
Hendrik Mentz
1 year ago
Paradigmatically panning out it seems to me is a science versus nature world in which the former will be said to protect us from the latter. Think agriculture (GMs, pesticides, lab meat), weather (geo engineering), health (natural immune systems overridden by a gene therapy platform) and accommodation (surveilled human settlement zones resembling ICU) and ‘out there’ a nightmarish world of germs and primitives that must get on with it. If so the new appointee to lead the science desk at the WHO makes every sense.
Last edited 1 year ago by Hendrik Mentz
Hendrik Mentz
1 year ago
Paradigmatically panning out it seems to me is a science versus nature world in which the former will be said to protect us from the latter. Think agriculture (GMs, pesticides, lab meat), weather (geo engineering), health (natural immune systems overridden by a gene therapy platform) and accommodation (surveilled human settlement zones resembling ICU) and ‘out there’ a nightmarish world of germs and primitives that must get on with it. If so the new appointee to lead the science desk at the WHO makes every sense.
Last edited 1 year ago by Hendrik Mentz
Jim Veenbaas
1 year ago
The incestuous relationship between the regime media, the technocrats and elected leaders is the biggest threat to democracy.
Don’t be silly. There IS a very cushy relationship at the moment between governments, big tech, academe, NGOs and non-profits, and, most damningly, the media (which I worked in for 2 decades), that is pushing various agendas, withholding information and causing great harm. Noting that has nothing to do with Lizard People, David Icke or anything else. The media in particular is entirely corrupted and has abandoned its core mission of informing the public dispassionately with accurate, unbiased information.
People need to remember that Britain has by far the most diverse media in the Anglosphere. In Canada. Australia and even the US, the regime media are virtually all the same and share the same ideology.
People need to remember that Britain has by far the most diverse media in the Anglosphere. In Canada. Australia and even the US, the regime media are virtually all the same and share the same ideology.
Don’t be silly. There IS a very cushy relationship at the moment between governments, big tech, academe, NGOs and non-profits, and, most damningly, the media (which I worked in for 2 decades), that is pushing various agendas, withholding information and causing great harm. Noting that has nothing to do with Lizard People, David Icke or anything else. The media in particular is entirely corrupted and has abandoned its core mission of informing the public dispassionately with accurate, unbiased information.
The incestuous relationship between the regime media, the technocrats and elected leaders is the biggest threat to democracy.
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
I didn’t bother to read the article, I mean, what’s the point? If you do not know the scene at this point you have basically slept through WWIII – although it has been, Is, 5th Generation warfare so no bombs. And then conducted against its own citizens and the world by social media, the education and entertainment industries, the pharma/Bio industry, the MSM & Social media, the CCP, Government Spook Agencies, government Deep State, the Uni-party Con and Labour parties, the King (deep WEF), the Health providers, and so on…
Anyway – Covid 19 is a Bio Weapon, as is the vax, come from Western secret Security Agencies, DOD, and the lizards like Gates, Schwab, Fink, Soros, WHO, IMF, and the evil head of the Welcome Trust (which is its self evil on line with the Bill and Melinda Gates eugenics council) and the CCP too… wow.. we are F__*ed
You lost, by the way. Soon the world will collapse into a horrendous depression – that being the point of all this (and the Ukraine war too). If you do not have your stash of gold, your 50 kg of rice and dried beans, couple crates of canned food, toilet paper, fire wood, and a butcher knife lashed on the end of a stick (defense, in the absence of a second amendment) then you have not been paying attention.
P.S. I am currently reading Churchill’s history of the English speaking peoples, and am on the Plantagenets…. Oh, how I wish they were on the throne. The traitors who have done this would get what they so justly deserve. What a pathetic Government we have! Biden, Boris, Sunak and the worms Hunt and Fauci…….and the rest – all of them almost – all dirty rats.
Having read your own opening line about not bothering to read the article, you’ll permit me the precious time saved in not bothering to read your repetitive blather.
I’m drawn to Bjorn’s apocalyptic vision and so read much truth in his cris de cœur. But I agree, he should take the trouble to read before commenting because survival will require more than dried beans, toilet paper and a butcher knife. We need first to find one another.
He sounds like a programmed chatbot. Ticks all the boxes. Like all insane conspiracy theories, it contains the odd kernel of truth here and there. The style reminds me of Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea’s brilliant Illuminatus trilogy, but of course that was satire.
He sounds like a programmed chatbot. Ticks all the boxes. Like all insane conspiracy theories, it contains the odd kernel of truth here and there. The style reminds me of Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea’s brilliant Illuminatus trilogy, but of course that was satire.
I enjoy his almost eschatological doom-mongering and seek out his posts on each and every article. Within such angry replies tends to be something at least approaching an essential truth.
I’m drawn to Bjorn’s apocalyptic vision and so read much truth in his cris de cœur. But I agree, he should take the trouble to read before commenting because survival will require more than dried beans, toilet paper and a butcher knife. We need first to find one another.
I enjoy his almost eschatological doom-mongering and seek out his posts on each and every article. Within such angry replies tends to be something at least approaching an essential truth.
I have long thought that Farrar is the worst of them. Somehow barbaric medieval punishment seems like an attractive option for him and his fellow crooks.
Perhaps something along the lines of the following would be apposite?
“The 20th of the same month, a gallows and a scaffold being set up for the purpose in St. Giles his fieldes, where they were wont to meet, the first 7 were hanged thereon, cut down, their privities cut off, bowelled alive and seeing, and quartered”.*
I have always thought that expression “bowelled alive and SEEING” was of interest. O what happy days!
(*William Camden’s account of the execution of Babington & Co, 20th September, 1586 last.)
Perhaps something along the lines of the following would be apposite?
“The 20th of the same month, a gallows and a scaffold being set up for the purpose in St. Giles his fieldes, where they were wont to meet, the first 7 were hanged thereon, cut down, their privities cut off, bowelled alive and seeing, and quartered”.*
I have always thought that expression “bowelled alive and SEEING” was of interest. O what happy days!
(*William Camden’s account of the execution of Babington & Co, 20th September, 1586 last.)
Having read your own opening line about not bothering to read the article, you’ll permit me the precious time saved in not bothering to read your repetitive blather.
I have long thought that Farrar is the worst of them. Somehow barbaric medieval punishment seems like an attractive option for him and his fellow crooks.
You forgot to mention the 5,000 rounds of ammunition in your ‘stash’.
Elliott Bjorn
1 year ago
I didn’t bother to read the article, I mean, what’s the point? If you do not know the scene at this point you have basically slept through WWIII – although it has been, Is, 5th Generation warfare so no bombs. And then conducted against its own citizens and the world by social media, the education and entertainment industries, the pharma/Bio industry, the MSM & Social media, the CCP, Government Spook Agencies, government Deep State, the Uni-party Con and Labour parties, the King (deep WEF), the Health providers, and so on…
Anyway – Covid 19 is a Bio Weapon, as is the vax, come from Western secret Security Agencies, DOD, and the lizards like Gates, Schwab, Fink, Soros, WHO, IMF, and the evil head of the Welcome Trust (which is its self evil on line with the Bill and Melinda Gates eugenics council) and the CCP too… wow.. we are F__*ed
You lost, by the way. Soon the world will collapse into a horrendous depression – that being the point of all this (and the Ukraine war too). If you do not have your stash of gold, your 50 kg of rice and dried beans, couple crates of canned food, toilet paper, fire wood, and a butcher knife lashed on the end of a stick (defense, in the absence of a second amendment) then you have not been paying attention.
P.S. I am currently reading Churchill’s history of the English speaking peoples, and am on the Plantagenets…. Oh, how I wish they were on the throne. The traitors who have done this would get what they so justly deserve. What a pathetic Government we have! Biden, Boris, Sunak and the worms Hunt and Fauci…….and the rest – all of them almost – all dirty rats.
Simon South
1 year ago
A really good thought provoking read.. I was wondering however, if there was a missing touch of irony with the quote “placing more faith in a brutally-repressive Chinese dictatorship than an elected US government.” ?
Is that the democratic government that was partially funding the research in the Chinese lab? Was that the democracy that is bribed with millions of dollars by big corporations- oops sorry not bribed – lobbied , and the same democracy that, led by Trump tried to storm their government buildings cos they didn’t get their way?
It is so true – journalism must hold the mirror to all aspects of society, in the post truth social media drip feed of drivel, thank goodness for Unherd.
Last edited 1 year ago by Simon South
Simon South
1 year ago
A really good thought provoking read.. I was wondering however, if there was a missing touch of irony with the quote “placing more faith in a brutally-repressive Chinese dictatorship than an elected US government.” ?
Is that the democratic government that was partially funding the research in the Chinese lab? Was that the democracy that is bribed with millions of dollars by big corporations- oops sorry not bribed – lobbied , and the same democracy that, led by Trump tried to storm their government buildings cos they didn’t get their way?
It is so true – journalism must hold the mirror to all aspects of society, in the post truth social media drip feed of drivel, thank goodness for Unherd.
Last edited 1 year ago by Simon South
Nik Jewell
1 year ago
Good article. I’ve been meaning to write a review for my Substack of Farrar’s book, ‘Spike’, in light of all that has emerged since its publication. Farrar’s own account is, at best, ‘economic’ with the truth. What underlies all this, as he makes clear in the book, is that Farrrar is a fan of GoF research; let’s not expect that he will be influencing the WHO to exert pressure on governments to ban it.
Last edited 1 year ago by Nik Jewell
Nik Jewell
1 year ago
Good article. I’ve been meaning to write a review for my Substack of Farrar’s book, ‘Spike’, in light of all that has emerged since its publication. Farrar’s own account is, at best, ‘economic’ with the truth. What underlies all this, as he makes clear in the book, is that Farrrar is a fan of GoF research; let’s not expect that he will be influencing the WHO to exert pressure on governments to ban it.
Last edited 1 year ago by Nik Jewell
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Thank you – I presume the subtitle referring to Farrar as a “supine scientist” was inserted by the editor? For your piece spells it out clearly – Farrar was anything but supine, he was, as you say, at the centre of the web, a perpetrator, not a bystander.
And as such he should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
Thank you – I presume the subtitle referring to Farrar as a “supine scientist” was inserted by the editor? For your piece spells it out clearly – Farrar was anything but supine, he was, as you say, at the centre of the web, a perpetrator, not a bystander.
Gordon Arta
1 year ago
No surprise MSM journalists were so supine. I can’t find one with any verified health qualifications, knowledge, experience, or expertise. It was journalism which enabled Wakefield and the MMR scandal. They’ve learned nothing. The same clueless over-opinionated little cabal, degree in EngLit or ‘journalism’, who once wrote a column in a provincial rag on the latest fad diet, and is now the health editor (or science, technology, defence, etc) editor of a broadsheet.
No surprise MSM journalists were so supine. I can’t find one with any verified health qualifications, knowledge, experience, or expertise. It was journalism which enabled Wakefield and the MMR scandal. They’ve learned nothing. The same clueless over-opinionated little cabal, degree in EngLit or ‘journalism’, who once wrote a column in a provincial rag on the latest fad diet, and is now the health editor (or science, technology, defence, etc) editor of a broadsheet.
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
By far your finest essay so far Mr Burrell, I thank you.
If you are found ‘hanging’ from say Blackfriars Bridge someday, we shall all know why!
CHARLES STANHOPE
1 year ago
By far your finest essay so far Mr Burrell, I thank you.
If you are found ‘hanging’ from say Blackfriars Bridge someday, we shall all know why!
John Callender
1 year ago
Brilliant article, many thanks. A major source of funding for British universities is international students. There is an market for these students in which we compete with other English-speaking countries such as the USA and Australia, and, more recently, European countries offering courses taught in English. Around 19 percent of all students and 42 percent on full-time postgraduate courses are domiciled outwith the UK.
The biggest ‘donor’ country by far is China. The number of students from China comprises around a third of the non-UK domiciled total and is greater than the next three countries combined. As the well-worn proverb states, never bite the hand that feeds you.
“never bite the hand that feeds you” :-
Particularly if it is holding a Colt .45
John Callender
1 year ago
Brilliant article, many thanks. A major source of funding for British universities is international students. There is an market for these students in which we compete with other English-speaking countries such as the USA and Australia, and, more recently, European countries offering courses taught in English. Around 19 percent of all students and 42 percent on full-time postgraduate courses are domiciled outwith the UK.
The biggest ‘donor’ country by far is China. The number of students from China comprises around a third of the non-UK domiciled total and is greater than the next three countries combined. As the well-worn proverb states, never bite the hand that feeds you.
Norman Powers
1 year ago
Presumably this continuing failure is a legacy of the media group’s reaction to Donald Trump’s promotion of the possibility of a lab leak
Seems more likely that it’s because the Guardian is the journal of the public sector and academia. Everything about the lab leak theory – that it was possible at all, the behavior of the people involved etc – is absolutely damning towards public sector science. There’s just no way to blame any of this on corporations or conservatives when people like Farrer are so clearly of the left, so all they can do is try to attack anything other than natural origins.
Norman Powers
1 year ago
Presumably this continuing failure is a legacy of the media group’s reaction to Donald Trump’s promotion of the possibility of a lab leak
Seems more likely that it’s because the Guardian is the journal of the public sector and academia. Everything about the lab leak theory – that it was possible at all, the behavior of the people involved etc – is absolutely damning towards public sector science. There’s just no way to blame any of this on corporations or conservatives when people like Farrer are so clearly of the left, so all they can do is try to attack anything other than natural origins.
R Wright
1 year ago
These individuals will be viewed with the same opprobrium we today reserve for phrenologists and the quacks that electrocuted ‘hysterical’ women. The fact that they will not only get away with it scot free during our lifetimes, but will be actively rewarded, does not make the reckoning of history any less important.
R Wright
1 year ago
These individuals will be viewed with the same opprobrium we today reserve for phrenologists and the quacks that electrocuted ‘hysterical’ women. The fact that they will not only get away with it scot free during our lifetimes, but will be actively rewarded, does not make the reckoning of history any less important.
Anne Torr
1 year ago
This excellent article should be read in conjunction with Thomas Fazi’s article of 6th March titled ‘How WHO was Captured’. Given Farrar’s track record and his promotion to WHO – it is a considerable risk (alongside his great mate Richard Horton of The Lancet) to give WHO any further powers.
Anne Torr
1 year ago
This excellent article should be read in conjunction with Thomas Fazi’s article of 6th March titled ‘How WHO was Captured’. Given Farrar’s track record and his promotion to WHO – it is a considerable risk (alongside his great mate Richard Horton of The Lancet) to give WHO any further powers.
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
The real sport that The Telegraph revelations have provided, is the fun of mocking the erstwhile lemming like Coronaphobes, who followed the government and super quack pied pipers of DDR like manipulative dishonesty, with an obsessive compliant desire…!!!
Nicky Samengo-Turner
1 year ago
The real sport that The Telegraph revelations have provided, is the fun of mocking the erstwhile lemming like Coronaphobes, who followed the government and super quack pied pipers of DDR like manipulative dishonesty, with an obsessive compliant desire…!!!
Bob Downing
1 year ago
Interesting in itself, but illustrative of the wider problem with politicised science and lack of investigation. Rather earlier than Covid, the UN took charge of climate science, the IPCC became the sole voice of truth, the media heralded its Heads (even non-scientific government appointees) as the greatest experts in the world, the BBC instigated a ban on non-believers, institutes of learning sacked heretics and Groupthink became the only acceptable form of “debate”. And corporations leaped on the renewables bandwagon. No history now exists before records began, even the records of countless paleo-scientists, just as the years of medical science and experience which might have been helpful (one would hope) have either been ignored or manipulated in the Covid scenario. Can we now believe any scientist who isn’t entirely self-funded and free of the political or other agendas of his masters?
Bob Downing
1 year ago
Interesting in itself, but illustrative of the wider problem with politicised science and lack of investigation. Rather earlier than Covid, the UN took charge of climate science, the IPCC became the sole voice of truth, the media heralded its Heads (even non-scientific government appointees) as the greatest experts in the world, the BBC instigated a ban on non-believers, institutes of learning sacked heretics and Groupthink became the only acceptable form of “debate”. And corporations leaped on the renewables bandwagon. No history now exists before records began, even the records of countless paleo-scientists, just as the years of medical science and experience which might have been helpful (one would hope) have either been ignored or manipulated in the Covid scenario. Can we now believe any scientist who isn’t entirely self-funded and free of the political or other agendas of his masters?
Lizzie J
1 year ago
I find it interesting that the Chinese government is now letting its citizens roam far and wide around the world but does not allow the rest of the world into China.
That, combined with a draconian lockdown, will no doubt keep its citizens even more terrified of stepping out of line and on stand by to bring the next virus to us. Job done. For now.
I read today that the threat of a flu lock down was announced in one of the Chinese cities. . Guess China tries to keep her citizens on their toes.Our Overlords probably already salivating at the thought of doing the same to us again. But this time I’ll risk going to prison by opposing any measure they announce.
I read today that the threat of a flu lock down was announced in one of the Chinese cities. . Guess China tries to keep her citizens on their toes.Our Overlords probably already salivating at the thought of doing the same to us again. But this time I’ll risk going to prison by opposing any measure they announce.
Last edited 1 year ago by Stephanie Surface
Lizzie J
1 year ago
I find it interesting that the Chinese government is now letting its citizens roam far and wide around the world but does not allow the rest of the world into China.
That, combined with a draconian lockdown, will no doubt keep its citizens even more terrified of stepping out of line and on stand by to bring the next virus to us. Job done. For now.
Douglas McNeish
1 year ago
“We are moving from an era of enlightenment to something darker.” It is called the Gaslightenment. Taking their cue from the CCP, leaders in science, government and media, engineered public perceptions for the benefit of their reputations, and to insure the continued flow of funding from governments – China’s in particular.
Would it be too cynical to suggest that Farrar received the top post at the WHO as a reward for having silenced any debate about the virus that might lead to an origin in a Chinese lab? One moreover that was funded by US government-supported bodies?
Too cynical, perhaps. Too un(wait for it… ) no not herd, hinged, for sure.
Douglas McNeish
1 year ago
“We are moving from an era of enlightenment to something darker.” It is called the Gaslightenment. Taking their cue from the CCP, leaders in science, government and media, engineered public perceptions for the benefit of their reputations, and to insure the continued flow of funding from governments – China’s in particular.
Would it be too cynical to suggest that Farrar received the top post at the WHO as a reward for having silenced any debate about the virus that might lead to an origin in a Chinese lab? One moreover that was funded by US government-supported bodies?
Last edited 1 year ago by Douglas McNeish
Martin Smith
1 year ago
Is it true that this spring a WHO proposal to give it total powder over the public health authorities of national governments will be debated and voted on?
I thought that that decision had already been made but TPTB at UNHQ and WHO were waiting for an opportune moment to inform all the national governments of the results of their votes.
The final draft will be debated this spring but ratification will be next year. In pandemic emergencies the WHO in accordance with The Global Pandemic Treaty will overrule the laws of participating sovereign states. The WHO get to decide and declare the pandemics. In other words, total global control. Hard to believe but true.
Absolutely crazy that sovereign nations would subjugate themselves to an unelected quango. Of course it will only be the so-called western democracies that are prepared to give up their freedoms. Don’t expect the likes of India and China to abide by anything the WHO declares.
Absolutely crazy that sovereign nations would subjugate themselves to an unelected quango. Of course it will only be the so-called western democracies that are prepared to give up their freedoms. Don’t expect the likes of India and China to abide by anything the WHO declares.
I thought that that decision had already been made but TPTB at UNHQ and WHO were waiting for an opportune moment to inform all the national governments of the results of their votes.
The final draft will be debated this spring but ratification will be next year. In pandemic emergencies the WHO in accordance with The Global Pandemic Treaty will overrule the laws of participating sovereign states. The WHO get to decide and declare the pandemics. In other words, total global control. Hard to believe but true.
Martin Smith
1 year ago
Is it true that this spring a WHO proposal to give it total powder over the public health authorities of national governments will be debated and voted on?
Eric Parker
1 year ago
Curious to write at length on this topic without mentioning Matt Ridley and Alina Chan’s book, in which detailed evidence reveals the high likelihood of a lab leak.
I would add the 2021 Nicholas Wade article in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists as important to mention too.
Eric Parker
1 year ago
Curious to write at length on this topic without mentioning Matt Ridley and Alina Chan’s book, in which detailed evidence reveals the high likelihood of a lab leak.
Peter Lee
1 year ago
I’ve heard all the arguments why the virus escaped from the lab, but I have yet to hear a cogent rationale for why it came from natural sources. Why?
I think the unclear issue is the evidence that the virus may have been circulating in September 2019.
Now that Congress has voted unanimously for Biden to be forced to release all intelligence about the origins (good account in the DT today), we may learn more. It cannot be ruled out a priori that it is of US lab origin (some have argued this since early 2020). Equally, it cannot be ruled out that if it was circulating earlier that it is zoonotic (the distance of Wuhan from the bat caves would be less telling).
I still think, though, that it is an accidental escape from WIV.
Actually, I think we probably can rule out the possibility of a natural origin – unless one considers it likely to have spread from a bat to a pangolin having promiscuous inter-special sex.
Actually, I think we probably can rule out the possibility of a natural origin – unless one considers it likely to have spread from a bat to a pangolin having promiscuous inter-special sex.
All previous viruses of concern for humans that we know about were zoonotic spillovers : HIV, Ebola, Smallpox, Zika, Polio, Hepatitis, MERS, SARS1 etc. etc. the one exception was an influenza lab escape I think sometime in the 70s (?)
SARS1 propagated via bats through the edible wild animal trade in China
There is a well established wild animal supply, farming and distribution network within China sourcing these animals from adjacent countries along the belt and road routes (notably Laos and Vietnam). Before SARS 1 this trade was worth the equivalent of millions of US dollars
In 2019 China suffered a swine flu epidemic and had to slaughter its entire pig population. This resulted in a shortage of animal protein- the slack was taken up by the somewhat curtailed but still existent wild animal trade. Wuhan was one of many market centres for this trade
There were 2 distinct strains of SarsCov2 circulating in Wuhan in December 2019. This implies that there were 2 separate lab accidents or 2 separate zoonotic spillovers or that a progenitor virus was circulating earlier in 2019. The source of such a progenitor could have been anywhere….literally
The furin cleavage site. The arguments around this are quite technical. Very briefly if this site was nefariously inserted it shows piss poor engineering :
1. It is out of frame meaning the chances of it being copied incorrectly as the virus replicates are higher than if the insertion was in its “proper “place on the RNA daisy chain
2. There are a couple of Prolines close by that potentially can b**ger up the cleavage process
3. The whole binding complex of the original virus was not optimised for humans. We know this because it has mutated and evolved over the last 3 years to become much more effective as a virus
Last but not least history tells us that nature in general and viruses in particular are much more resourceful and “clever” than any uppity virologist with world domination in view. HIV is probably the best current example of this (you know, the other ongoing pandemic)
There are several well-established examples of lethal diseases moving from animals to humans: AIDS, SARS, MERS. New influenza strains come from animals. It is the most obvious explanation, and it can take years to find and confirm the path of transmission (AIDS, MERS, …) – if you ever find it. The lab origin is also a plausible scenario, what with the virus research labs in Wuhan and all, but as far as I am aware all we really have is two plausible hypotheses and there is not much conclusive evidence for choosing one ove the other. Which is presumably why the US intelligence services collectively are about 50:50 on the question and give low, or at most medium, probablilty on their judgements.
And, Mr McNeish, it is well established that new flu strains come through viruses passing between ducks and pigs before they get to humans I would submit that interspecies sex may not be required.
I think the unclear issue is the evidence that the virus may have been circulating in September 2019.
Now that Congress has voted unanimously for Biden to be forced to release all intelligence about the origins (good account in the DT today), we may learn more. It cannot be ruled out a priori that it is of US lab origin (some have argued this since early 2020). Equally, it cannot be ruled out that if it was circulating earlier that it is zoonotic (the distance of Wuhan from the bat caves would be less telling).
I still think, though, that it is an accidental escape from WIV.
All previous viruses of concern for humans that we know about were zoonotic spillovers : HIV, Ebola, Smallpox, Zika, Polio, Hepatitis, MERS, SARS1 etc. etc. the one exception was an influenza lab escape I think sometime in the 70s (?)
SARS1 propagated via bats through the edible wild animal trade in China
There is a well established wild animal supply, farming and distribution network within China sourcing these animals from adjacent countries along the belt and road routes (notably Laos and Vietnam). Before SARS 1 this trade was worth the equivalent of millions of US dollars
In 2019 China suffered a swine flu epidemic and had to slaughter its entire pig population. This resulted in a shortage of animal protein- the slack was taken up by the somewhat curtailed but still existent wild animal trade. Wuhan was one of many market centres for this trade
There were 2 distinct strains of SarsCov2 circulating in Wuhan in December 2019. This implies that there were 2 separate lab accidents or 2 separate zoonotic spillovers or that a progenitor virus was circulating earlier in 2019. The source of such a progenitor could have been anywhere….literally
The furin cleavage site. The arguments around this are quite technical. Very briefly if this site was nefariously inserted it shows piss poor engineering :
1. It is out of frame meaning the chances of it being copied incorrectly as the virus replicates are higher than if the insertion was in its “proper “place on the RNA daisy chain
2. There are a couple of Prolines close by that potentially can b**ger up the cleavage process
3. The whole binding complex of the original virus was not optimised for humans. We know this because it has mutated and evolved over the last 3 years to become much more effective as a virus
Last but not least history tells us that nature in general and viruses in particular are much more resourceful and “clever” than any uppity virologist with world domination in view. HIV is probably the best current example of this (you know, the other ongoing pandemic)
There are several well-established examples of lethal diseases moving from animals to humans: AIDS, SARS, MERS. New influenza strains come from animals. It is the most obvious explanation, and it can take years to find and confirm the path of transmission (AIDS, MERS, …) – if you ever find it. The lab origin is also a plausible scenario, what with the virus research labs in Wuhan and all, but as far as I am aware all we really have is two plausible hypotheses and there is not much conclusive evidence for choosing one ove the other. Which is presumably why the US intelligence services collectively are about 50:50 on the question and give low, or at most medium, probablilty on their judgements.
And, Mr McNeish, it is well established that new flu strains come through viruses passing between ducks and pigs before they get to humans I would submit that interspecies sex may not be required.
Last edited 1 year ago by Rasmus Fogh
Peter Lee
1 year ago
I’ve heard all the arguments why the virus escaped from the lab, but I have yet to hear a cogent rationale for why it came from natural sources. Why?
Jim Watson
1 year ago
Seems obvious that Farrar et al. will eventually be held to account. Seeing as the intelligence services are now coming out and saying they think lab leak is likely.
If the FBI and co think that and probably have for some time, then they will for sure be looking at those who deliberately suppressed it.
Impossible to escape from.
Imo, the FBI statement is part of America’s renewed push to make China enemy no 1. They’re influencing public opinion as they did in the pandemic.
Jim Watson
1 year ago
Seems obvious that Farrar et al. will eventually be held to account. Seeing as the intelligence services are now coming out and saying they think lab leak is likely.
If the FBI and co think that and probably have for some time, then they will for sure be looking at those who deliberately suppressed it.
Impossible to escape from.
Dominic A
1 year ago
No mention of Neil Ferguson? He seems the exemplar of careerist, politicised, self interested dysfunction. Failing up all the way.
Dominic A
1 year ago
No mention of Neil Ferguson? He seems the exemplar of careerist, politicised, self interested dysfunction. Failing up all the way.
William Jackson
1 year ago
Hypocrisy, dishonest, and propaganda to name but a few of the ‘evils’ of 21st Century politics and it now seems at least so business.
William Jackson
1 year ago
Hypocrisy, dishonest, and propaganda to name but a few of the ‘evils’ of 21st Century politics and it now seems at least so business.
Ardath Blauvelt
1 year ago
Ultimately, the answer is simple: control. Facts, narrative, outcome, future, planning….power. Our world is all about international control now, at every level. Whatever it takes because the stakes so high. Nothing ends matters.
Ardath Blauvelt
1 year ago
Ultimately, the answer is simple: control. Facts, narrative, outcome, future, planning….power. Our world is all about international control now, at every level. Whatever it takes because the stakes so high. Nothing ends matters.
C Ross
1 year ago
Very good. But nothing about Daszak and Pentagon funding or Wuhan links to Moderna.
C Ross
1 year ago
Very good. But nothing about Daszak and Pentagon funding or Wuhan links to Moderna.
Alan Thorpe
1 year ago
It seems to me that we have two kinds of science. The first is the science that enables us to make things. The second is the new science that tells us about the future and what we should do. It is no better than the Roman soothsayers fiddling with animal entrails. The only difference is that the entrails have been replaced with computer models and an army of social media player who are too willing to believe nonsense.
Well, we must sacrifice so the rain will continue to fall on our corn. Virgins are a small price to pay…
Alan Thorpe
1 year ago
It seems to me that we have two kinds of science. The first is the science that enables us to make things. The second is the new science that tells us about the future and what we should do. It is no better than the Roman soothsayers fiddling with animal entrails. The only difference is that the entrails have been replaced with computer models and an army of social media player who are too willing to believe nonsense.
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
As for the “why” – scientists have great trouble asking the question WHETHER something should be done; if it’s possible, the scientific imperative is to do it.
You can see this in the testimony of the Nazi doctors justifying their horrific experiments: Scientific knowledge ranks higher than human life. This is a problem medicine has grappled with since at least the Middle Ages, and is a key reason why the Nuremberg Code explicitly sets out the opposite position.
The question of “whether” is not raised in STEM education. You need the humanities for that. Stop teaching the humanities, and we’ll lose just that.
Jürg Gassmann
1 year ago
As for the “why” – scientists have great trouble asking the question WHETHER something should be done; if it’s possible, the scientific imperative is to do it.
You can see this in the testimony of the Nazi doctors justifying their horrific experiments: Scientific knowledge ranks higher than human life. This is a problem medicine has grappled with since at least the Middle Ages, and is a key reason why the Nuremberg Code explicitly sets out the opposite position.
The question of “whether” is not raised in STEM education. You need the humanities for that. Stop teaching the humanities, and we’ll lose just that.
P Branagan
1 year ago
We do know who made his career out of dodgy research with viruses – one Briton named Daszak. We also know who provided the money for the Covid dodgy research – 2 US citizens Collins and Fauci.
So, as far as I’m concerned, if the source of Covid was not some natural evolution of bat viruses, then 95%+ of the blame for the origins rest with that trio of evil charlatans.
Anyway, for me, much of the outrage in the UnHerd comments section is entirely misdirected.
Instead it should be directed towards the charlatans that told us that the mRNA clot shots were safe and effective. The fanatical medics effectively MANDATED billions of people to take the experimental (i.e. not fully tested) gene therapy.
Now, even the most fanatical medics pushing the clot shots accept that they don’t prevent people getting the virus and/or from passing it on.
Of course, when they found out that clot shots didn’t do what they claimed, the cover up had to begin and the lying started.
‘Well they prevent people from getting seriously ill and going into the ICU’.
For months during the latter half of 2021 and the first quarter of 2022 the terror campaign against the ‘unvaccinated’ continued while the obfuscation and lying propaganda went into overdrive.
Of course, now anybody with even the most timid of enquiring minds knows that the ICUs were jammers with triple jabbed patients.
Meanwhile, the numbers of adverse events associated with the clot shots rose exponentially.
So, we now know that the mRNA clot shots were largely untested and were neither effective or safe.
I know where my sense of outrage is directed.
P Branagan
1 year ago
We do know who made his career out of dodgy research with viruses – one Briton named Daszak. We also know who provided the money for the Covid dodgy research – 2 US citizens Collins and Fauci.
So, as far as I’m concerned, if the source of Covid was not some natural evolution of bat viruses, then 95%+ of the blame for the origins rest with that trio of evil charlatans.
Anyway, for me, much of the outrage in the UnHerd comments section is entirely misdirected.
Instead it should be directed towards the charlatans that told us that the mRNA clot shots were safe and effective. The fanatical medics effectively MANDATED billions of people to take the experimental (i.e. not fully tested) gene therapy.
Now, even the most fanatical medics pushing the clot shots accept that they don’t prevent people getting the virus and/or from passing it on.
Of course, when they found out that clot shots didn’t do what they claimed, the cover up had to begin and the lying started.
‘Well they prevent people from getting seriously ill and going into the ICU’.
For months during the latter half of 2021 and the first quarter of 2022 the terror campaign against the ‘unvaccinated’ continued while the obfuscation and lying propaganda went into overdrive.
Of course, now anybody with even the most timid of enquiring minds knows that the ICUs were jammers with triple jabbed patients.
Meanwhile, the numbers of adverse events associated with the clot shots rose exponentially.
So, we now know that the mRNA clot shots were largely untested and were neither effective or safe.
I know where my sense of outrage is directed.
Frank McCusker
1 year ago
The Russians and the Chinese have been at this ugly stuff for decades.
Frank McCusker
1 year ago
The Russians and the Chinese have been at this ugly stuff for decades.
Graham Thorpe
1 year ago
Occam and his razor are often of help on these occasions.
Graham Thorpe
1 year ago
Occam and his razor are often of help on these occasions.
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
There is no such thing as “the” science, let alone the climate alarmists’ mantra that “the science is settled”. All scientific knowledge is provisional until a better theory comes along, which is then tested to destruction by experiment.
SAGE was a disaster. Far too large, far too many pseudo scientists aka behavioural experts. And membership should have been conditional on accepting a self-denying ordinance on media appearances.
Dougie Undersub
1 year ago
There is no such thing as “the” science, let alone the climate alarmists’ mantra that “the science is settled”. All scientific knowledge is provisional until a better theory comes along, which is then tested to destruction by experiment.
SAGE was a disaster. Far too large, far too many pseudo scientists aka behavioural experts. And membership should have been conditional on accepting a self-denying ordinance on media appearances.
Martin Smith
1 year ago
Given that Covid cases appeared in the USA in autumn 2019 it has been suggested that activity at Fort Detrick might have been involved… only a conspiracy theory (for now…)
The Americans are too cheap too manufacture anything in the west. A leak of something manufactured in China but funded by the Yanks makes more sense and has the greater evidence.
Detrick has been pushed heavily by the Chinese media, just so you know, you have to be careful what info you read on that, there is also a lot of propaganda and just b*llsh*t from the other side on that one. It’s impossible to say where it came from, but remember it was Wuhan that shut down first.
The Americans are too cheap too manufacture anything in the west. A leak of something manufactured in China but funded by the Yanks makes more sense and has the greater evidence.
Detrick has been pushed heavily by the Chinese media, just so you know, you have to be careful what info you read on that, there is also a lot of propaganda and just b*llsh*t from the other side on that one. It’s impossible to say where it came from, but remember it was Wuhan that shut down first.
Martin Smith
1 year ago
Given that Covid cases appeared in the USA in autumn 2019 it has been suggested that activity at Fort Detrick might have been involved… only a conspiracy theory (for now…)
Thor Albro
1 year ago
With Fauci and Farrar it’s as if we asked Dr. Frankenstein to corral the monster he invented, but he denies having anything to do with it. It actually would make sense to have Dr. Frankenstein fix his own problem, but not if he thinks the villagers are too stupid to believe he had nothing to do with it; then it’s time for pitchforks, the stake and a bonfire.
Thor Albro
1 year ago
With Fauci and Farrar it’s as if we asked Dr. Frankenstein to corral the monster he invented, but he denies having anything to do with it. It actually would make sense to have Dr. Frankenstein fix his own problem, but not if he thinks the villagers are too stupid to believe he had nothing to do with it; then it’s time for pitchforks, the stake and a bonfire.
Rob N
1 year ago
So what can we do to make sure that:
1 These scum are kicked out of office and
2 Justice is visited upon them?
Rob N
1 year ago
So what can we do to make sure that:
1 These scum are kicked out of office and
2 Justice is visited upon them?
Rod McLaughlin
1 year ago
Brilliant. The only thing missing is the possibility that the establishment’s sea change is to do with a more aggressive stance toward China.This of course does not diminish the likelihood of a lab leak.
Isabel Oakshott: “Neither did the Foreign Office want to embarrass a Middle Eastern country for asking for 400 Covid jabs for members of its royal household, while the vaccine roll out was at an early stage here. But these countries are our allies – and the People’s Republic of China very definitely is not.”
Why? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/08/upsetting-china-governments-biggest-taboo-found-hard-way/
Rod McLaughlin
1 year ago
Brilliant. The only thing missing is the possibility that the establishment’s sea change is to do with a more aggressive stance toward China.This of course does not diminish the likelihood of a lab leak.
Isabel Oakshott: “Neither did the Foreign Office want to embarrass a Middle Eastern country for asking for 400 Covid jabs for members of its royal household, while the vaccine roll out was at an early stage here. But these countries are our allies – and the People’s Republic of China very definitely is not.”
Why? https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/08/upsetting-china-governments-biggest-taboo-found-hard-way/
Barbara Elsmore
1 year ago
‘Farrar also hosted a conference call on the first day of February 2022’
Dear Ian Birrell – there is an important date in this article that needs to be checked. According to a timeline put out by Epoch Times entitled Covid 19 Outbreak and Cover Up, the tele conference took place two whole years earlier than you state and was in fact held on 1 February 2020.
The Epoch Times, hmmmm. In the Alternative Fact Universe, it’s a shining star. But only there.
Barbara Elsmore
1 year ago
‘Farrar also hosted a conference call on the first day of February 2022’
Dear Ian Birrell – there is an important date in this article that needs to be checked. According to a timeline put out by Epoch Times entitled Covid 19 Outbreak and Cover Up, the tele conference took place two whole years earlier than you state and was in fact held on 1 February 2020.
While it is true that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, the inability after this much time and effort to find a plausible zoonotic host for Covid gives us compelling evidence of lab origin and human manipulation. It is not conclusive, but there is currently no alternative with any evidence at all in its favor.
Michael Layman
1 year ago
This excerpt sum it up regarding scientists,
“Regardless, their stupidity risks harming their profession through sinister efforts to crush free debate, a doctrine that lies at the root of scientific advancement. Sadly, all those journalists who failed to do their job of challenging powerful players and vested interests have also undermined my own profession again. This should provoke soul-searching, especially on the Left, over allowing partisanship to override fearless interrogation of important issues.”
No matter COVID origin; scientists, journalists and politicians failed us miserably and this is the real crime.
James Kirk
1 year ago
In round figures, on the internet 10% of the world caught it and 1% died, of or with it. In UK I remember commenting that we were outbreeding the virus. Our NHS and GPs are now accused of killing people either by not seeing them or not enquiring if the vaccines are worthy of investigation. We demand an inquiry but suspect it will be a whitewash. So why bother if half the population deny the verdict? Only when a new pandemic appears and ‘cry wolf’ occurs will we know how herd immunity plays in contrast. During the lockdowns the supermarkets were supplied and full, Amazon DPD and Fedex were busy and people, ignoring the ‘guidelines’ still travelled and met in secret. We barely locked down at all if containing the spread was the goal. More locked out than in.
“God is on our side, so the Matrix will not win.” Andrew Tate said it before you! So fear not, he has your back.
I
James Kirk
1 year ago
In round figures, on the internet 10% of the world caught it and 1% died, of or with it. In UK I remember commenting that we were outbreeding the virus. Our NHS and GPs are now accused of killing people either by not seeing them or not enquiring if the vaccines are worthy of investigation. We demand an inquiry but suspect it will be a whitewash. So why bother if half the population deny the verdict? Only when a new pandemic appears and ‘cry wolf’ occurs will we know how herd immunity plays in contrast. During the lockdowns the supermarkets were supplied and full, Amazon DPD and Fedex were busy and people, ignoring the ‘guidelines’ still travelled and met in secret. We barely locked down at all if containing the spread was the goal. More locked out than in.
Benjamin Greco
1 year ago
I find it astonishing that after more than a million people have died, we are arguing about who said what when about where the damn thing came from when no one really knows, and China isn’t going to let us find out.
It seems to me the arguments we are having about the origins of the pandemic as well as masking and lock downs are designed to simply create more partisan rancor when we should be trying to figure out how to handle the next pandemic.
Rest assured that all of the people arguing about masks and lock downs today will, when the next pandemic happens, when the emergency rooms are full and there aren’t enough ventilators to go around or enough PPE to protect healthcare workers and hundreds are dying every day, be slapping on masks, telling their employers they want to work from home, and standing in line for a needle jab.
I don’t understand why we have forgotten how scared everyone was before the vaccines, and how many were dying.
Instead of the bullsh*t we are arguing about we should be arguing about how to create a more a robust and resilient public health system to handle the next pandemic, about how to produce tests and vaccines faster and about how to save lives.
“I don’t understand why we have forgotten how scared everyone was before the vaccines, and how many were dying.”
Yes, I was scared and particularly so because my partner was dying of cancer during the first two years of the pandemic, and I didn’t want to infect her.
However, we now know that the vaccines were not very effective and that the majority of people who went to a hospital in the early days died because they were intubated or because they were put on Mizadolam, a respiratory suppressant.
We also now question (some did all along) why early treatment protocols were abandoned (to obtain the EUAs for the vaccines and Remedesivir, it is alleged). Many people who died early on may not have died. We also know that the people who died were at an age where flu might well have taken them out and that with the middle-aged, the biggest risk factor was obesity.
We didn’t know all that with certainty at the time, of course, but we abandoned the pre-pandemic planning that had agreed that masking and lockdowns would be ineffective.
The Lockdown Files are particularly revealing about some of the decisions made here.
“Instead of the bullsh*t we are arguing about we should be arguing about how to create a more a robust and resilient public health system to handle the next pandemic, about how to produce tests and vaccines faster and about how to save lives.”
Producing and testing vaccines faster is not compatible with safety, as we have learnt with the Covid vaccines.
The WHO has a plan for the next pandemic – they will make all decisions in future.
Sorry, but I do not think the things you claim ‘we know’ have in any way been proved. You need to convince us of them, not take them for granted and build on your assumptions.
And? Your article says that infection gives partial immunity, higher for earlier variants and below 50% temporarioly for omicron (roughly(. Which sounds pretty similar to what vaccines give. What has that got to do with any of Nik Jewell’s claims?
And? Your article says that infection gives partial immunity, higher for earlier variants and below 50% temporarioly for omicron (roughly(. Which sounds pretty similar to what vaccines give. What has that got to do with any of Nik Jewell’s claims?
I’m afraid I wouldn’t trust any of these Donkeys in our public health departments. They still recommend 400 iu for Vitamin D without even checking people’s levels. Peer reviews showed that people with high levels were better able to survive Covid and being a hormone was able to control the Body’s response to the virus. But still absolutely no word on this from the powers to be.
The Lancet article has some mildly interesting but irrelevant data about immunity caused by COVID infection (which no one ever disputed would happen). The Sciencedirect article seems like serious work and gives (by the authour’s own words) an *indication* that there *might* be an adverse even problem big enough to be serious and indicates the need for further studies since – as the authors say – this . work is unavoidably insufficient because of limited data. The rest of your links are a waste of time: the sources are so obviously biased that the only people who could trust the contents are those who are already convinced that vaccines are dangerous.
Sorry, but I do not think the things you claim ‘we know’ have in any way been proved. You need to convince us of them, not take them for granted and build on your assumptions.
I’m afraid I wouldn’t trust any of these Donkeys in our public health departments. They still recommend 400 iu for Vitamin D without even checking people’s levels. Peer reviews showed that people with high levels were better able to survive Covid and being a hormone was able to control the Body’s response to the virus. But still absolutely no word on this from the powers to be.
The Lancet article has some mildly interesting but irrelevant data about immunity caused by COVID infection (which no one ever disputed would happen). The Sciencedirect article seems like serious work and gives (by the authour’s own words) an *indication* that there *might* be an adverse even problem big enough to be serious and indicates the need for further studies since – as the authors say – this . work is unavoidably insufficient because of limited data. The rest of your links are a waste of time: the sources are so obviously biased that the only people who could trust the contents are those who are already convinced that vaccines are dangerous.
I wouldn’t ordinarily offer unsolicited advice but in the interest of the common good, allow me to suggest the next time you get scared (of a pandemic, a climate change, a far right terrorist conspiracy, or whatever other unseen boogeyman), take a deep breath and say a prayer until you’ve collected yourself, then gird your loins and face the situation rationally. What you ought not to do in a state of fear is make far-reaching decisions, such as to collaborate in drastic measures along the lines of suppression of our God-given rights, and mass participation in novel medical interventions such as wearing a funny mask and taking an unknown injection.
“Fear thou not; for I am with thee: be not dismayed; for I am thy God: I will strengthen thee; yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness.” -Isaiah 41:10
If I found myself in a small -plane and the pilot fell over dead, I would either get on the radio and try to land it myself, or grab whatever looked like a parachute and jump out – even though I had never done anything like it before and both are quite far-reaching decisions. What would you do – pray to God and wait for him to land you at your destination airport?
Your analogy assumes that getting COVID unvaccinated is complete riskless. That would obviously make vaccination unnecesary – but I do not share your assumption.
Your analogy assumes that getting COVID unvaccinated is complete riskless. That would obviously make vaccination unnecesary – but I do not share your assumption.
If I found myself in a small -plane and the pilot fell over dead, I would either get on the radio and try to land it myself, or grab whatever looked like a parachute and jump out – even though I had never done anything like it before and both are quite far-reaching decisions. What would you do – pray to God and wait for him to land you at your destination airport?
Thank you for the Atlantic link – a commendably even handed piece.
With you 100% in relation to future pandemic planning. However, I am not holding my breath on that one.
Not so. We should be concerned that the new WHO director engaged in suppresing scientific debate. We should be concerned that prominent scientists and government agencies stifled opinion. We should be concerned about journalists not willing to ask difficult questions. All these concerns will affect how we effectively respond to the next pandemic.
“I don’t understand why we have forgotten how scared everyone was before the vaccines, and how many were dying.”
Yes, I was scared and particularly so because my partner was dying of cancer during the first two years of the pandemic, and I didn’t want to infect her.
However, we now know that the vaccines were not very effective and that the majority of people who went to a hospital in the early days died because they were intubated or because they were put on Mizadolam, a respiratory suppressant.
We also now question (some did all along) why early treatment protocols were abandoned (to obtain the EUAs for the vaccines and Remedesivir, it is alleged). Many people who died early on may not have died. We also know that the people who died were at an age where flu might well have taken them out and that with the middle-aged, the biggest risk factor was obesity.
We didn’t know all that with certainty at the time, of course, but we abandoned the pre-pandemic planning that had agreed that masking and lockdowns would be ineffective.
The Lockdown Files are particularly revealing about some of the decisions made here.
“Instead of the bullsh*t we are arguing about we should be arguing about how to create a more a robust and resilient public health system to handle the next pandemic, about how to produce tests and vaccines faster and about how to save lives.”
Producing and testing vaccines faster is not compatible with safety, as we have learnt with the Covid vaccines.
The WHO has a plan for the next pandemic – they will make all decisions in future.
I wouldn’t ordinarily offer unsolicited advice but in the interest of the common good, allow me to suggest the next time you get scared (of a pandemic, a climate change, a far right terrorist conspiracy, or whatever other unseen boogeyman), take a deep breath and say a prayer until you’ve collected yourself, then gird your loins and face the situation rationally. What you ought not to do in a state of fear is make far-reaching decisions, such as to collaborate in drastic measures along the lines of suppression of our God-given rights, and mass participation in novel medical interventions such as wearing a funny mask and taking an unknown injection.
“Fear thou not; for I am with thee: be not dismayed; for I am thy God: I will strengthen thee; yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness.” -Isaiah 41:10
Thank you for the Atlantic link – a commendably even handed piece.
With you 100% in relation to future pandemic planning. However, I am not holding my breath on that one.
Not so. We should be concerned that the new WHO director engaged in suppresing scientific debate. We should be concerned that prominent scientists and government agencies stifled opinion. We should be concerned about journalists not willing to ask difficult questions. All these concerns will affect how we effectively respond to the next pandemic.
Benjamin Greco
1 year ago
I find it astonishing that after more than a million people have died, we are arguing about who said what when about where the damn thing came from when no one really knows, and China isn’t going to let us find out.
It seems to me the arguments we are having about the origins of the pandemic as well as masking and lock downs are designed to simply create more partisan rancor when we should be trying to figure out how to handle the next pandemic.
Rest assured that all of the people arguing about masks and lock downs today will, when the next pandemic happens, when the emergency rooms are full and there aren’t enough ventilators to go around or enough PPE to protect healthcare workers and hundreds are dying every day, be slapping on masks, telling their employers they want to work from home, and standing in line for a needle jab.
I don’t understand why we have forgotten how scared everyone was before the vaccines, and how many were dying.
Instead of the bullsh*t we are arguing about we should be arguing about how to create a more a robust and resilient public health system to handle the next pandemic, about how to produce tests and vaccines faster and about how to save lives.
The Wuhan virus was developed by the Clintons in a Washington pizzeria. The same pizzeria where they run a pedophile ring. That should make sense to Unherd readers….
I often wonder if Unherd commenters (who seem to be relatively small in number) broadly reflect the attitudes of the Unherd readership generally. It would be interesting to know how many subscribers there are. Anyway, I’m a Guardian reading, lefty, wokeflake, libtard remoaner, so you’re not alone here 🙂
I’ve wondered this as well; I do think that probably most are to the right of myself, probably a long way in that direction. I wouldn’t classify myself the way you do yourself, accept the lefty bit, but I no longer expect to agree on a raft of issues here, but that doesn’t stop me reading and commenting even if many of my posts disappear for some time or even forever (who knows why).
I welcome it, but I don’t think I’ve actually ever seen anyone use wokeflake to be honest. If you are doing it properly you will upset everyone, left and right. They both echo chamber. I’m not interested in echo chambers. It’s unherd. Not revert to the old herds.
I’ve wondered this as well; I do think that probably most are to the right of myself, probably a long way in that direction. I wouldn’t classify myself the way you do yourself, accept the lefty bit, but I no longer expect to agree on a raft of issues here, but that doesn’t stop me reading and commenting even if many of my posts disappear for some time or even forever (who knows why).
I welcome it, but I don’t think I’ve actually ever seen anyone use wokeflake to be honest. If you are doing it properly you will upset everyone, left and right. They both echo chamber. I’m not interested in echo chambers. It’s unherd. Not revert to the old herds.
What are you, the reactionary police?
I see you have not replied to my comment below.
Would you like to engage in a left wing conversation about any of the subjects I have mentioned? Since that was your complaint.
I’m very happy to tell you all about the one planet development scheme and why I want it rolled out in England. I can do that one for pages. I can do covid for pages too. And the no nato war thing. Pick a subject. Or are you just here to complain.
What are you, the reactionary police?
I see you have not replied to my comment below.
Would you like to engage in a left wing conversation about any of the subjects I have mentioned? Since that was your complaint.
I’m very happy to tell you all about the one planet development scheme and why I want it rolled out in England. I can do that one for pages. I can do covid for pages too. And the no nato war thing. Pick a subject. Or are you just here to complain.
I often wonder if Unherd commenters (who seem to be relatively small in number) broadly reflect the attitudes of the Unherd readership generally. It would be interesting to know how many subscribers there are. Anyway, I’m a Guardian reading, lefty, wokeflake, libtard remoaner, so you’re not alone here 🙂
Hey, not all of them. Some of these folks need professional help.
Danielle Treille
1 year ago
The Wuhan virus was developed by the Clintons in a Washington pizzeria. The same pizzeria where they run a pedophile ring. That should make sense to Unherd readers….
Danielle Treille
1 year ago
I subscribed to Unherd, hoping for some unbiased opinions on world /societal events. Boy, was I wrong. Unherd is so blatantly right-wing it is laughable. Talk about one-sided discussions… The only thing I regret is having wasted money on a yearly subscription which I will cancel at the first opportunity. PS The only opinions worth reading are those by Kathleen Stock!
I’m afraid that there are certain topics on UnHerd where only one view is preferred, and COVID is one of them, However, there are articles that are worth reading even if one disagrees with the theses, and it’s good to have one’s own views challenged sometimes, even though only people like Terry Eagleton and Julie Bindel and one or two others challenge those on the right. I would urge you not to leave precipitously, I’m being selfish here I need a little support, and to comment and be d*mned, accepting all the down votes.
I too recently subscribed to UnHerd, mainly because I don’t want to live in my own little echo chamber, and because the articles are generally well-written although I may disagree more often than not with the premise and argument. But this article has poked me in the ribs and made me take notice of how I have been perhaps naively consuming COVID-related scientific articles. I also admire Ian Birrell and assume that he has done his due diligence. So, I am for the better having read this and I will stay with UnHerd.
I too recently subscribed to UnHerd, mainly because I don’t want to live in my own little echo chamber, and because the articles are generally well-written although I may disagree more often than not with the premise and argument. But this article has poked me in the ribs and made me take notice of how I have been perhaps naively consuming COVID-related scientific articles. I also admire Ian Birrell and assume that he has done his due diligence. So, I am for the better having read this and I will stay with UnHerd.
You do have a point but I think it is worth sticking with Unherd for the information that is almost impossible to get anywhere else. I’m also not sure if Left and Right is a relevant designation these days.
OK, contribute a left wing opinion then. I’m not sure what’s right wing about this discussion anyway. Are you saying the left doesn’t want to know the true origins of the pandemic, or doesn’t care about scientists being caught lying?
I do to the first, but have so far found no satisfactory answers. As for the scientists caught lying: sheer intellectual laziness for/from those who are satisfied with swallowing simplistic explanations to a very complex issue.
I do to the first, but have so far found no satisfactory answers. As for the scientists caught lying: sheer intellectual laziness for/from those who are satisfied with swallowing simplistic explanations to a very complex issue.
Don’t be so sure. I am “right-wing”, I would call it radical libertarian, and I got lots of down votes in some of the discussions. If an interesting article comes along, there is usually quite a fierce debate going on. I sometimes prefer the debates to the articles.
I tend to think of Unherd as somewhat above left vs right, though more libertarian than authoritarian.
As noted by others, the origins of SARS-CoV-2 is primarily a scientific issue, not a political one. The cover-up is more of a political issue, but I don’t see that as left vs right either.
Yes there are bat reservoirs described in detail here :
Ecology, evolution and spillover of coronaviruses from batshttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-021-00652-2
and here :
Bat coronaviruses related to SARS-CoV-2 and infectious for human cellshttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04532-4
and here :
A strategy to assess spillover risk of bat SARS-related coronaviruses in Southeast Asiahttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31860-w
Unfortunately the SE Asian bat population has not been widely sampled – there are a huge number of them (they comprise about 40% of all mammals in that region) so lots of surprises in store, I am sure.
You are correct. Neither A nor B lineages which were the first ones to be fully typed from sick individuals in Wuhan have been found in any animal or bat, but you wouldn’t expect them to be – they had a different looking common ancestor and we have only the vaguest idea of what that common ancestor might look like and at the time the Chinese authorities cleared the Wuhan wet markets of all animals – any evidence destroyed.
Also, it took 20 years to fully elucidate the SARS 1 infectivity daisy chain.
As other people have mentioned here the origins of Sars Cov 2 are all conjecture for now and likely to stay that way given the lack of funding necessary to do a large enough sampling of the bat populations in SE Asia.
You are correct. Neither A nor B lineages which were the first ones to be fully typed from sick individuals in Wuhan have been found in any animal or bat, but you wouldn’t expect them to be – they had a different looking common ancestor and we have only the vaguest idea of what that common ancestor might look like and at the time the Chinese authorities cleared the Wuhan wet markets of all animals – any evidence destroyed.
Also, it took 20 years to fully elucidate the SARS 1 infectivity daisy chain.
As other people have mentioned here the origins of Sars Cov 2 are all conjecture for now and likely to stay that way given the lack of funding necessary to do a large enough sampling of the bat populations in SE Asia.
Yes there are bat reservoirs described in detail here :
Ecology, evolution and spillover of coronaviruses from batshttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-021-00652-2
and here :
Bat coronaviruses related to SARS-CoV-2 and infectious for human cellshttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04532-4
and here :
A strategy to assess spillover risk of bat SARS-related coronaviruses in Southeast Asiahttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31860-w
Unfortunately the SE Asian bat population has not been widely sampled – there are a huge number of them (they comprise about 40% of all mammals in that region) so lots of surprises in store, I am sure.
You will have missed all my anti war posts then. All the links I have shared from left wing anti war websites. I did not notice you interested in them? I shared the wsw the other day and highlighted the imprisonment of a left wing anti war activist, mentioned by Ray mcgovern. You must have missed me highlighting the damage sanctions are causing developing countries and sharing un speeches calling for peace and consideration of these developing economies. I didn’t notice you then either.
I did not notice you interested in the Welsh one planet development scheme or the left wing Pro green website I shared when I commented about that either. Do you even know what the one planet development scheme is?
There are plenty of anti war voices from the libertarian right. For me the Left usually wants more interventions be it in the economy, in most foreign policy or generally in the life of the individual.
Yeah again, I’m left right up down depends on the day and my mood and the subject. Point is, complaining there is no left wing stuff shared here is ridiculous because I know that’s not true.
Yeah again, I’m left right up down depends on the day and my mood and the subject. Point is, complaining there is no left wing stuff shared here is ridiculous because I know that’s not true.
There are plenty of anti war voices from the libertarian right. For me the Left usually wants more interventions be it in the economy, in most foreign policy or generally in the life of the individual.
I’m afraid that there are certain topics on UnHerd where only one view is preferred, and COVID is one of them, However, there are articles that are worth reading even if one disagrees with the theses, and it’s good to have one’s own views challenged sometimes, even though only people like Terry Eagleton and Julie Bindel and one or two others challenge those on the right. I would urge you not to leave precipitously, I’m being selfish here I need a little support, and to comment and be d*mned, accepting all the down votes.
You do have a point but I think it is worth sticking with Unherd for the information that is almost impossible to get anywhere else. I’m also not sure if Left and Right is a relevant designation these days.
OK, contribute a left wing opinion then. I’m not sure what’s right wing about this discussion anyway. Are you saying the left doesn’t want to know the true origins of the pandemic, or doesn’t care about scientists being caught lying?
Don’t be so sure. I am “right-wing”, I would call it radical libertarian, and I got lots of down votes in some of the discussions. If an interesting article comes along, there is usually quite a fierce debate going on. I sometimes prefer the debates to the articles.
I tend to think of Unherd as somewhat above left vs right, though more libertarian than authoritarian.
As noted by others, the origins of SARS-CoV-2 is primarily a scientific issue, not a political one. The cover-up is more of a political issue, but I don’t see that as left vs right either.
You will have missed all my anti war posts then. All the links I have shared from left wing anti war websites. I did not notice you interested in them? I shared the wsw the other day and highlighted the imprisonment of a left wing anti war activist, mentioned by Ray mcgovern. You must have missed me highlighting the damage sanctions are causing developing countries and sharing un speeches calling for peace and consideration of these developing economies. I didn’t notice you then either.
I did not notice you interested in the Welsh one planet development scheme or the left wing Pro green website I shared when I commented about that either. Do you even know what the one planet development scheme is?
There are certain subjects that bring out the herding tendencies of this audience. It’s quite ironic given the philosophy of the website.
Danielle Treille
1 year ago
I subscribed to Unherd, hoping for some unbiased opinions on world /societal events. Boy, was I wrong. Unherd is so blatantly right-wing it is laughable. Talk about one-sided discussions… The only thing I regret is having wasted money on a yearly subscription which I will cancel at the first opportunity. PS The only opinions worth reading are those by Kathleen Stock!
This article represents everything that journalism should be: open-minded, exacting, thorough and above all – at least as far as it’s possible to discern – independent.
Any UK government that signs up to unfettered liability to the dictates of the WHO under the likes of Farrar deserves to be condemned, as history surely will condemn.
One simple but chilling question stands out. Why – for what purpose – would scientists wish to bio-engineer a form of virus designed specifically to overcome our bodies defences? Perhaps some scientists among Unherd readers could put forward a valid research explanation.
And moreover: why would anyone trust the Chinese to carry out that programme?
The only plausible answer is, surely, weaponisation?
It is, unless someone can proffer a valid humanitarian rationale, e g. bio-defence. We know that toxins are produced for chemical weaponry, but they’re not contagious.
The possible argument was that, if all the major players were involved in the research and received the results, then no country would have an advantage.
Are you seriously suggesting that any research conducted in Chinese lab would be open to scrutiny and results available to all?
Come on, it is communist dictatorship we are taling about.
Are you seriously suggesting that any research conducted in Chinese lab would be open to scrutiny and results available to all?
Come on, it is communist dictatorship we are taling about.
One would only need to drop a test tube of it in Times Square or Oxford Circus in the tourist season…
But just like during the Cold War the real threat is stupidity/bureaucratic brain freeze/the madness of generals and scientists/Murphy’s Law. And politicians.
One would only have to drop a vial of it in Times Square…’ and what- lots of people would develop cold symptoms, a cough, aches and pains?
you are forgetting the official reaction to those ‘aches and pains’ and the ensuing economic damage
Keep in mind that millions of people have died from this “in progress” version, which was not optimized for lethality, but was merely the current level of progress to date.
you are forgetting the official reaction to those ‘aches and pains’ and the ensuing economic damage
Keep in mind that millions of people have died from this “in progress” version, which was not optimized for lethality, but was merely the current level of progress to date.
One would only have to drop a vial of it in Times Square…’ and what- lots of people would develop cold symptoms, a cough, aches and pains?
It is, unless someone can proffer a valid humanitarian rationale, e g. bio-defence. We know that toxins are produced for chemical weaponry, but they’re not contagious.
The possible argument was that, if all the major players were involved in the research and received the results, then no country would have an advantage.
One would only need to drop a test tube of it in Times Square or Oxford Circus in the tourist season…
But just like during the Cold War the real threat is stupidity/bureaucratic brain freeze/the madness of generals and scientists/Murphy’s Law. And politicians.
An excellent read! I think the immediate total shut down of the Wuhan population gave the game away! The meticulously researched ‘Viral – The Search for the Origin of Covid-19” (Alina Chan and Matt Ridley’) also makes a compelling case pointing to weaponisation.
Viral is an excellent read …
Viral is an excellent read …
Why? Essentially as I understand it. Develop a better bullet so you can develop a better bullet proof vest.
Fauci has said that if you you didn’t do GOF tests you couldn’t develop the flu vaccine.
Why China?
More bang for your buck.
Less regulation than US – probably not got go ahead in US (obviously rightly).
All configured to do in lab.
As I remember it the guy from Kings College (a specialist in this area) pointed out that just because they didn’t get the original funding doesn’t mean they didn’t do it. This happens all the time in such research. He also said ( this was several years back) that it was likely a lab leak because the virus had changed in a way that was very unlikely to have happened in the wild.
Would I trust China to do this testing ?
Obviously not – what sane person who cared anything about other people would?
If you recall the Wuhan Lab was built by the French who were keen to work with the Chinese on virus research but were quickly shown the door. So they were basically novices at working in high security labs. That they were found to be carrying out GOF in BS2 labs by people who were not fully qualified could have lead to the ultimate mistake. The lab assistants who fell ill could never be traced.
If you recall the Wuhan Lab was built by the French who were keen to work with the Chinese on virus research but were quickly shown the door. So they were basically novices at working in high security labs. That they were found to be carrying out GOF in BS2 labs by people who were not fully qualified could have lead to the ultimate mistake. The lab assistants who fell ill could never be traced.
GOF work is supposed to arrive at a vaccine before the created virus can leap from an animal host. Nicholas Wade reported that the GOF work was being done at a lessor safety level than recommended; thus, a possible leak. If science is allowed to dabble in such efforts, the highest possible safety level in certified facilities should be required.
The Wuhan lab had a number of issues related to poor / defective construction as well, such as problems with the ventilation system (rather important, given what they’re doing in there).
It was built by BioMérieux. Stéphane Bancel then skipped from that CEO gig, right over to running Moderna (a move that raised eyebrows, given he has no relevant experience in mRNA or even drug dev).
It is interesting how many of these players seem to fail upwards, and keep rotating around and reappearing in the story in different roles.
The Wuhan lab had a number of issues related to poor / defective construction as well, such as problems with the ventilation system (rather important, given what they’re doing in there).
It was built by BioMérieux. Stéphane Bancel then skipped from that CEO gig, right over to running Moderna (a move that raised eyebrows, given he has no relevant experience in mRNA or even drug dev).
It is interesting how many of these players seem to fail upwards, and keep rotating around and reappearing in the story in different roles.
For selling vaccines?
The Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences =
Porton Down. QED?
Charles. Your point is?
Prototype Biological weapon……negligent discharge.
That is the kind of argument that would make me prefer Farrar and Danczig, lies, suppression of the truth, and all included. COVID would clearly make a totally useless biological weapon, since you can neither control it nor stop ists spread – as we have clearly seen. Like all the blather about the ‘Chinsese Flu’ and the ‘Wuhan Virus’, that the Orange Man indulged in, it just uses a serious wordwide health emergency as a handy excuse for China-bashing and firing up the base. It is still true that the lab origin seems to be about 50:50 on current evidence, and that it was wrong to claim we knew otherwise, but you could almost understand how people might think it was better to quash that discussion and get on with dealing with the emergency, rather than indulge in starting a mutual blame game.
Why do you claim that covid virus lab origin is only 50:50?
There is zero evidence that it was transmitted by bats to some animals and then to humans.
So, the other 50% of your covid origin theory is what exactly?
AFAIAC there is not really any hard evidence either way. And the more extraordinary the claim (and the consequences of adopting it), the more you need hard evidence. The default assumption would be the natural origin, since that kind of thing has happened repeatedly. The existence of the virus center in Wuhan working on bat virus, and there being some people in the scientific world interested in gain-of-function research means there is a plausible route also here, but that does not prove it actually happened, only that it might have. Of the several attempts to show that the virus does not ‘look natural’, only one seems to have stood up, the one about the distribution of enzyme cleavage sites through the virus genome. And it is hard to be sure what the probability is of *something* fishy-looking being found in a random virus genome when many people are eagerly searching for it. Anyway, a very large fraction of the scientific world firmly believe in the natural origin. The US intelligence agencies, collectively got it right – some believe in one hypothesis, some in the other, none of them is particularly certain either way. For the scientific world both hypotheses seem to be viable. That is a lot of smart people in both fields, knowing more than I do, who could not to to a clear decision. The only way I can see to certainty would be if you jump to a conclusion, and arbitrarily decide that all those who disagree with you are part (or dupes) of a conspiracy. And I, for one, am not jumping on that wagon.
Well said. It’s a very good article with a lot of balance about the truth of the origins. Where it fails is absolutely condemning those who theorized “natural”. The science and investigation is still on-going. We will probably never know for certain. At the time, tensions were high. The “truth” of its source was not the highest priority. It was handling it regardless of origin. Many in the world of politics were looking to bash China using the “science” when the science was and remains inconclusive.
Great article – very poor and unsupported conclusions.
Exactly!
Exactly!
But that is precisely the wagon that those scientists, physicians, health officials and others jumped on when they ridiculed and/or demonized scientists who supported the lab leak theory and journalists who wanted to investigate rather than blindly accept the word from on high.
Well said. It’s a very good article with a lot of balance about the truth of the origins. Where it fails is absolutely condemning those who theorized “natural”. The science and investigation is still on-going. We will probably never know for certain. At the time, tensions were high. The “truth” of its source was not the highest priority. It was handling it regardless of origin. Many in the world of politics were looking to bash China using the “science” when the science was and remains inconclusive.
Great article – very poor and unsupported conclusions.
But that is precisely the wagon that those scientists, physicians, health officials and others jumped on when they ridiculed and/or demonized scientists who supported the lab leak theory and journalists who wanted to investigate rather than blindly accept the word from on high.
AFAIAC there is not really any hard evidence either way. And the more extraordinary the claim (and the consequences of adopting it), the more you need hard evidence. The default assumption would be the natural origin, since that kind of thing has happened repeatedly. The existence of the virus center in Wuhan working on bat virus, and there being some people in the scientific world interested in gain-of-function research means there is a plausible route also here, but that does not prove it actually happened, only that it might have. Of the several attempts to show that the virus does not ‘look natural’, only one seems to have stood up, the one about the distribution of enzyme cleavage sites through the virus genome. And it is hard to be sure what the probability is of *something* fishy-looking being found in a random virus genome when many people are eagerly searching for it. Anyway, a very large fraction of the scientific world firmly believe in the natural origin. The US intelligence agencies, collectively got it right – some believe in one hypothesis, some in the other, none of them is particularly certain either way. For the scientific world both hypotheses seem to be viable. That is a lot of smart people in both fields, knowing more than I do, who could not to to a clear decision. The only way I can see to certainty would be if you jump to a conclusion, and arbitrarily decide that all those who disagree with you are part (or dupes) of a conspiracy. And I, for one, am not jumping on that wagon.
Why? Because it might ‘scare the pants off’ everyone?
Define “everyone”.
Define “everyone”.
I’m not sure quashing discussion gets better solutions
Which is exactly what Unherders do to the “un-enlightened”….
Danielle, your indiscriminate use of the term “Unherders” says far more about certain limitations on the part of someone using that term than it does about the diverse contributors to Comments.
There are very many intelligent, worthwhile and often original contributions from across the political spectrum, plus from those with no particular affiliation but expertise in their respective fields.
You’re more than welcome to try to refute any of the Comments – we’re a pretty robust bunch in general – but simply throwing insults around is a waste of your time.
Not a waste, judging by your reaction. And insults, only when they come from the “other” side. So just keep trying to shut me up. Bonne chance.
I’m suggesting you try to reply to Comments you disagree with by explaining your own perspective. That’s the very opposite of “trying to shut you up”.
I’m suggesting you try to reply to Comments you disagree with by explaining your own perspective. That’s the very opposite of “trying to shut you up”.
The restraint and precision in your choice of words was a thing of wonder!
Thank you for making that point so well.
Not a waste, judging by your reaction. And insults, only when they come from the “other” side. So just keep trying to shut me up. Bonne chance.
The restraint and precision in your choice of words was a thing of wonder!
Thank you for making that point so well.
Danielle, your indiscriminate use of the term “Unherders” says far more about certain limitations on the part of someone using that term than it does about the diverse contributors to Comments.
There are very many intelligent, worthwhile and often original contributions from across the political spectrum, plus from those with no particular affiliation but expertise in their respective fields.
You’re more than welcome to try to refute any of the Comments – we’re a pretty robust bunch in general – but simply throwing insults around is a waste of your time.
Which is exactly what Unherders do to the “un-enlightened”….
There are always excuses for hiding the truth, some better than others, but none nearly as good as simply knowing the truth.
Why do you claim that covid virus lab origin is only 50:50?
There is zero evidence that it was transmitted by bats to some animals and then to humans.
So, the other 50% of your covid origin theory is what exactly?
Why? Because it might ‘scare the pants off’ everyone?
I’m not sure quashing discussion gets better solutions
There are always excuses for hiding the truth, some better than others, but none nearly as good as simply knowing the truth.
I agree. The Chinese just hadn’t developed the antidote or learnt how to control its mutation, otherwise it is the perfect biological weapon: crippling to the economy and polity of ‘enemy’ nations but not so deadly as to be world-ending. Like all such Weapons of Mass Destruction, the wound effect is more devastating than a KIA.
Unfortunately for the Chinese, it got out before they had the means in place to control it.
That is the kind of argument that would make me prefer Farrar and Danczig, lies, suppression of the truth, and all included. COVID would clearly make a totally useless biological weapon, since you can neither control it nor stop ists spread – as we have clearly seen. Like all the blather about the ‘Chinsese Flu’ and the ‘Wuhan Virus’, that the Orange Man indulged in, it just uses a serious wordwide health emergency as a handy excuse for China-bashing and firing up the base. It is still true that the lab origin seems to be about 50:50 on current evidence, and that it was wrong to claim we knew otherwise, but you could almost understand how people might think it was better to quash that discussion and get on with dealing with the emergency, rather than indulge in starting a mutual blame game.
I agree. The Chinese just hadn’t developed the antidote or learnt how to control its mutation, otherwise it is the perfect biological weapon: crippling to the economy and polity of ‘enemy’ nations but not so deadly as to be world-ending. Like all such Weapons of Mass Destruction, the wound effect is more devastating than a KIA.
Unfortunately for the Chinese, it got out before they had the means in place to control it.
Prototype Biological weapon……negligent discharge.
One in an urban centre containing more than a million people.
The other, in a very low population-density area within a facility under military control.
Ironically or even coincidentally not very far from the magnificent Cathedral City of Salisbury.
Years ago I was surprised that our ‘research facilities’ were NOT based in the rather ominously named plant at DOUNREAY at the very top of Caledonia.
Ironically or even coincidentally not very far from the magnificent Cathedral City of Salisbury.
Years ago I was surprised that our ‘research facilities’ were NOT based in the rather ominously named plant at DOUNREAY at the very top of Caledonia.
Charles. Your point is?
One in an urban centre containing more than a million people.
The other, in a very low population-density area within a facility under military control.
As for the “why” – scientists have great trouble asking the question WHETHER something should be done; if it’s possible, the scientific imperative is to do it.
You can see this in the testimony of the Nazi doctors justifying their horrific experiments: Scientific knowledge ranks higher than human life. This is a problem medicine has grappled with since at least the Middle Ages, and is a key reason why the Nuremberg Code explicitly sets out the opposite position.
The question of “whether” is not raised in STEM education. You need the humanities for that. Stop teaching the humanities, and we’ll lose just that.
Great point.
Clemenceau said that war is too important to be left to the generals. Gain of function research is too important to be left to the virologists. As we have seen, to our cost – nearly 7 million dead.
Sadly, this is exactly what is happening
Great point.
Clemenceau said that war is too important to be left to the generals. Gain of function research is too important to be left to the virologists. As we have seen, to our cost – nearly 7 million dead.
Sadly, this is exactly what is happening
The Chinese Government was trusted to carry out the programme because they have less concern for their own environment and for their own people. The fallacy in the position of people such as Fauci who collaborated with the Chinese Government is that the escaped virus spread globally. Presumably these people thought that any escape of a virus could be controlled.
Actually, it’s because only China has the right monkeys and mice to experiment on. The animal rights activists in the West are the cause of that, and Covid is the unintended consequence.
Classic SARS CoV was more deadly than SARS CoV 2 but had poor transmission and so was controlled. The cleavage site that should not have been there for this supposed Zoonotic virus overcome that problem. The closest coronavirus with a cleavage site had only 39% identity to SARS CoV2. And these eminent scientists have yet to understand how it got there except to say it definitely didn’t come from a Lab.
Actually, it’s because only China has the right monkeys and mice to experiment on. The animal rights activists in the West are the cause of that, and Covid is the unintended consequence.
Classic SARS CoV was more deadly than SARS CoV 2 but had poor transmission and so was controlled. The cleavage site that should not have been there for this supposed Zoonotic virus overcome that problem. The closest coronavirus with a cleavage site had only 39% identity to SARS CoV2. And these eminent scientists have yet to understand how it got there except to say it definitely didn’t come from a Lab.
Why China? Because they now have a practical monopoly on animal based research.
Thanks, that’s an important point, along with others made.
Thanks, that’s an important point, along with others made.
In 2020 Fauci and Collins suppressed the Great Barrington Declaration, a prospectus for how to respond to Covid. It recommended targeted care and support for the vulnerable (obese, compromised immune, fragile), and advocated that the rest of us should go on with our lives, keep the lights on. It turns out the pandemic was more of a panic demic–fueled by Fauci’s single minded desire to enrich big pharma by insisting that vaccines were the only sensible approach. We now know he was lying and self serving.
Covid disinformation, fueled by in-the-toilet, servile media panic, was the dress rehearsal for crowd control–for compelling frightened surrender to the lies. This surrender helped pave the way for the current wave of disinformation regarding NATO’s, and America’s provocation of Putin, all in the interest of empire. And as with Covid, we see many here and elsewhere spouting those lies fed to them by a media that is no longer interested in bringing truth to power. Truly, the West is busy destroying itself as we speak, and much of this can be traced back to the Covid overkill.
A final note. Covid was a disease, an affliction like a flu. It sweeps away the vulnerable, but over 90% of those who caught it experience mild symptoms. The danger it presented did not justify masks, shutdowns and all the rest.
Fauci was trying to keep from being prosecuted and executed for his crimes. He had enough money.
“Ultimately, much of the media ended up presenting a collective idea that there was settled consensus, sweeping aside the voices of bravely-dissenting scientists.”
Exactly as they are now doing with the ‘climate emergency’. The playbook is identical. Not just the Guardian and the BBC, the worst offenders, but the entire MSM are complicit in this conspiracy of silence to stifle debate and impose a single narrative on a (for the most part) blissfully supine populace. What will it take for people to wake up and smell the coffee?
I agree with that. Glad you didn’t include Ukraine, which is an entirely separate issue.
Yes, Ukraine is a different issue. No dissenting scientific voices to suppress, just a complete absence of historical context while bleating on about Putin’s ‘unprovoked’ invasion.
Yes, Ukraine is a different issue. No dissenting scientific voices to suppress, just a complete absence of historical context while bleating on about Putin’s ‘unprovoked’ invasion.
I suspect many people are aware of questions surrounding the climate hypothesis, but feel they don’t have enough knowledge or verbal dexterity to refute the argument. They will also have watched from afar, the pile-ons, the ridicule and the vitriol aimed at those brave enough to stick their heads up.
So they stay quiet, but that doesn’t mean they agree.
I agree with that. Glad you didn’t include Ukraine, which is an entirely separate issue.
I suspect many people are aware of questions surrounding the climate hypothesis, but feel they don’t have enough knowledge or verbal dexterity to refute the argument. They will also have watched from afar, the pile-ons, the ridicule and the vitriol aimed at those brave enough to stick their heads up.
So they stay quiet, but that doesn’t mean they agree.
It seems Covid also inflamed a lot of brains, sweeping away their capacity for rational thinking.
I’m guessing all those upvoting this comment skimmed over the nonsense about NATO causing Putin’s unprovoked (and badly miscalculated) war. At least I hope so.
Yes, I upvoted it and no, I didn’t overlook the comments about NATO’s shameful behaviour. One can think what one wants about that issue, but the lack of historical context in the media does not allow readers the chance to make up their own minds.
Yes, I upvoted it and no, I didn’t overlook the comments about NATO’s shameful behaviour. One can think what one wants about that issue, but the lack of historical context in the media does not allow readers the chance to make up their own minds.
Fauci was trying to keep from being prosecuted and executed for his crimes. He had enough money.
“Ultimately, much of the media ended up presenting a collective idea that there was settled consensus, sweeping aside the voices of bravely-dissenting scientists.”
Exactly as they are now doing with the ‘climate emergency’. The playbook is identical. Not just the Guardian and the BBC, the worst offenders, but the entire MSM are complicit in this conspiracy of silence to stifle debate and impose a single narrative on a (for the most part) blissfully supine populace. What will it take for people to wake up and smell the coffee?
It seems Covid also inflamed a lot of brains, sweeping away their capacity for rational thinking.
I’m guessing all those upvoting this comment skimmed over the nonsense about NATO causing Putin’s unprovoked (and badly miscalculated) war. At least I hope so.
V much agree. Excellent article.
As regards was it part of a deliberate biological ‘weaponisation’ strategy, we just don’t know. Might possibly be some free-lancing, unchecked scientists in that lab but CCP tentacles run deep so wouldn’t they have known and tacitly approved?
One suspects the reluctance to state it was a distinct possibility part of the embedded western Group-think that has wanted to believe the CCP is/was not as malign a force as it is. We are now awakening at apace over so many domains of western life. Let us hope it is not too late.
The lack of transparency is most acute as regards the CCP and the blanket resistance to a proper investigation. Farrar et al do now seem compromised but the bigger demon here must be seen as the CCP.
The explanation I read somewhere is that by creating a more dangerous virus the researchers could then find a way to kill that virus, and that way could also be used to kill less dangerous viruses. The great danger in this approach is that they may create a very dangerous virus and not find a way to kill it, especially risky if the virus escaped from the lab.
Much is said about the Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli but the American Ralph Baric was also heavily involved in Gain of function research even more so I would say. Here in an interview he talks about his Gain of Function work and their quest for super viruses.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/07/26/1030043/gain-of-function-research-coronavirus-ralph-baric-vaccines/
How many of you are also aware of the fact that virologists have been able to recreate the Avian flu virus of 1918 from permanently frozen people that died of the virus. Why? Because they wanted to understand why it was so lethal.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/reconstruction-1918-virus.html
Farrar and Fauci, Redfield and Collins have committed crimes against humanity. They should be treated as such.
Bring back the guillotine; off with their heads!
Bring back the guillotine; off with their heads!
Chinese and Americans
So that thy know what to look for (as part of general genomic surveillance of possible pathogens) in terms of genomic sequences that may produce a potentially harmful pathogen for animals that we use for food or for ourselves.
This is the main purpose of what is called “gain of function research “. It’s an early warning system for the next pandemic.
Like an asteroid watch.
Thanks for this, and to others who’ve added to the understanding of a layperson with regard to the methodologies employed by virologists.
Greater clarity is never wasted.
Isn’t the genome sequencing and monitoring of potentially dangerous viruses, sensible as that is, a very different thing to active gain of function research?
Personally I think the term “gain of function research” is a very unforutnate term given all the baggage it has acquired over the last 3 years.
For a better understanding of what this research is for and the benefits that accrue one would be better off reading :
Virology under the Microscope—a Call for Rational Discourse Jan 2023
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jvi.00089-23
Everything from pepped up oncolytic viruses, to faster computers using improved electrical conductance facilitated by an engineered M13 bacteriophage to increased nitrogen fixation by plants using a manipulated Klebsiella etc…etc.
All of these are “gain of function”
Also, as this paper points out, “Gain-of-function research with pathogens of pandemic potential established that avian influenza viruses have the capacity to acquire mammalian transmissibility and that bat-associated coronaviruses posed a danger to humans, years before COVID-19”
Generally I am quite proud when I find that I have said things similar to you, because you are so much better informed than I am. But this article is not convincing. It could be summarised as ‘We are the authorities, and we say that virology is a good thing, so leave us to do our work in peace’. Which may be true, but which does not address the actual problems.
When people say ‘gain-of-function research’ what they actually mean is engineering particularly dangerous pathogens for research purposes. Possibly the term technically includes using phages to improve electricity transmission in computers (etc.) and surely that is a ‘good thing’ – but it is irrelevant because that is not what people are (quite understandably) worried about. In effect it is a strawman argument.
Similarly, it is beside the point to give the long list of formal safeguards and permissions required to make certain virology experiments in the US. What people actually worry about is not whether there is a safety bureaucracy in place, but whether the scientists (and bureaucrats) involved are getting it right and respecting the necessary precautions, or whether they just pay lip service and try to find a way to get around the rules and do what they feel they should be doing. In particular, boasting of US safety protocols is not a good answer to those who claim that US researchers may deliberately have promoted – and funded – research in China exactly because that made it possible to do research that was not allowed under US rules.
The paper concludes that “Regulations that are redundant with current practice or overly cumbersome will lead to unwarranted constraints on pandemic preparation and response and could leave humanity more vulnerable to future disease outbreaks.” In itself that is a platitude. But it rather translates as ‘We are already being sufficiently careful on our own initiative, and you had better not limit our freedom to work, because that will lose you the very important fruits of our research’. Which may very well be true, but the problem is exactly that some people doubt whether the research community – or parts of it – has its priorities right and can be trusted to make these decisions without more oversight. The paper is arguing for freedom to continue as before without actually addressing the real preoccupations this raises. That approach decreases trust, rather than increasing it. If they want to be trusted to continue – and quite likely that is the best thing to do – they would be better advised to take people’s worries seriously and address them directly.
Thanks for the sentiments of support. It does feel to me sometimes that UnHerd is a fact free zone.
I agree with you that the authors of this commentary are unashamed of their biases and that this almost rant is insensitive to some people’s current concerns about science in general and virology in particular but I can understand why they may have chosen to write this piece in this way.
I think that the phrase “gain of function research” was a useful and accurate descriptor before Covid (witness the examples they quote) but it has become terminally contaminated and I think that they possibly felt the need to push back with some force to counter what they view as a fundamental misunderstanding of what is going on.
I agree with you too, that there has been a collapse of trust in science (with big and little “s”) over the last 3 years and counter arguments couched in this way (stone cold facts) don’t do anything to make people feel better.
From personal experience and from what I have read over the last 3 years, I think the majority of research scientists are honest, ethical, questioning (they wouldn’t be doing science otherwise), and self reflective. Sensibly, this solid majority have kept out of the limelight. We don’t hear about them at all. No headlines. No clickbait. I think that the 156 scientists that have put their name to this commentary are a sample of this group – pretty clueless as to how to engage effectively with an anxious / frightened general populace but desperate to tell it how it is.
Personally I don’t have a trust problem with the science side of Covid – politicians and the WHO is another kettle of (stinking) fish. There are bad apples in all walks of life and I would probably place Peter Daszak and EcoAlliance in that barrel at the moment. As for Farrar, Fauci, Whitty, Vallance et al I think they did the best they could with the information they had at the time.
To my mind, right now, there is an acute shortage of good science communicators in the biological sciences.
I have no problem with the science side of COVID either, and I agree in your judgement of scientists, both in the mass and for the individuals you mention. What I do think could be a problem is that scientists are strongly biased against ever deciding that some promising line of research should *not* be carried out. It is not so much desire for fame and fortune – they share that with everybody else – but a genuine desire for improving human knowledge, coupled with a desire to prove themselves and win in the game they have dedicated their life to. Like the mountaneer said about Everest ‘ I want to climb it because it is there’. And, of course, if you do not do it, you risk that someone else will just do it instead of you, and get their name in the history books. Anyone who has ever written a grant application will also have a well-earned cynicism about official goals, and a habit of finding insincere ways to make it look like the things you want to do anyway for rather different reasons actually fulfil the goals of promoting SMEs, increasing diversity, or whatever.
Anecdote 1: The bioscientist, back when AIDS was an urgent (and well-financed) study subject who commented that of course we should be working on AIDS, but we should not forget that this was also an opportunity to do things that were good science.
Anecdote 2: The people who did the first test-tube babies amid considerable controversy – doing things that had not been possible on planet earth since God rested on the seventh day – but claimed as their only reason for doing this the desire to help poor women who could not have children. In the weakest language possible: I do not believe this was an accurate reflection of reality.
The article may well be understandable, but what would be more convincing, and calming, would be an accept in principle that maybe there could be experiments it was better not to do, a more specific evaluation of risks and rewards of particular experiment types, and a discussion of how we can make sure that people will actually abide by the rules set out rather than trying to circumvent them. That at least would show scientists who do not value their own freedom of action above the risk of creating man-made pandemics.
I have no problem with the science side of COVID either, and I agree in your judgement of scientists, both in the mass and for the individuals you mention. What I do think could be a problem is that scientists are strongly biased against ever deciding that some promising line of research should *not* be carried out. It is not so much desire for fame and fortune – they share that with everybody else – but a genuine desire for improving human knowledge, coupled with a desire to prove themselves and win in the game they have dedicated their life to. Like the mountaneer said about Everest ‘ I want to climb it because it is there’. And, of course, if you do not do it, you risk that someone else will just do it instead of you, and get their name in the history books. Anyone who has ever written a grant application will also have a well-earned cynicism about official goals, and a habit of finding insincere ways to make it look like the things you want to do anyway for rather different reasons actually fulfil the goals of promoting SMEs, increasing diversity, or whatever.
Anecdote 1: The bioscientist, back when AIDS was an urgent (and well-financed) study subject who commented that of course we should be working on AIDS, but we should not forget that this was also an opportunity to do things that were good science.
Anecdote 2: The people who did the first test-tube babies amid considerable controversy – doing things that had not been possible on planet earth since God rested on the seventh day – but claimed as their only reason for doing this the desire to help poor women who could not have children. In the weakest language possible: I do not believe this was an accurate reflection of reality.
The article may well be understandable, but what would be more convincing, and calming, would be an accept in principle that maybe there could be experiments it was better not to do, a more specific evaluation of risks and rewards of particular experiment types, and a discussion of how we can make sure that people will actually abide by the rules set out rather than trying to circumvent them. That at least would show scientists who do not value their own freedom of action above the risk of creating man-made pandemics.
Thanks for the sentiments of support. It does feel to me sometimes that UnHerd is a fact free zone.
I agree with you that the authors of this commentary are unashamed of their biases and that this almost rant is insensitive to some people’s current concerns about science in general and virology in particular but I can understand why they may have chosen to write this piece in this way.
I think that the phrase “gain of function research” was a useful and accurate descriptor before Covid (witness the examples they quote) but it has become terminally contaminated and I think that they possibly felt the need to push back with some force to counter what they view as a fundamental misunderstanding of what is going on.
I agree with you too, that there has been a collapse of trust in science (with big and little “s”) over the last 3 years and counter arguments couched in this way (stone cold facts) don’t do anything to make people feel better.
From personal experience and from what I have read over the last 3 years, I think the majority of research scientists are honest, ethical, questioning (they wouldn’t be doing science otherwise), and self reflective. Sensibly, this solid majority have kept out of the limelight. We don’t hear about them at all. No headlines. No clickbait. I think that the 156 scientists that have put their name to this commentary are a sample of this group – pretty clueless as to how to engage effectively with an anxious / frightened general populace but desperate to tell it how it is.
Personally I don’t have a trust problem with the science side of Covid – politicians and the WHO is another kettle of (stinking) fish. There are bad apples in all walks of life and I would probably place Peter Daszak and EcoAlliance in that barrel at the moment. As for Farrar, Fauci, Whitty, Vallance et al I think they did the best they could with the information they had at the time.
To my mind, right now, there is an acute shortage of good science communicators in the biological sciences.
Generally I am quite proud when I find that I have said things similar to you, because you are so much better informed than I am. But this article is not convincing. It could be summarised as ‘We are the authorities, and we say that virology is a good thing, so leave us to do our work in peace’. Which may be true, but which does not address the actual problems.
When people say ‘gain-of-function research’ what they actually mean is engineering particularly dangerous pathogens for research purposes. Possibly the term technically includes using phages to improve electricity transmission in computers (etc.) and surely that is a ‘good thing’ – but it is irrelevant because that is not what people are (quite understandably) worried about. In effect it is a strawman argument.
Similarly, it is beside the point to give the long list of formal safeguards and permissions required to make certain virology experiments in the US. What people actually worry about is not whether there is a safety bureaucracy in place, but whether the scientists (and bureaucrats) involved are getting it right and respecting the necessary precautions, or whether they just pay lip service and try to find a way to get around the rules and do what they feel they should be doing. In particular, boasting of US safety protocols is not a good answer to those who claim that US researchers may deliberately have promoted – and funded – research in China exactly because that made it possible to do research that was not allowed under US rules.
The paper concludes that “Regulations that are redundant with current practice or overly cumbersome will lead to unwarranted constraints on pandemic preparation and response and could leave humanity more vulnerable to future disease outbreaks.” In itself that is a platitude. But it rather translates as ‘We are already being sufficiently careful on our own initiative, and you had better not limit our freedom to work, because that will lose you the very important fruits of our research’. Which may very well be true, but the problem is exactly that some people doubt whether the research community – or parts of it – has its priorities right and can be trusted to make these decisions without more oversight. The paper is arguing for freedom to continue as before without actually addressing the real preoccupations this raises. That approach decreases trust, rather than increasing it. If they want to be trusted to continue – and quite likely that is the best thing to do – they would be better advised to take people’s worries seriously and address them directly.
Personally I think the term “gain of function research” is a very unforutnate term given all the baggage it has acquired over the last 3 years.
For a better understanding of what this research is for and the benefits that accrue one would be better off reading :
Virology under the Microscope—a Call for Rational Discourse Jan 2023
https://journals.asm.org/doi/10.1128/jvi.00089-23
Everything from pepped up oncolytic viruses, to faster computers using improved electrical conductance facilitated by an engineered M13 bacteriophage to increased nitrogen fixation by plants using a manipulated Klebsiella etc…etc.
All of these are “gain of function”
Also, as this paper points out, “Gain-of-function research with pathogens of pandemic potential established that avian influenza viruses have the capacity to acquire mammalian transmissibility and that bat-associated coronaviruses posed a danger to humans, years before COVID-19”
Thanks for this, and to others who’ve added to the understanding of a layperson with regard to the methodologies employed by virologists.
Greater clarity is never wasted.
Isn’t the genome sequencing and monitoring of potentially dangerous viruses, sensible as that is, a very different thing to active gain of function research?
It is now obvious that the total responsibility for this disaster lies 100% with the Chinese Communist Party.
China lied to its own people in January, claiming the virus was not infectious. Then it silenced doctors in Wuhan from telling the truth about the virus and pressurised the WHO into agreeing it was not a dangerous epidemic. Chinese Communist Party officials then ordered the destruction of laboratory samples, while insisting there was no contagion. (The Sunday Times Nov 15 2020).
Knowing all this it allowed thousands of Chinese to return after the New Year to work and study in Europe and elsewhere, thus unleashing a global epidemic.
Whether this virus was unleashed in China by accident or design, you have to ask yourselves this: Who profits?
The economies of the Western world have been seriously damaged, confidence in governments shaken, there’s social instability, health systems at breaking point in many countries and there have been millions of unavoidable deaths. And all without one bullet having been fired.
Sun Tzu the Chinese general, military strategist, author of The Art of War, would have been impressed.
The elites envision a world where only they get to travel, eat proper food, heat their homes, drive their cars and have children. They want an underclass as slaves. If the slaves continue to ‘over-breed’ and vote against the aims of the elite class, a deadly virus released into the masses will distract them from wanting democracy and freedom . That’s why they are researching such viruses. They will need an antidote for themselves thus the trials of new vaccines on the plebs.
The only plausible answer is, surely, weaponisation?
An excellent read! I think the immediate total shut down of the Wuhan population gave the game away! The meticulously researched ‘Viral – The Search for the Origin of Covid-19” (Alina Chan and Matt Ridley’) also makes a compelling case pointing to weaponisation.
Why? Essentially as I understand it. Develop a better bullet so you can develop a better bullet proof vest.
Fauci has said that if you you didn’t do GOF tests you couldn’t develop the flu vaccine.
Why China?
More bang for your buck.
Less regulation than US – probably not got go ahead in US (obviously rightly).
All configured to do in lab.
As I remember it the guy from Kings College (a specialist in this area) pointed out that just because they didn’t get the original funding doesn’t mean they didn’t do it. This happens all the time in such research. He also said ( this was several years back) that it was likely a lab leak because the virus had changed in a way that was very unlikely to have happened in the wild.
Would I trust China to do this testing ?
Obviously not – what sane person who cared anything about other people would?
GOF work is supposed to arrive at a vaccine before the created virus can leap from an animal host. Nicholas Wade reported that the GOF work was being done at a lessor safety level than recommended; thus, a possible leak. If science is allowed to dabble in such efforts, the highest possible safety level in certified facilities should be required.
For selling vaccines?
The Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences =
Porton Down. QED?
As for the “why” – scientists have great trouble asking the question WHETHER something should be done; if it’s possible, the scientific imperative is to do it.
You can see this in the testimony of the Nazi doctors justifying their horrific experiments: Scientific knowledge ranks higher than human life. This is a problem medicine has grappled with since at least the Middle Ages, and is a key reason why the Nuremberg Code explicitly sets out the opposite position.
The question of “whether” is not raised in STEM education. You need the humanities for that. Stop teaching the humanities, and we’ll lose just that.
The Chinese Government was trusted to carry out the programme because they have less concern for their own environment and for their own people. The fallacy in the position of people such as Fauci who collaborated with the Chinese Government is that the escaped virus spread globally. Presumably these people thought that any escape of a virus could be controlled.
Why China? Because they now have a practical monopoly on animal based research.
In 2020 Fauci and Collins suppressed the Great Barrington Declaration, a prospectus for how to respond to Covid. It recommended targeted care and support for the vulnerable (obese, compromised immune, fragile), and advocated that the rest of us should go on with our lives, keep the lights on. It turns out the pandemic was more of a panic demic–fueled by Fauci’s single minded desire to enrich big pharma by insisting that vaccines were the only sensible approach. We now know he was lying and self serving.
Covid disinformation, fueled by in-the-toilet, servile media panic, was the dress rehearsal for crowd control–for compelling frightened surrender to the lies. This surrender helped pave the way for the current wave of disinformation regarding NATO’s, and America’s provocation of Putin, all in the interest of empire. And as with Covid, we see many here and elsewhere spouting those lies fed to them by a media that is no longer interested in bringing truth to power. Truly, the West is busy destroying itself as we speak, and much of this can be traced back to the Covid overkill.
A final note. Covid was a disease, an affliction like a flu. It sweeps away the vulnerable, but over 90% of those who caught it experience mild symptoms. The danger it presented did not justify masks, shutdowns and all the rest.
V much agree. Excellent article.
As regards was it part of a deliberate biological ‘weaponisation’ strategy, we just don’t know. Might possibly be some free-lancing, unchecked scientists in that lab but CCP tentacles run deep so wouldn’t they have known and tacitly approved?
One suspects the reluctance to state it was a distinct possibility part of the embedded western Group-think that has wanted to believe the CCP is/was not as malign a force as it is. We are now awakening at apace over so many domains of western life. Let us hope it is not too late.
The lack of transparency is most acute as regards the CCP and the blanket resistance to a proper investigation. Farrar et al do now seem compromised but the bigger demon here must be seen as the CCP.
The explanation I read somewhere is that by creating a more dangerous virus the researchers could then find a way to kill that virus, and that way could also be used to kill less dangerous viruses. The great danger in this approach is that they may create a very dangerous virus and not find a way to kill it, especially risky if the virus escaped from the lab.
Much is said about the Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli but the American Ralph Baric was also heavily involved in Gain of function research even more so I would say. Here in an interview he talks about his Gain of Function work and their quest for super viruses.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/07/26/1030043/gain-of-function-research-coronavirus-ralph-baric-vaccines/
How many of you are also aware of the fact that virologists have been able to recreate the Avian flu virus of 1918 from permanently frozen people that died of the virus. Why? Because they wanted to understand why it was so lethal.
https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/reconstruction-1918-virus.html
Farrar and Fauci, Redfield and Collins have committed crimes against humanity. They should be treated as such.
Chinese and Americans
So that thy know what to look for (as part of general genomic surveillance of possible pathogens) in terms of genomic sequences that may produce a potentially harmful pathogen for animals that we use for food or for ourselves.
This is the main purpose of what is called “gain of function research “. It’s an early warning system for the next pandemic.
Like an asteroid watch.
It is now obvious that the total responsibility for this disaster lies 100% with the Chinese Communist Party.
China lied to its own people in January, claiming the virus was not infectious. Then it silenced doctors in Wuhan from telling the truth about the virus and pressurised the WHO into agreeing it was not a dangerous epidemic. Chinese Communist Party officials then ordered the destruction of laboratory samples, while insisting there was no contagion. (The Sunday Times Nov 15 2020).
Knowing all this it allowed thousands of Chinese to return after the New Year to work and study in Europe and elsewhere, thus unleashing a global epidemic.
Whether this virus was unleashed in China by accident or design, you have to ask yourselves this: Who profits?
The economies of the Western world have been seriously damaged, confidence in governments shaken, there’s social instability, health systems at breaking point in many countries and there have been millions of unavoidable deaths. And all without one bullet having been fired.
Sun Tzu the Chinese general, military strategist, author of The Art of War, would have been impressed.
The elites envision a world where only they get to travel, eat proper food, heat their homes, drive their cars and have children. They want an underclass as slaves. If the slaves continue to ‘over-breed’ and vote against the aims of the elite class, a deadly virus released into the masses will distract them from wanting democracy and freedom . That’s why they are researching such viruses. They will need an antidote for themselves thus the trials of new vaccines on the plebs.
This article represents everything that journalism should be: open-minded, exacting, thorough and above all – at least as far as it’s possible to discern – independent.
Any UK government that signs up to unfettered liability to the dictates of the WHO under the likes of Farrar deserves to be condemned, as history surely will condemn.
One simple but chilling question stands out. Why – for what purpose – would scientists wish to bio-engineer a form of virus designed specifically to overcome our bodies defences? Perhaps some scientists among Unherd readers could put forward a valid research explanation.
And moreover: why would anyone trust the Chinese to carry out that programme?
The tragedy is that none of these people, Farrar, Fauci and Collins will ever be held to account. Instead they are lauded with prizes and awards from august bodies such as the US National Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society. and what’s worse is that those august bodies are full on supportive of the regime that was imposed in the US and UK (lockdowns, masks, vaccine mandates, school closures, etc….)
Perhaps even worse is that half the population, at least in the US, and perhaps even in the UK, are still fully supportive of the Government’s actions vis a vis Covid.
Mind-boggling, isn’t it? Even in the face of all the evidence, there remain those convinced it was for the greater good, nothing sinister was occurring, and suspicion about government intentions is mad tin foil hattery. I raised a skeptical right eyebrow back in early 2020 when our weirdo neighbor was going house to house handing out masks she made from old bathing suits. Gahhhh! Never wore one in any form, didn’t lock down, didn’t get the shot, and – surprise! – didn’t get the d*mn Chinese flu.
Presumably you live in a fairly ‘civilised’ bit of the States Ms Barrows?
You would be correct, Sir. Moved from New England to Florida’s Gulf Coast at the height of the madness two years ago and haven’t looked back.
Excellent, I have an old friend who recently moved from near Seattle to Naples, Florida and loves it!
Very cool – and smart. We’re in a beautiful village just above Naples – itself a stunner of a city. Such a terrible shame that those of us who loved our former homes (my family had been in New England since 1634), had to leave because of disastrous mismanagement by political opportunists in the pay of ideologues.
If you visit your friend in Naples – and I strongly suggest you do – I have a few places on it’s gorgeous Fifth Avenue where we could meet for a drink!
Thank you so much, I shall remember that.
If it’s any comfort things are just as bad over at present.
However I sense things maybe changing. Ironically it maybe in Sweden where the ‘fight back’ begins.
Thank you so much, I shall remember that.
If it’s any comfort things are just as bad over at present.
However I sense things maybe changing. Ironically it maybe in Sweden where the ‘fight back’ begins.
Very cool – and smart. We’re in a beautiful village just above Naples – itself a stunner of a city. Such a terrible shame that those of us who loved our former homes (my family had been in New England since 1634), had to leave because of disastrous mismanagement by political opportunists in the pay of ideologues.
If you visit your friend in Naples – and I strongly suggest you do – I have a few places on it’s gorgeous Fifth Avenue where we could meet for a drink!
Well that explains that! I hear they add something to the water in Florida, which would explain the derangement syndrome affecting many Floridians.
You’re very welcome not to visit.
Been there, done that.
Swallowed the t-shirt?
Nope, didn’t drink the Kool-Aid either.
Your response, by way of a trite slogan, rather suggests your did (swallow the t-shirt).
Your response, by way of a trite slogan, rather suggests your did (swallow the t-shirt).
Nope, didn’t drink the Kool-Aid either.
Swallowed the t-shirt?
Been there, done that.
You’re very welcome not to visit.
Excellent, I have an old friend who recently moved from near Seattle to Naples, Florida and loves it!
Well that explains that! I hear they add something to the water in Florida, which would explain the derangement syndrome affecting many Floridians.
You would be correct, Sir. Moved from New England to Florida’s Gulf Coast at the height of the madness two years ago and haven’t looked back.
Presumably you live in a fairly ‘civilised’ bit of the States Ms Barrows?
And the same people who supported these actions are the ones demanding we grovel and apologize for every failure of government in the past.
“Perhaps even worse is that half the population, at least in the US, and perhaps even in the UK, are still fully supportive of the Government’s actions vis a vis Covid.”
Yes, absolutely terrifying, but at the same time somewhat satisfying to realise that at least 50% of Western Society are nothing less than worthless, verminous dross. It rather reinforces what BR said many years ago:- “Most people would rather die than think and MOST do!”
A bit savage on the verminous dross side today Mr Stanhope. That is half of society.
I like your rather die than think quote though.
Yes agreed, too much Merlot after a long day in ‘the field’!
Thought I’d antagonise you a bit, I’m on the gin. I know you like to exercise your freedom of speech. I appreciate that.
‘In vino veritas’ as the Ancients would say!
‘In vino veritas’ as the Ancients would say!
Thought I’d antagonise you a bit, I’m on the gin. I know you like to exercise your freedom of speech. I appreciate that.
Yes agreed, too much Merlot after a long day in ‘the field’!
A bit savage on the verminous dross side today Mr Stanhope. That is half of society.
I like your rather die than think quote though.
Mind-boggling, isn’t it? Even in the face of all the evidence, there remain those convinced it was for the greater good, nothing sinister was occurring, and suspicion about government intentions is mad tin foil hattery. I raised a skeptical right eyebrow back in early 2020 when our weirdo neighbor was going house to house handing out masks she made from old bathing suits. Gahhhh! Never wore one in any form, didn’t lock down, didn’t get the shot, and – surprise! – didn’t get the d*mn Chinese flu.
And the same people who supported these actions are the ones demanding we grovel and apologize for every failure of government in the past.
“Perhaps even worse is that half the population, at least in the US, and perhaps even in the UK, are still fully supportive of the Government’s actions vis a vis Covid.”
Yes, absolutely terrifying, but at the same time somewhat satisfying to realise that at least 50% of Western Society are nothing less than worthless, verminous dross. It rather reinforces what BR said many years ago:- “Most people would rather die than think and MOST do!”
The tragedy is that none of these people, Farrar, Fauci and Collins will ever be held to account. Instead they are lauded with prizes and awards from august bodies such as the US National Academy of Sciences and the Royal Society. and what’s worse is that those august bodies are full on supportive of the regime that was imposed in the US and UK (lockdowns, masks, vaccine mandates, school closures, etc….)
Perhaps even worse is that half the population, at least in the US, and perhaps even in the UK, are still fully supportive of the Government’s actions vis a vis Covid.
An absolute tour de force.
Brilliantly written.
Wish more journalists were like Ian Birrell.
An absolute tour de force.
Brilliantly written.
Wish more journalists were like Ian Birrell.
Farrar, at the head of WHO, this despot leading an unelected body which world governments have handed unprecedented power to? What could possibly go wrong? I am ashamed of my once most admired scientific body, Wellcome Trust, and terrified for the future. Somebody do something! Quick!
Farrar, at the head of WHO, this despot leading an unelected body which world governments have handed unprecedented power to? What could possibly go wrong? I am ashamed of my once most admired scientific body, Wellcome Trust, and terrified for the future. Somebody do something! Quick!
The Guardian abandoned impartiality in favour of ideology, long ago. It is the nearest equivalent to that old Soviet chestnut, that there is no truth in The Truth and no news in The News; The Guardian does not guard us.
Actually the joke was: there’s no truth in Izvestia (News) and no news in Pravda (Truth).
I read a Guardian article online from 2005 on libertarian bloggers. I’ve always found the paper, and its politics, risible but blimey! This piece was almost balanced. Readable. Well-written. 2005 is another planet as far as the Guardian is concerned.
Actually the joke was: there’s no truth in Izvestia (News) and no news in Pravda (Truth).
I read a Guardian article online from 2005 on libertarian bloggers. I’ve always found the paper, and its politics, risible but blimey! This piece was almost balanced. Readable. Well-written. 2005 is another planet as far as the Guardian is concerned.
The Guardian abandoned impartiality in favour of ideology, long ago. It is the nearest equivalent to that old Soviet chestnut, that there is no truth in The Truth and no news in The News; The Guardian does not guard us.
Paradigmatically panning out it seems to me is a science versus nature world in which the former will be said to protect us from the latter. Think agriculture (GMs, pesticides, lab meat), weather (geo engineering), health (natural immune systems overridden by a gene therapy platform) and accommodation (surveilled human settlement zones resembling ICU) and ‘out there’ a nightmarish world of germs and primitives that must get on with it. If so the new appointee to lead the science desk at the WHO makes every sense.
Paradigmatically panning out it seems to me is a science versus nature world in which the former will be said to protect us from the latter. Think agriculture (GMs, pesticides, lab meat), weather (geo engineering), health (natural immune systems overridden by a gene therapy platform) and accommodation (surveilled human settlement zones resembling ICU) and ‘out there’ a nightmarish world of germs and primitives that must get on with it. If so the new appointee to lead the science desk at the WHO makes every sense.
The incestuous relationship between the regime media, the technocrats and elected leaders is the biggest threat to democracy.
You forgot the lizard people…
Don’t be silly. There IS a very cushy relationship at the moment between governments, big tech, academe, NGOs and non-profits, and, most damningly, the media (which I worked in for 2 decades), that is pushing various agendas, withholding information and causing great harm. Noting that has nothing to do with Lizard People, David Icke or anything else. The media in particular is entirely corrupted and has abandoned its core mission of informing the public dispassionately with accurate, unbiased information.
People need to remember that Britain has by far the most diverse media in the Anglosphere. In Canada. Australia and even the US, the regime media are virtually all the same and share the same ideology.
People need to remember that Britain has by far the most diverse media in the Anglosphere. In Canada. Australia and even the US, the regime media are virtually all the same and share the same ideology.
Don’t be silly. There IS a very cushy relationship at the moment between governments, big tech, academe, NGOs and non-profits, and, most damningly, the media (which I worked in for 2 decades), that is pushing various agendas, withholding information and causing great harm. Noting that has nothing to do with Lizard People, David Icke or anything else. The media in particular is entirely corrupted and has abandoned its core mission of informing the public dispassionately with accurate, unbiased information.
You forgot the lizard people…
The incestuous relationship between the regime media, the technocrats and elected leaders is the biggest threat to democracy.
I didn’t bother to read the article, I mean, what’s the point? If you do not know the scene at this point you have basically slept through WWIII – although it has been, Is, 5th Generation warfare so no bombs. And then conducted against its own citizens and the world by social media, the education and entertainment industries, the pharma/Bio industry, the MSM & Social media, the CCP, Government Spook Agencies, government Deep State, the Uni-party Con and Labour parties, the King (deep WEF), the Health providers, and so on…
Anyway – Covid 19 is a Bio Weapon, as is the vax, come from Western secret Security Agencies, DOD, and the lizards like Gates, Schwab, Fink, Soros, WHO, IMF, and the evil head of the Welcome Trust (which is its self evil on line with the Bill and Melinda Gates eugenics council) and the CCP too… wow.. we are F__*ed
You lost, by the way. Soon the world will collapse into a horrendous depression – that being the point of all this (and the Ukraine war too). If you do not have your stash of gold, your 50 kg of rice and dried beans, couple crates of canned food, toilet paper, fire wood, and a butcher knife lashed on the end of a stick (defense, in the absence of a second amendment) then you have not been paying attention.
P.S. I am currently reading Churchill’s history of the English speaking peoples, and am on the Plantagenets…. Oh, how I wish they were on the throne. The traitors who have done this would get what they so justly deserve. What a pathetic Government we have! Biden, Boris, Sunak and the worms Hunt and Fauci…….and the rest – all of them almost – all dirty rats.
Having read your own opening line about not bothering to read the article, you’ll permit me the precious time saved in not bothering to read your repetitive blather.
I did the same!
I’m drawn to Bjorn’s apocalyptic vision and so read much truth in his cris de cœur. But I agree, he should take the trouble to read before commenting because survival will require more than dried beans, toilet paper and a butcher knife. We need first to find one another.
I’m here, and I’m armed.
Well you would be…
Well you would be…
I’m here, and I’m armed.
Blather can make for a good read.
I know where you’re coming from, but not the same read multiple times over.
I share views, of course, and since people like us are vastly outnumbered, vastly, by the herd, his “blather” merits frequent repeating.
He sounds like a programmed chatbot. Ticks all the boxes. Like all insane conspiracy theories, it contains the odd kernel of truth here and there. The style reminds me of Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea’s brilliant Illuminatus trilogy, but of course that was satire.
He sounds like a programmed chatbot. Ticks all the boxes. Like all insane conspiracy theories, it contains the odd kernel of truth here and there. The style reminds me of Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea’s brilliant Illuminatus trilogy, but of course that was satire.
There is a fine line, isn’t there?
I share views, of course, and since people like us are vastly outnumbered, vastly, by the herd, his “blather” merits frequent repeating.
There is a fine line, isn’t there?
I know where you’re coming from, but not the same read multiple times over.
I enjoy his almost eschatological doom-mongering and seek out his posts on each and every article. Within such angry replies tends to be something at least approaching an essential truth.
I did the same!
I’m drawn to Bjorn’s apocalyptic vision and so read much truth in his cris de cœur. But I agree, he should take the trouble to read before commenting because survival will require more than dried beans, toilet paper and a butcher knife. We need first to find one another.
Blather can make for a good read.
I enjoy his almost eschatological doom-mongering and seek out his posts on each and every article. Within such angry replies tends to be something at least approaching an essential truth.
I have long thought that Farrar is the worst of them. Somehow barbaric medieval punishment seems like an attractive option for him and his fellow crooks.
You could save Jeremy Clarkson lots of grief by becoming his PR rep.
Perhaps something along the lines of the following would be apposite?
“The 20th of the same month, a gallows and a scaffold being set up for the purpose in St. Giles his fieldes, where they were wont to meet, the first 7 were hanged thereon, cut down, their privities cut off, bowelled alive and seeing, and quartered”.*
I have always thought that expression “bowelled alive and SEEING” was of interest. O what happy days!
(*William Camden’s account of the execution of Babington & Co, 20th September, 1586 last.)
You could save Jeremy Clarkson lots of grief by becoming his PR rep.
Perhaps something along the lines of the following would be apposite?
“The 20th of the same month, a gallows and a scaffold being set up for the purpose in St. Giles his fieldes, where they were wont to meet, the first 7 were hanged thereon, cut down, their privities cut off, bowelled alive and seeing, and quartered”.*
I have always thought that expression “bowelled alive and SEEING” was of interest. O what happy days!
(*William Camden’s account of the execution of Babington & Co, 20th September, 1586 last.)
You forgot to mention the 5,000 rounds of ammunition in your ‘stash’.
Having read your own opening line about not bothering to read the article, you’ll permit me the precious time saved in not bothering to read your repetitive blather.
I have long thought that Farrar is the worst of them. Somehow barbaric medieval punishment seems like an attractive option for him and his fellow crooks.
You forgot to mention the 5,000 rounds of ammunition in your ‘stash’.
I didn’t bother to read the article, I mean, what’s the point? If you do not know the scene at this point you have basically slept through WWIII – although it has been, Is, 5th Generation warfare so no bombs. And then conducted against its own citizens and the world by social media, the education and entertainment industries, the pharma/Bio industry, the MSM & Social media, the CCP, Government Spook Agencies, government Deep State, the Uni-party Con and Labour parties, the King (deep WEF), the Health providers, and so on…
Anyway – Covid 19 is a Bio Weapon, as is the vax, come from Western secret Security Agencies, DOD, and the lizards like Gates, Schwab, Fink, Soros, WHO, IMF, and the evil head of the Welcome Trust (which is its self evil on line with the Bill and Melinda Gates eugenics council) and the CCP too… wow.. we are F__*ed
You lost, by the way. Soon the world will collapse into a horrendous depression – that being the point of all this (and the Ukraine war too). If you do not have your stash of gold, your 50 kg of rice and dried beans, couple crates of canned food, toilet paper, fire wood, and a butcher knife lashed on the end of a stick (defense, in the absence of a second amendment) then you have not been paying attention.
P.S. I am currently reading Churchill’s history of the English speaking peoples, and am on the Plantagenets…. Oh, how I wish they were on the throne. The traitors who have done this would get what they so justly deserve. What a pathetic Government we have! Biden, Boris, Sunak and the worms Hunt and Fauci…….and the rest – all of them almost – all dirty rats.
A really good thought provoking read.. I was wondering however, if there was a missing touch of irony with the quote “placing more faith in a brutally-repressive Chinese dictatorship than an elected US government.” ?
Is that the democratic government that was partially funding the research in the Chinese lab? Was that the democracy that is bribed with millions of dollars by big corporations- oops sorry not bribed – lobbied , and the same democracy that, led by Trump tried to storm their government buildings cos they didn’t get their way?
It is so true – journalism must hold the mirror to all aspects of society, in the post truth social media drip feed of drivel, thank goodness for Unherd.
A really good thought provoking read.. I was wondering however, if there was a missing touch of irony with the quote “placing more faith in a brutally-repressive Chinese dictatorship than an elected US government.” ?
Is that the democratic government that was partially funding the research in the Chinese lab? Was that the democracy that is bribed with millions of dollars by big corporations- oops sorry not bribed – lobbied , and the same democracy that, led by Trump tried to storm their government buildings cos they didn’t get their way?
It is so true – journalism must hold the mirror to all aspects of society, in the post truth social media drip feed of drivel, thank goodness for Unherd.
Good article. I’ve been meaning to write a review for my Substack of Farrar’s book, ‘Spike’, in light of all that has emerged since its publication. Farrar’s own account is, at best, ‘economic’ with the truth. What underlies all this, as he makes clear in the book, is that Farrrar is a fan of GoF research; let’s not expect that he will be influencing the WHO to exert pressure on governments to ban it.
Good article. I’ve been meaning to write a review for my Substack of Farrar’s book, ‘Spike’, in light of all that has emerged since its publication. Farrar’s own account is, at best, ‘economic’ with the truth. What underlies all this, as he makes clear in the book, is that Farrrar is a fan of GoF research; let’s not expect that he will be influencing the WHO to exert pressure on governments to ban it.
Thank you – I presume the subtitle referring to Farrar as a “supine scientist” was inserted by the editor? For your piece spells it out clearly – Farrar was anything but supine, he was, as you say, at the centre of the web, a perpetrator, not a bystander.
And as such he should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
The citizens of the world must demand a 21st Century Nuremberg Trial for all involved.
Raising my eyebrows and feeling a tad sorry for you…
Raising my eyebrows and feeling a tad sorry for you…
The citizens of the world must demand a 21st Century Nuremberg Trial for all involved.
And as such he should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Thank you – I presume the subtitle referring to Farrar as a “supine scientist” was inserted by the editor? For your piece spells it out clearly – Farrar was anything but supine, he was, as you say, at the centre of the web, a perpetrator, not a bystander.
No surprise MSM journalists were so supine. I can’t find one with any verified health qualifications, knowledge, experience, or expertise. It was journalism which enabled Wakefield and the MMR scandal. They’ve learned nothing. The same clueless over-opinionated little cabal, degree in EngLit or ‘journalism’, who once wrote a column in a provincial rag on the latest fad diet, and is now the health editor (or science, technology, defence, etc) editor of a broadsheet.
You should try Phil Hammond (MD in Private Eye) for some generally even handed and knowledgeable commentaries
so true.
You should try Phil Hammond (MD in Private Eye) for some generally even handed and knowledgeable commentaries
so true.
No surprise MSM journalists were so supine. I can’t find one with any verified health qualifications, knowledge, experience, or expertise. It was journalism which enabled Wakefield and the MMR scandal. They’ve learned nothing. The same clueless over-opinionated little cabal, degree in EngLit or ‘journalism’, who once wrote a column in a provincial rag on the latest fad diet, and is now the health editor (or science, technology, defence, etc) editor of a broadsheet.
By far your finest essay so far Mr Burrell, I thank you.
If you are found ‘hanging’ from say Blackfriars Bridge someday, we shall all know why!
By far your finest essay so far Mr Burrell, I thank you.
If you are found ‘hanging’ from say Blackfriars Bridge someday, we shall all know why!
Brilliant article, many thanks. A major source of funding for British universities is international students. There is an market for these students in which we compete with other English-speaking countries such as the USA and Australia, and, more recently, European countries offering courses taught in English. Around 19 percent of all students and 42 percent on full-time postgraduate courses are domiciled outwith the UK.
The biggest ‘donor’ country by far is China. The number of students from China comprises around a third of the non-UK domiciled total and is greater than the next three countries combined. As the well-worn proverb states, never bite the hand that feeds you.
“never bite the hand that feeds you” :-
Particularly if it is holding a Colt .45
“never bite the hand that feeds you” :-
Particularly if it is holding a Colt .45
Brilliant article, many thanks. A major source of funding for British universities is international students. There is an market for these students in which we compete with other English-speaking countries such as the USA and Australia, and, more recently, European countries offering courses taught in English. Around 19 percent of all students and 42 percent on full-time postgraduate courses are domiciled outwith the UK.
The biggest ‘donor’ country by far is China. The number of students from China comprises around a third of the non-UK domiciled total and is greater than the next three countries combined. As the well-worn proverb states, never bite the hand that feeds you.
Seems more likely that it’s because the Guardian is the journal of the public sector and academia. Everything about the lab leak theory – that it was possible at all, the behavior of the people involved etc – is absolutely damning towards public sector science. There’s just no way to blame any of this on corporations or conservatives when people like Farrer are so clearly of the left, so all they can do is try to attack anything other than natural origins.
Seems more likely that it’s because the Guardian is the journal of the public sector and academia. Everything about the lab leak theory – that it was possible at all, the behavior of the people involved etc – is absolutely damning towards public sector science. There’s just no way to blame any of this on corporations or conservatives when people like Farrer are so clearly of the left, so all they can do is try to attack anything other than natural origins.
These individuals will be viewed with the same opprobrium we today reserve for phrenologists and the quacks that electrocuted ‘hysterical’ women. The fact that they will not only get away with it scot free during our lifetimes, but will be actively rewarded, does not make the reckoning of history any less important.
These individuals will be viewed with the same opprobrium we today reserve for phrenologists and the quacks that electrocuted ‘hysterical’ women. The fact that they will not only get away with it scot free during our lifetimes, but will be actively rewarded, does not make the reckoning of history any less important.
This excellent article should be read in conjunction with Thomas Fazi’s article of 6th March titled ‘How WHO was Captured’. Given Farrar’s track record and his promotion to WHO – it is a considerable risk (alongside his great mate Richard Horton of The Lancet) to give WHO any further powers.
This excellent article should be read in conjunction with Thomas Fazi’s article of 6th March titled ‘How WHO was Captured’. Given Farrar’s track record and his promotion to WHO – it is a considerable risk (alongside his great mate Richard Horton of The Lancet) to give WHO any further powers.
The real sport that The Telegraph revelations have provided, is the fun of mocking the erstwhile lemming like Coronaphobes, who followed the government and super quack pied pipers of DDR like manipulative dishonesty, with an obsessive compliant desire…!!!
The real sport that The Telegraph revelations have provided, is the fun of mocking the erstwhile lemming like Coronaphobes, who followed the government and super quack pied pipers of DDR like manipulative dishonesty, with an obsessive compliant desire…!!!
Interesting in itself, but illustrative of the wider problem with politicised science and lack of investigation. Rather earlier than Covid, the UN took charge of climate science, the IPCC became the sole voice of truth, the media heralded its Heads (even non-scientific government appointees) as the greatest experts in the world, the BBC instigated a ban on non-believers, institutes of learning sacked heretics and Groupthink became the only acceptable form of “debate”. And corporations leaped on the renewables bandwagon. No history now exists before records began, even the records of countless paleo-scientists, just as the years of medical science and experience which might have been helpful (one would hope) have either been ignored or manipulated in the Covid scenario. Can we now believe any scientist who isn’t entirely self-funded and free of the political or other agendas of his masters?
Interesting in itself, but illustrative of the wider problem with politicised science and lack of investigation. Rather earlier than Covid, the UN took charge of climate science, the IPCC became the sole voice of truth, the media heralded its Heads (even non-scientific government appointees) as the greatest experts in the world, the BBC instigated a ban on non-believers, institutes of learning sacked heretics and Groupthink became the only acceptable form of “debate”. And corporations leaped on the renewables bandwagon. No history now exists before records began, even the records of countless paleo-scientists, just as the years of medical science and experience which might have been helpful (one would hope) have either been ignored or manipulated in the Covid scenario. Can we now believe any scientist who isn’t entirely self-funded and free of the political or other agendas of his masters?
I find it interesting that the Chinese government is now letting its citizens roam far and wide around the world but does not allow the rest of the world into China.
That, combined with a draconian lockdown, will no doubt keep its citizens even more terrified of stepping out of line and on stand by to bring the next virus to us. Job done. For now.
I read today that the threat of a flu lock down was announced in one of the Chinese cities. . Guess China tries to keep her citizens on their toes.Our Overlords probably already salivating at the thought of doing the same to us again. But this time I’ll risk going to prison by opposing any measure they announce.
Well they’ve locked down our birds in the UK because of the rise of Bird flu H5N1. Our creepy politicians must be salivating.
Well they’ve locked down our birds in the UK because of the rise of Bird flu H5N1. Our creepy politicians must be salivating.
I read today that the threat of a flu lock down was announced in one of the Chinese cities. . Guess China tries to keep her citizens on their toes.Our Overlords probably already salivating at the thought of doing the same to us again. But this time I’ll risk going to prison by opposing any measure they announce.
I find it interesting that the Chinese government is now letting its citizens roam far and wide around the world but does not allow the rest of the world into China.
That, combined with a draconian lockdown, will no doubt keep its citizens even more terrified of stepping out of line and on stand by to bring the next virus to us. Job done. For now.
“We are moving from an era of enlightenment to something darker.” It is called the Gaslightenment. Taking their cue from the CCP, leaders in science, government and media, engineered public perceptions for the benefit of their reputations, and to insure the continued flow of funding from governments – China’s in particular.
Would it be too cynical to suggest that Farrar received the top post at the WHO as a reward for having silenced any debate about the virus that might lead to an origin in a Chinese lab? One moreover that was funded by US government-supported bodies?
Too cynical, perhaps. Too un(wait for it… ) no not herd, hinged, for sure.
You write with such certainty, yet are entirely unsupported by evidence, argument or facts.
You write with such certainty, yet are entirely unsupported by evidence, argument or facts.
Too cynical, perhaps. Too un(wait for it… ) no not herd, hinged, for sure.
“We are moving from an era of enlightenment to something darker.” It is called the Gaslightenment. Taking their cue from the CCP, leaders in science, government and media, engineered public perceptions for the benefit of their reputations, and to insure the continued flow of funding from governments – China’s in particular.
Would it be too cynical to suggest that Farrar received the top post at the WHO as a reward for having silenced any debate about the virus that might lead to an origin in a Chinese lab? One moreover that was funded by US government-supported bodies?
Is it true that this spring a WHO proposal to give it total powder over the public health authorities of national governments will be debated and voted on?
Yes but unfortunately not by anybody you’d trust to act in your best interests.
I thought that that decision had already been made but TPTB at UNHQ and WHO were waiting for an opportune moment to inform all the national governments of the results of their votes.
The final draft will be debated this spring but ratification will be next year. In pandemic emergencies the WHO in accordance with The Global Pandemic Treaty will overrule the laws of participating sovereign states. The WHO get to decide and declare the pandemics. In other words, total global control. Hard to believe but true.
Absolutely crazy that sovereign nations would subjugate themselves to an unelected quango. Of course it will only be the so-called western democracies that are prepared to give up their freedoms. Don’t expect the likes of India and China to abide by anything the WHO declares.
Absolutely crazy that sovereign nations would subjugate themselves to an unelected quango. Of course it will only be the so-called western democracies that are prepared to give up their freedoms. Don’t expect the likes of India and China to abide by anything the WHO declares.
Yes but unfortunately not by anybody you’d trust to act in your best interests.
I thought that that decision had already been made but TPTB at UNHQ and WHO were waiting for an opportune moment to inform all the national governments of the results of their votes.
The final draft will be debated this spring but ratification will be next year. In pandemic emergencies the WHO in accordance with The Global Pandemic Treaty will overrule the laws of participating sovereign states. The WHO get to decide and declare the pandemics. In other words, total global control. Hard to believe but true.
Is it true that this spring a WHO proposal to give it total powder over the public health authorities of national governments will be debated and voted on?
Curious to write at length on this topic without mentioning Matt Ridley and Alina Chan’s book, in which detailed evidence reveals the high likelihood of a lab leak.
I would add the 2021 Nicholas Wade article in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists as important to mention too.
I would add the 2021 Nicholas Wade article in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists as important to mention too.
Curious to write at length on this topic without mentioning Matt Ridley and Alina Chan’s book, in which detailed evidence reveals the high likelihood of a lab leak.
I’ve heard all the arguments why the virus escaped from the lab, but I have yet to hear a cogent rationale for why it came from natural sources. Why?
I think the unclear issue is the evidence that the virus may have been circulating in September 2019.
Now that Congress has voted unanimously for Biden to be forced to release all intelligence about the origins (good account in the DT today), we may learn more. It cannot be ruled out a priori that it is of US lab origin (some have argued this since early 2020). Equally, it cannot be ruled out that if it was circulating earlier that it is zoonotic (the distance of Wuhan from the bat caves would be less telling).
I still think, though, that it is an accidental escape from WIV.
Actually, I think we probably can rule out the possibility of a natural origin – unless one considers it likely to have spread from a bat to a pangolin having promiscuous inter-special sex.
Actually, I think we probably can rule out the possibility of a natural origin – unless one considers it likely to have spread from a bat to a pangolin having promiscuous inter-special sex.
All previous viruses of concern for humans that we know about were zoonotic spillovers : HIV, Ebola, Smallpox, Zika, Polio, Hepatitis, MERS, SARS1 etc. etc. the one exception was an influenza lab escape I think sometime in the 70s (?)
SARS1 propagated via bats through the edible wild animal trade in China
There is a well established wild animal supply, farming and distribution network within China sourcing these animals from adjacent countries along the belt and road routes (notably Laos and Vietnam). Before SARS 1 this trade was worth the equivalent of millions of US dollars
In 2019 China suffered a swine flu epidemic and had to slaughter its entire pig population. This resulted in a shortage of animal protein- the slack was taken up by the somewhat curtailed but still existent wild animal trade. Wuhan was one of many market centres for this trade
There were 2 distinct strains of SarsCov2 circulating in Wuhan in December 2019. This implies that there were 2 separate lab accidents or 2 separate zoonotic spillovers or that a progenitor virus was circulating earlier in 2019. The source of such a progenitor could have been anywhere….literally
The furin cleavage site. The arguments around this are quite technical. Very briefly if this site was nefariously inserted it shows piss poor engineering :
1. It is out of frame meaning the chances of it being copied incorrectly as the virus replicates are higher than if the insertion was in its “proper “place on the RNA daisy chain
2. There are a couple of Prolines close by that potentially can b**ger up the cleavage process
3. The whole binding complex of the original virus was not optimised for humans. We know this because it has mutated and evolved over the last 3 years to become much more effective as a virus
Last but not least history tells us that nature in general and viruses in particular are much more resourceful and “clever” than any uppity virologist with world domination in view. HIV is probably the best current example of this (you know, the other ongoing pandemic)
There are several well-established examples of lethal diseases moving from animals to humans: AIDS, SARS, MERS. New influenza strains come from animals. It is the most obvious explanation, and it can take years to find and confirm the path of transmission (AIDS, MERS, …) – if you ever find it. The lab origin is also a plausible scenario, what with the virus research labs in Wuhan and all, but as far as I am aware all we really have is two plausible hypotheses and there is not much conclusive evidence for choosing one ove the other. Which is presumably why the US intelligence services collectively are about 50:50 on the question and give low, or at most medium, probablilty on their judgements.
And, Mr McNeish, it is well established that new flu strains come through viruses passing between ducks and pigs before they get to humans I would submit that interspecies sex may not be required.
I think the unclear issue is the evidence that the virus may have been circulating in September 2019.
Now that Congress has voted unanimously for Biden to be forced to release all intelligence about the origins (good account in the DT today), we may learn more. It cannot be ruled out a priori that it is of US lab origin (some have argued this since early 2020). Equally, it cannot be ruled out that if it was circulating earlier that it is zoonotic (the distance of Wuhan from the bat caves would be less telling).
I still think, though, that it is an accidental escape from WIV.
All previous viruses of concern for humans that we know about were zoonotic spillovers : HIV, Ebola, Smallpox, Zika, Polio, Hepatitis, MERS, SARS1 etc. etc. the one exception was an influenza lab escape I think sometime in the 70s (?)
SARS1 propagated via bats through the edible wild animal trade in China
There is a well established wild animal supply, farming and distribution network within China sourcing these animals from adjacent countries along the belt and road routes (notably Laos and Vietnam). Before SARS 1 this trade was worth the equivalent of millions of US dollars
In 2019 China suffered a swine flu epidemic and had to slaughter its entire pig population. This resulted in a shortage of animal protein- the slack was taken up by the somewhat curtailed but still existent wild animal trade. Wuhan was one of many market centres for this trade
There were 2 distinct strains of SarsCov2 circulating in Wuhan in December 2019. This implies that there were 2 separate lab accidents or 2 separate zoonotic spillovers or that a progenitor virus was circulating earlier in 2019. The source of such a progenitor could have been anywhere….literally
The furin cleavage site. The arguments around this are quite technical. Very briefly if this site was nefariously inserted it shows piss poor engineering :
1. It is out of frame meaning the chances of it being copied incorrectly as the virus replicates are higher than if the insertion was in its “proper “place on the RNA daisy chain
2. There are a couple of Prolines close by that potentially can b**ger up the cleavage process
3. The whole binding complex of the original virus was not optimised for humans. We know this because it has mutated and evolved over the last 3 years to become much more effective as a virus
Last but not least history tells us that nature in general and viruses in particular are much more resourceful and “clever” than any uppity virologist with world domination in view. HIV is probably the best current example of this (you know, the other ongoing pandemic)
There are several well-established examples of lethal diseases moving from animals to humans: AIDS, SARS, MERS. New influenza strains come from animals. It is the most obvious explanation, and it can take years to find and confirm the path of transmission (AIDS, MERS, …) – if you ever find it. The lab origin is also a plausible scenario, what with the virus research labs in Wuhan and all, but as far as I am aware all we really have is two plausible hypotheses and there is not much conclusive evidence for choosing one ove the other. Which is presumably why the US intelligence services collectively are about 50:50 on the question and give low, or at most medium, probablilty on their judgements.
And, Mr McNeish, it is well established that new flu strains come through viruses passing between ducks and pigs before they get to humans I would submit that interspecies sex may not be required.
I’ve heard all the arguments why the virus escaped from the lab, but I have yet to hear a cogent rationale for why it came from natural sources. Why?
Seems obvious that Farrar et al. will eventually be held to account. Seeing as the intelligence services are now coming out and saying they think lab leak is likely.
If the FBI and co think that and probably have for some time, then they will for sure be looking at those who deliberately suppressed it.
Impossible to escape from.
Imo, the FBI statement is part of America’s renewed push to make China enemy no 1. They’re influencing public opinion as they did in the pandemic.
Imo, the FBI statement is part of America’s renewed push to make China enemy no 1. They’re influencing public opinion as they did in the pandemic.
Seems obvious that Farrar et al. will eventually be held to account. Seeing as the intelligence services are now coming out and saying they think lab leak is likely.
If the FBI and co think that and probably have for some time, then they will for sure be looking at those who deliberately suppressed it.
Impossible to escape from.
No mention of Neil Ferguson? He seems the exemplar of careerist, politicised, self interested dysfunction. Failing up all the way.
No mention of Neil Ferguson? He seems the exemplar of careerist, politicised, self interested dysfunction. Failing up all the way.
Hypocrisy, dishonest, and propaganda to name but a few of the ‘evils’ of 21st Century politics and it now seems at least so business.
Hypocrisy, dishonest, and propaganda to name but a few of the ‘evils’ of 21st Century politics and it now seems at least so business.
Ultimately, the answer is simple: control. Facts, narrative, outcome, future, planning….power. Our world is all about international control now, at every level. Whatever it takes because the stakes so high. Nothing ends matters.
Ultimately, the answer is simple: control. Facts, narrative, outcome, future, planning….power. Our world is all about international control now, at every level. Whatever it takes because the stakes so high. Nothing ends matters.
Very good. But nothing about Daszak and Pentagon funding or Wuhan links to Moderna.
Very good. But nothing about Daszak and Pentagon funding or Wuhan links to Moderna.
It seems to me that we have two kinds of science. The first is the science that enables us to make things. The second is the new science that tells us about the future and what we should do. It is no better than the Roman soothsayers fiddling with animal entrails. The only difference is that the entrails have been replaced with computer models and an army of social media player who are too willing to believe nonsense.
Well, we must sacrifice so the rain will continue to fall on our corn. Virgins are a small price to pay…
Well, we must sacrifice so the rain will continue to fall on our corn. Virgins are a small price to pay…
It seems to me that we have two kinds of science. The first is the science that enables us to make things. The second is the new science that tells us about the future and what we should do. It is no better than the Roman soothsayers fiddling with animal entrails. The only difference is that the entrails have been replaced with computer models and an army of social media player who are too willing to believe nonsense.
As for the “why” – scientists have great trouble asking the question WHETHER something should be done; if it’s possible, the scientific imperative is to do it.
You can see this in the testimony of the Nazi doctors justifying their horrific experiments: Scientific knowledge ranks higher than human life. This is a problem medicine has grappled with since at least the Middle Ages, and is a key reason why the Nuremberg Code explicitly sets out the opposite position.
The question of “whether” is not raised in STEM education. You need the humanities for that. Stop teaching the humanities, and we’ll lose just that.
As for the “why” – scientists have great trouble asking the question WHETHER something should be done; if it’s possible, the scientific imperative is to do it.
You can see this in the testimony of the Nazi doctors justifying their horrific experiments: Scientific knowledge ranks higher than human life. This is a problem medicine has grappled with since at least the Middle Ages, and is a key reason why the Nuremberg Code explicitly sets out the opposite position.
The question of “whether” is not raised in STEM education. You need the humanities for that. Stop teaching the humanities, and we’ll lose just that.
We do know who made his career out of dodgy research with viruses – one Briton named Daszak. We also know who provided the money for the Covid dodgy research – 2 US citizens Collins and Fauci.
So, as far as I’m concerned, if the source of Covid was not some natural evolution of bat viruses, then 95%+ of the blame for the origins rest with that trio of evil charlatans.
Anyway, for me, much of the outrage in the UnHerd comments section is entirely misdirected.
Instead it should be directed towards the charlatans that told us that the mRNA clot shots were safe and effective. The fanatical medics effectively MANDATED billions of people to take the experimental (i.e. not fully tested) gene therapy.
Now, even the most fanatical medics pushing the clot shots accept that they don’t prevent people getting the virus and/or from passing it on.
Of course, when they found out that clot shots didn’t do what they claimed, the cover up had to begin and the lying started.
‘Well they prevent people from getting seriously ill and going into the ICU’.
For months during the latter half of 2021 and the first quarter of 2022 the terror campaign against the ‘unvaccinated’ continued while the obfuscation and lying propaganda went into overdrive.
Of course, now anybody with even the most timid of enquiring minds knows that the ICUs were jammers with triple jabbed patients.
Meanwhile, the numbers of adverse events associated with the clot shots rose exponentially.
So, we now know that the mRNA clot shots were largely untested and were neither effective or safe.
I know where my sense of outrage is directed.
We do know who made his career out of dodgy research with viruses – one Briton named Daszak. We also know who provided the money for the Covid dodgy research – 2 US citizens Collins and Fauci.
So, as far as I’m concerned, if the source of Covid was not some natural evolution of bat viruses, then 95%+ of the blame for the origins rest with that trio of evil charlatans.
Anyway, for me, much of the outrage in the UnHerd comments section is entirely misdirected.
Instead it should be directed towards the charlatans that told us that the mRNA clot shots were safe and effective. The fanatical medics effectively MANDATED billions of people to take the experimental (i.e. not fully tested) gene therapy.
Now, even the most fanatical medics pushing the clot shots accept that they don’t prevent people getting the virus and/or from passing it on.
Of course, when they found out that clot shots didn’t do what they claimed, the cover up had to begin and the lying started.
‘Well they prevent people from getting seriously ill and going into the ICU’.
For months during the latter half of 2021 and the first quarter of 2022 the terror campaign against the ‘unvaccinated’ continued while the obfuscation and lying propaganda went into overdrive.
Of course, now anybody with even the most timid of enquiring minds knows that the ICUs were jammers with triple jabbed patients.
Meanwhile, the numbers of adverse events associated with the clot shots rose exponentially.
So, we now know that the mRNA clot shots were largely untested and were neither effective or safe.
I know where my sense of outrage is directed.
The Russians and the Chinese have been at this ugly stuff for decades.
The Russians and the Chinese have been at this ugly stuff for decades.
Occam and his razor are often of help on these occasions.
Occam and his razor are often of help on these occasions.
There is no such thing as “the” science, let alone the climate alarmists’ mantra that “the science is settled”. All scientific knowledge is provisional until a better theory comes along, which is then tested to destruction by experiment.
SAGE was a disaster. Far too large, far too many pseudo scientists aka behavioural experts. And membership should have been conditional on accepting a self-denying ordinance on media appearances.
There is no such thing as “the” science, let alone the climate alarmists’ mantra that “the science is settled”. All scientific knowledge is provisional until a better theory comes along, which is then tested to destruction by experiment.
SAGE was a disaster. Far too large, far too many pseudo scientists aka behavioural experts. And membership should have been conditional on accepting a self-denying ordinance on media appearances.
Given that Covid cases appeared in the USA in autumn 2019 it has been suggested that activity at Fort Detrick might have been involved… only a conspiracy theory (for now…)
Give it six months . . .
The Americans are too cheap too manufacture anything in the west. A leak of something manufactured in China but funded by the Yanks makes more sense and has the greater evidence.
But the Americans did fund the complete reconstruction of the 1918 Avian flu.
But the Americans did fund the complete reconstruction of the 1918 Avian flu.
Detrick has been pushed heavily by the Chinese media, just so you know, you have to be careful what info you read on that, there is also a lot of propaganda and just b*llsh*t from the other side on that one. It’s impossible to say where it came from, but remember it was Wuhan that shut down first.
Give it six months . . .
The Americans are too cheap too manufacture anything in the west. A leak of something manufactured in China but funded by the Yanks makes more sense and has the greater evidence.
Detrick has been pushed heavily by the Chinese media, just so you know, you have to be careful what info you read on that, there is also a lot of propaganda and just b*llsh*t from the other side on that one. It’s impossible to say where it came from, but remember it was Wuhan that shut down first.
Given that Covid cases appeared in the USA in autumn 2019 it has been suggested that activity at Fort Detrick might have been involved… only a conspiracy theory (for now…)
With Fauci and Farrar it’s as if we asked Dr. Frankenstein to corral the monster he invented, but he denies having anything to do with it. It actually would make sense to have Dr. Frankenstein fix his own problem, but not if he thinks the villagers are too stupid to believe he had nothing to do with it; then it’s time for pitchforks, the stake and a bonfire.
With Fauci and Farrar it’s as if we asked Dr. Frankenstein to corral the monster he invented, but he denies having anything to do with it. It actually would make sense to have Dr. Frankenstein fix his own problem, but not if he thinks the villagers are too stupid to believe he had nothing to do with it; then it’s time for pitchforks, the stake and a bonfire.
So what can we do to make sure that:
1 These scum are kicked out of office and
2 Justice is visited upon them?
So what can we do to make sure that:
1 These scum are kicked out of office and
2 Justice is visited upon them?
Brilliant. The only thing missing is the possibility that the establishment’s sea change is to do with a more aggressive stance toward China.This of course does not diminish the likelihood of a lab leak.
Isabel Oakshott: “Neither did the Foreign Office want to embarrass a Middle Eastern country for asking for 400 Covid jabs for members of its royal household, while the vaccine roll out was at an early stage here. But these countries are our allies – and the People’s Republic of China very definitely is not.”
Why?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/08/upsetting-china-governments-biggest-taboo-found-hard-way/
Brilliant. The only thing missing is the possibility that the establishment’s sea change is to do with a more aggressive stance toward China.This of course does not diminish the likelihood of a lab leak.
Isabel Oakshott: “Neither did the Foreign Office want to embarrass a Middle Eastern country for asking for 400 Covid jabs for members of its royal household, while the vaccine roll out was at an early stage here. But these countries are our allies – and the People’s Republic of China very definitely is not.”
Why?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/03/08/upsetting-china-governments-biggest-taboo-found-hard-way/
‘Farrar also hosted a conference call on the first day of February 2022’
Dear Ian Birrell – there is an important date in this article that needs to be checked. According to a timeline put out by Epoch Times entitled Covid 19 Outbreak and Cover Up, the tele conference took place two whole years earlier than you state and was in fact held on 1 February 2020.
The Epoch Times, hmmmm. In the Alternative Fact Universe, it’s a shining star. But only there.
The Epoch Times, hmmmm. In the Alternative Fact Universe, it’s a shining star. But only there.
‘Farrar also hosted a conference call on the first day of February 2022’
Dear Ian Birrell – there is an important date in this article that needs to be checked. According to a timeline put out by Epoch Times entitled Covid 19 Outbreak and Cover Up, the tele conference took place two whole years earlier than you state and was in fact held on 1 February 2020.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-worsened-america-rage-virus-for-which-theres-no-vaccine-lockdown-vaccine-mandates-ron-desantis-stanford-masking-2670cd39?st=au7qsbzgwxi6h9m&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
Much more worrying, that and the current stupidity pandemic.
Much more worrying, that and the current stupidity pandemic.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-worsened-america-rage-virus-for-which-theres-no-vaccine-lockdown-vaccine-mandates-ron-desantis-stanford-masking-2670cd39?st=au7qsbzgwxi6h9m&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
While it is true that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence, the inability after this much time and effort to find a plausible zoonotic host for Covid gives us compelling evidence of lab origin and human manipulation. It is not conclusive, but there is currently no alternative with any evidence at all in its favor.
This excerpt sum it up regarding scientists,
“Regardless, their stupidity risks harming their profession through sinister efforts to crush free debate, a doctrine that lies at the root of scientific advancement. Sadly, all those journalists who failed to do their job of challenging powerful players and vested interests have also undermined my own profession again. This should provoke soul-searching, especially on the Left, over allowing partisanship to override fearless interrogation of important issues.”
No matter COVID origin; scientists, journalists and politicians failed us miserably and this is the real crime.
In round figures, on the internet 10% of the world caught it and 1% died, of or with it. In UK I remember commenting that we were outbreeding the virus. Our NHS and GPs are now accused of killing people either by not seeing them or not enquiring if the vaccines are worthy of investigation. We demand an inquiry but suspect it will be a whitewash. So why bother if half the population deny the verdict? Only when a new pandemic appears and ‘cry wolf’ occurs will we know how herd immunity plays in contrast. During the lockdowns the supermarkets were supplied and full, Amazon DPD and Fedex were busy and people, ignoring the ‘guidelines’ still travelled and met in secret. We barely locked down at all if containing the spread was the goal. More locked out than in.
“God is on our side, so the Matrix will not win.” Andrew Tate said it before you! So fear not, he has your back.
I
Tate or God? Lower case ‘he’, must be Tate then. Dunno, think he’s either stuck in the matrix or the embrace of a big Romanian chap.
Tate or God? Lower case ‘he’, must be Tate then. Dunno, think he’s either stuck in the matrix or the embrace of a big Romanian chap.
“God is on our side, so the Matrix will not win.” Andrew Tate said it before you! So fear not, he has your back.
I
In round figures, on the internet 10% of the world caught it and 1% died, of or with it. In UK I remember commenting that we were outbreeding the virus. Our NHS and GPs are now accused of killing people either by not seeing them or not enquiring if the vaccines are worthy of investigation. We demand an inquiry but suspect it will be a whitewash. So why bother if half the population deny the verdict? Only when a new pandemic appears and ‘cry wolf’ occurs will we know how herd immunity plays in contrast. During the lockdowns the supermarkets were supplied and full, Amazon DPD and Fedex were busy and people, ignoring the ‘guidelines’ still travelled and met in secret. We barely locked down at all if containing the spread was the goal. More locked out than in.
I find it astonishing that after more than a million people have died, we are arguing about who said what when about where the damn thing came from when no one really knows, and China isn’t going to let us find out.
It seems to me the arguments we are having about the origins of the pandemic as well as masking and lock downs are designed to simply create more partisan rancor when we should be trying to figure out how to handle the next pandemic.
Rest assured that all of the people arguing about masks and lock downs today will, when the next pandemic happens, when the emergency rooms are full and there aren’t enough ventilators to go around or enough PPE to protect healthcare workers and hundreds are dying every day, be slapping on masks, telling their employers they want to work from home, and standing in line for a needle jab.
I don’t understand why we have forgotten how scared everyone was before the vaccines, and how many were dying.
Instead of the bullsh*t we are arguing about we should be arguing about how to create a more a robust and resilient public health system to handle the next pandemic, about how to produce tests and vaccines faster and about how to save lives.
For a reasonable take on lab leak theory and a debunking of the latest study of studies about masking read this excellent Atlantic article
https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2023/03/covid-lab-leak-mask-mandates-science-media-information/673263/
“I don’t understand why we have forgotten how scared everyone was before the vaccines, and how many were dying.”
Yes, I was scared and particularly so because my partner was dying of cancer during the first two years of the pandemic, and I didn’t want to infect her.
However, we now know that the vaccines were not very effective and that the majority of people who went to a hospital in the early days died because they were intubated or because they were put on Mizadolam, a respiratory suppressant.
We also now question (some did all along) why early treatment protocols were abandoned (to obtain the EUAs for the vaccines and Remedesivir, it is alleged). Many people who died early on may not have died. We also know that the people who died were at an age where flu might well have taken them out and that with the middle-aged, the biggest risk factor was obesity.
We didn’t know all that with certainty at the time, of course, but we abandoned the pre-pandemic planning that had agreed that masking and lockdowns would be ineffective.
The Lockdown Files are particularly revealing about some of the decisions made here.
“Instead of the bullsh*t we are arguing about we should be arguing about how to create a more a robust and resilient public health system to handle the next pandemic, about how to produce tests and vaccines faster and about how to save lives.”
Producing and testing vaccines faster is not compatible with safety, as we have learnt with the Covid vaccines.
The WHO has a plan for the next pandemic – they will make all decisions in future.
Sorry, but I do not think the things you claim ‘we know’ have in any way been proved. You need to convince us of them, not take them for granted and build on your assumptions.
And? Your article says that infection gives partial immunity, higher for earlier variants and below 50% temporarioly for omicron (roughly(. Which sounds pretty similar to what vaccines give. What has that got to do with any of Nik Jewell’s claims?
And? Your article says that infection gives partial immunity, higher for earlier variants and below 50% temporarioly for omicron (roughly(. Which sounds pretty similar to what vaccines give. What has that got to do with any of Nik Jewell’s claims?
I’m afraid I wouldn’t trust any of these Donkeys in our public health departments. They still recommend 400 iu for Vitamin D without even checking people’s levels. Peer reviews showed that people with high levels were better able to survive Covid and being a hormone was able to control the Body’s response to the virus. But still absolutely no word on this from the powers to be.
The Lancet article has some mildly interesting but irrelevant data about immunity caused by COVID infection (which no one ever disputed would happen). The Sciencedirect article seems like serious work and gives (by the authour’s own words) an *indication* that there *might* be an adverse even problem big enough to be serious and indicates the need for further studies since – as the authors say – this . work is unavoidably insufficient because of limited data. The rest of your links are a waste of time: the sources are so obviously biased that the only people who could trust the contents are those who are already convinced that vaccines are dangerous.
Not much support here.
Sorry, but I do not think the things you claim ‘we know’ have in any way been proved. You need to convince us of them, not take them for granted and build on your assumptions.
I’m afraid I wouldn’t trust any of these Donkeys in our public health departments. They still recommend 400 iu for Vitamin D without even checking people’s levels. Peer reviews showed that people with high levels were better able to survive Covid and being a hormone was able to control the Body’s response to the virus. But still absolutely no word on this from the powers to be.
The Lancet article has some mildly interesting but irrelevant data about immunity caused by COVID infection (which no one ever disputed would happen). The Sciencedirect article seems like serious work and gives (by the authour’s own words) an *indication* that there *might* be an adverse even problem big enough to be serious and indicates the need for further studies since – as the authors say – this . work is unavoidably insufficient because of limited data. The rest of your links are a waste of time: the sources are so obviously biased that the only people who could trust the contents are those who are already convinced that vaccines are dangerous.
Not much support here.
I wouldn’t ordinarily offer unsolicited advice but in the interest of the common good, allow me to suggest the next time you get scared (of a pandemic, a climate change, a far right terrorist conspiracy, or whatever other unseen boogeyman), take a deep breath and say a prayer until you’ve collected yourself, then gird your loins and face the situation rationally. What you ought not to do in a state of fear is make far-reaching decisions, such as to collaborate in drastic measures along the lines of suppression of our God-given rights, and mass participation in novel medical interventions such as wearing a funny mask and taking an unknown injection.
“Fear thou not; for I am with thee: be not dismayed; for I am thy God: I will strengthen thee; yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness.” -Isaiah 41:10
If I found myself in a small -plane and the pilot fell over dead, I would either get on the radio and try to land it myself, or grab whatever looked like a parachute and jump out – even though I had never done anything like it before and both are quite far-reaching decisions. What would you do – pray to God and wait for him to land you at your destination airport?
May I share your parachute? Not much into praying…
Your analogy assumes that getting COVID unvaccinated is complete riskless. That would obviously make vaccination unnecesary – but I do not share your assumption.
May I share your parachute? Not much into praying…
Your analogy assumes that getting COVID unvaccinated is complete riskless. That would obviously make vaccination unnecesary – but I do not share your assumption.
If I found myself in a small -plane and the pilot fell over dead, I would either get on the radio and try to land it myself, or grab whatever looked like a parachute and jump out – even though I had never done anything like it before and both are quite far-reaching decisions. What would you do – pray to God and wait for him to land you at your destination airport?
Great observations and comment. I won’t sit well with the conspiracy theorists however.
Thank you for the Atlantic link – a commendably even handed piece.
With you 100% in relation to future pandemic planning. However, I am not holding my breath on that one.
Not so. We should be concerned that the new WHO director engaged in suppresing scientific debate. We should be concerned that prominent scientists and government agencies stifled opinion. We should be concerned about journalists not willing to ask difficult questions. All these concerns will affect how we effectively respond to the next pandemic.
“I don’t understand why we have forgotten how scared everyone was before the vaccines, and how many were dying.”
Yes, I was scared and particularly so because my partner was dying of cancer during the first two years of the pandemic, and I didn’t want to infect her.
However, we now know that the vaccines were not very effective and that the majority of people who went to a hospital in the early days died because they were intubated or because they were put on Mizadolam, a respiratory suppressant.
We also now question (some did all along) why early treatment protocols were abandoned (to obtain the EUAs for the vaccines and Remedesivir, it is alleged). Many people who died early on may not have died. We also know that the people who died were at an age where flu might well have taken them out and that with the middle-aged, the biggest risk factor was obesity.
We didn’t know all that with certainty at the time, of course, but we abandoned the pre-pandemic planning that had agreed that masking and lockdowns would be ineffective.
The Lockdown Files are particularly revealing about some of the decisions made here.
“Instead of the bullsh*t we are arguing about we should be arguing about how to create a more a robust and resilient public health system to handle the next pandemic, about how to produce tests and vaccines faster and about how to save lives.”
Producing and testing vaccines faster is not compatible with safety, as we have learnt with the Covid vaccines.
The WHO has a plan for the next pandemic – they will make all decisions in future.
I wouldn’t ordinarily offer unsolicited advice but in the interest of the common good, allow me to suggest the next time you get scared (of a pandemic, a climate change, a far right terrorist conspiracy, or whatever other unseen boogeyman), take a deep breath and say a prayer until you’ve collected yourself, then gird your loins and face the situation rationally. What you ought not to do in a state of fear is make far-reaching decisions, such as to collaborate in drastic measures along the lines of suppression of our God-given rights, and mass participation in novel medical interventions such as wearing a funny mask and taking an unknown injection.
“Fear thou not; for I am with thee: be not dismayed; for I am thy God: I will strengthen thee; yea, I will help thee; yea, I will uphold thee with the right hand of my righteousness.” -Isaiah 41:10
Great observations and comment. I won’t sit well with the conspiracy theorists however.
Thank you for the Atlantic link – a commendably even handed piece.
With you 100% in relation to future pandemic planning. However, I am not holding my breath on that one.
Not so. We should be concerned that the new WHO director engaged in suppresing scientific debate. We should be concerned that prominent scientists and government agencies stifled opinion. We should be concerned about journalists not willing to ask difficult questions. All these concerns will affect how we effectively respond to the next pandemic.
I find it astonishing that after more than a million people have died, we are arguing about who said what when about where the damn thing came from when no one really knows, and China isn’t going to let us find out.
It seems to me the arguments we are having about the origins of the pandemic as well as masking and lock downs are designed to simply create more partisan rancor when we should be trying to figure out how to handle the next pandemic.
Rest assured that all of the people arguing about masks and lock downs today will, when the next pandemic happens, when the emergency rooms are full and there aren’t enough ventilators to go around or enough PPE to protect healthcare workers and hundreds are dying every day, be slapping on masks, telling their employers they want to work from home, and standing in line for a needle jab.
I don’t understand why we have forgotten how scared everyone was before the vaccines, and how many were dying.
Instead of the bullsh*t we are arguing about we should be arguing about how to create a more a robust and resilient public health system to handle the next pandemic, about how to produce tests and vaccines faster and about how to save lives.
For a reasonable take on lab leak theory and a debunking of the latest study of studies about masking read this excellent Atlantic article
https://www.theatlantic.com/newsletters/archive/2023/03/covid-lab-leak-mask-mandates-science-media-information/673263/
The Wuhan virus was developed by the Clintons in a Washington pizzeria. The same pizzeria where they run a pedophile ring. That should make sense to Unherd readers….
And there was me thinking it might’ve escaped from the encounter between Bill and Monica.
Apparently according to the recent ‘dress’ evidence Monica didn’t swallow.
There’s many a slip betwixt cup and lip.
There’s many a slip betwixt cup and lip.
Apparently according to the recent ‘dress’ evidence Monica didn’t swallow.
Good girl! You earned a social credit point!
Go back to the New Statesman Danielle.
“Think Again”…
“Think Again”…
I often wonder if Unherd commenters (who seem to be relatively small in number) broadly reflect the attitudes of the Unherd readership generally. It would be interesting to know how many subscribers there are. Anyway, I’m a Guardian reading, lefty, wokeflake, libtard remoaner, so you’re not alone here 🙂
I’ve wondered this as well; I do think that probably most are to the right of myself, probably a long way in that direction. I wouldn’t classify myself the way you do yourself, accept the lefty bit, but I no longer expect to agree on a raft of issues here, but that doesn’t stop me reading and commenting even if many of my posts disappear for some time or even forever (who knows why).
Good on you, Sy! Now let’s hear some of your thoughts about the virus not just what your bumper sticker says about you.
I welcome it, but I don’t think I’ve actually ever seen anyone use wokeflake to be honest. If you are doing it properly you will upset everyone, left and right. They both echo chamber. I’m not interested in echo chambers. It’s unherd. Not revert to the old herds.
No need to downvote this comment. Everyone welcome here.
I’ve wondered this as well; I do think that probably most are to the right of myself, probably a long way in that direction. I wouldn’t classify myself the way you do yourself, accept the lefty bit, but I no longer expect to agree on a raft of issues here, but that doesn’t stop me reading and commenting even if many of my posts disappear for some time or even forever (who knows why).
Good on you, Sy! Now let’s hear some of your thoughts about the virus not just what your bumper sticker says about you.
I welcome it, but I don’t think I’ve actually ever seen anyone use wokeflake to be honest. If you are doing it properly you will upset everyone, left and right. They both echo chamber. I’m not interested in echo chambers. It’s unherd. Not revert to the old herds.
No need to downvote this comment. Everyone welcome here.
You need the QAnon boards. You are in the wrong place. Nobody talks about that here.
Ooops, forgot to add “sarcasm” at the end of my comment for those “sarcasm-challenged”…
Alongside your comment below, it didn’t come across as sarcasm. Some people just love to bring a place down…
So right… like the angry reactionaries who have found a safe haven on Unherd.
What are you, the reactionary police?
I see you have not replied to my comment below.
Would you like to engage in a left wing conversation about any of the subjects I have mentioned? Since that was your complaint.
I’m very happy to tell you all about the one planet development scheme and why I want it rolled out in England. I can do that one for pages. I can do covid for pages too. And the no nato war thing. Pick a subject. Or are you just here to complain.
What are you, the reactionary police?
I see you have not replied to my comment below.
Would you like to engage in a left wing conversation about any of the subjects I have mentioned? Since that was your complaint.
I’m very happy to tell you all about the one planet development scheme and why I want it rolled out in England. I can do that one for pages. I can do covid for pages too. And the no nato war thing. Pick a subject. Or are you just here to complain.
So right… like the angry reactionaries who have found a safe haven on Unherd.
Alongside your comment below, it didn’t come across as sarcasm. Some people just love to bring a place down…
Ooops, forgot to add “sarcasm” at the end of my comment for those “sarcasm-challenged”…
Hey, not all of them. Some of these folks need professional help.
And there was me thinking it might’ve escaped from the encounter between Bill and Monica.
Good girl! You earned a social credit point!
Go back to the New Statesman Danielle.
I often wonder if Unherd commenters (who seem to be relatively small in number) broadly reflect the attitudes of the Unherd readership generally. It would be interesting to know how many subscribers there are. Anyway, I’m a Guardian reading, lefty, wokeflake, libtard remoaner, so you’re not alone here 🙂
You need the QAnon boards. You are in the wrong place. Nobody talks about that here.
Hey, not all of them. Some of these folks need professional help.
The Wuhan virus was developed by the Clintons in a Washington pizzeria. The same pizzeria where they run a pedophile ring. That should make sense to Unherd readers….
I subscribed to Unherd, hoping for some unbiased opinions on world /societal events. Boy, was I wrong. Unherd is so blatantly right-wing it is laughable. Talk about one-sided discussions… The only thing I regret is having wasted money on a yearly subscription which I will cancel at the first opportunity. PS The only opinions worth reading are those by Kathleen Stock!
I’m afraid that there are certain topics on UnHerd where only one view is preferred, and COVID is one of them, However, there are articles that are worth reading even if one disagrees with the theses, and it’s good to have one’s own views challenged sometimes, even though only people like Terry Eagleton and Julie Bindel and one or two others challenge those on the right. I would urge you not to leave precipitously, I’m being selfish here I need a little support, and to comment and be d*mned, accepting all the down votes.
I too recently subscribed to UnHerd, mainly because I don’t want to live in my own little echo chamber, and because the articles are generally well-written although I may disagree more often than not with the premise and argument. But this article has poked me in the ribs and made me take notice of how I have been perhaps naively consuming COVID-related scientific articles. I also admire Ian Birrell and assume that he has done his due diligence. So, I am for the better having read this and I will stay with UnHerd.
Seconded.
The irony Mr Fogh. You got any Russian for me today?
The irony Mr Fogh. You got any Russian for me today?
To comment and be damned
I too recently subscribed to UnHerd, mainly because I don’t want to live in my own little echo chamber, and because the articles are generally well-written although I may disagree more often than not with the premise and argument. But this article has poked me in the ribs and made me take notice of how I have been perhaps naively consuming COVID-related scientific articles. I also admire Ian Birrell and assume that he has done his due diligence. So, I am for the better having read this and I will stay with UnHerd.
Seconded.
To comment and be damned
Danielle: what in your view is right-wing about Ian Birrell’s article? I’m genuinely curious to know your opinion.
You do have a point but I think it is worth sticking with Unherd for the information that is almost impossible to get anywhere else. I’m also not sure if Left and Right is a relevant designation these days.
OK, contribute a left wing opinion then. I’m not sure what’s right wing about this discussion anyway. Are you saying the left doesn’t want to know the true origins of the pandemic, or doesn’t care about scientists being caught lying?
I do to the first, but have so far found no satisfactory answers. As for the scientists caught lying: sheer intellectual laziness for/from those who are satisfied with swallowing simplistic explanations to a very complex issue.
I do to the first, but have so far found no satisfactory answers. As for the scientists caught lying: sheer intellectual laziness for/from those who are satisfied with swallowing simplistic explanations to a very complex issue.
Don’t be so sure. I am “right-wing”, I would call it radical libertarian, and I got lots of down votes in some of the discussions. If an interesting article comes along, there is usually quite a fierce debate going on. I sometimes prefer the debates to the articles.
I tend to think of Unherd as somewhat above left vs right, though more libertarian than authoritarian.
As noted by others, the origins of SARS-CoV-2 is primarily a scientific issue, not a political one. The cover-up is more of a political issue, but I don’t see that as left vs right either.
Yes there are bat reservoirs described in detail here :
Ecology, evolution and spillover of coronaviruses from batshttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-021-00652-2
and here :
Bat coronaviruses related to SARS-CoV-2 and infectious for human cellshttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04532-4
and here :
A strategy to assess spillover risk of bat SARS-related coronaviruses in Southeast Asiahttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31860-w
Unfortunately the SE Asian bat population has not been widely sampled – there are a huge number of them (they comprise about 40% of all mammals in that region) so lots of surprises in store, I am sure.
You are correct. Neither A nor B lineages which were the first ones to be fully typed from sick individuals in Wuhan have been found in any animal or bat, but you wouldn’t expect them to be – they had a different looking common ancestor and we have only the vaguest idea of what that common ancestor might look like and at the time the Chinese authorities cleared the Wuhan wet markets of all animals – any evidence destroyed.
Also, it took 20 years to fully elucidate the SARS 1 infectivity daisy chain.
As other people have mentioned here the origins of Sars Cov 2 are all conjecture for now and likely to stay that way given the lack of funding necessary to do a large enough sampling of the bat populations in SE Asia.
You are correct. Neither A nor B lineages which were the first ones to be fully typed from sick individuals in Wuhan have been found in any animal or bat, but you wouldn’t expect them to be – they had a different looking common ancestor and we have only the vaguest idea of what that common ancestor might look like and at the time the Chinese authorities cleared the Wuhan wet markets of all animals – any evidence destroyed.
Also, it took 20 years to fully elucidate the SARS 1 infectivity daisy chain.
As other people have mentioned here the origins of Sars Cov 2 are all conjecture for now and likely to stay that way given the lack of funding necessary to do a large enough sampling of the bat populations in SE Asia.
Yes there are bat reservoirs described in detail here :
Ecology, evolution and spillover of coronaviruses from batshttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-021-00652-2
and here :
Bat coronaviruses related to SARS-CoV-2 and infectious for human cellshttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-04532-4
and here :
A strategy to assess spillover risk of bat SARS-related coronaviruses in Southeast Asiahttps://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-022-31860-w
Unfortunately the SE Asian bat population has not been widely sampled – there are a huge number of them (they comprise about 40% of all mammals in that region) so lots of surprises in store, I am sure.
You will have missed all my anti war posts then. All the links I have shared from left wing anti war websites. I did not notice you interested in them? I shared the wsw the other day and highlighted the imprisonment of a left wing anti war activist, mentioned by Ray mcgovern. You must have missed me highlighting the damage sanctions are causing developing countries and sharing un speeches calling for peace and consideration of these developing economies. I didn’t notice you then either.
I did not notice you interested in the Welsh one planet development scheme or the left wing Pro green website I shared when I commented about that either. Do you even know what the one planet development scheme is?
There are plenty of anti war voices from the libertarian right. For me the Left usually wants more interventions be it in the economy, in most foreign policy or generally in the life of the individual.
Yeah again, I’m left right up down depends on the day and my mood and the subject. Point is, complaining there is no left wing stuff shared here is ridiculous because I know that’s not true.
Yeah again, I’m left right up down depends on the day and my mood and the subject. Point is, complaining there is no left wing stuff shared here is ridiculous because I know that’s not true.
There are plenty of anti war voices from the libertarian right. For me the Left usually wants more interventions be it in the economy, in most foreign policy or generally in the life of the individual.
There are certain subjects that bring out the herding tendencies of this audience. It’s quite ironic given the philosophy of the website.
I’m afraid that there are certain topics on UnHerd where only one view is preferred, and COVID is one of them, However, there are articles that are worth reading even if one disagrees with the theses, and it’s good to have one’s own views challenged sometimes, even though only people like Terry Eagleton and Julie Bindel and one or two others challenge those on the right. I would urge you not to leave precipitously, I’m being selfish here I need a little support, and to comment and be d*mned, accepting all the down votes.
Danielle: what in your view is right-wing about Ian Birrell’s article? I’m genuinely curious to know your opinion.
You do have a point but I think it is worth sticking with Unherd for the information that is almost impossible to get anywhere else. I’m also not sure if Left and Right is a relevant designation these days.
OK, contribute a left wing opinion then. I’m not sure what’s right wing about this discussion anyway. Are you saying the left doesn’t want to know the true origins of the pandemic, or doesn’t care about scientists being caught lying?
Don’t be so sure. I am “right-wing”, I would call it radical libertarian, and I got lots of down votes in some of the discussions. If an interesting article comes along, there is usually quite a fierce debate going on. I sometimes prefer the debates to the articles.
I tend to think of Unherd as somewhat above left vs right, though more libertarian than authoritarian.
As noted by others, the origins of SARS-CoV-2 is primarily a scientific issue, not a political one. The cover-up is more of a political issue, but I don’t see that as left vs right either.
You will have missed all my anti war posts then. All the links I have shared from left wing anti war websites. I did not notice you interested in them? I shared the wsw the other day and highlighted the imprisonment of a left wing anti war activist, mentioned by Ray mcgovern. You must have missed me highlighting the damage sanctions are causing developing countries and sharing un speeches calling for peace and consideration of these developing economies. I didn’t notice you then either.
I did not notice you interested in the Welsh one planet development scheme or the left wing Pro green website I shared when I commented about that either. Do you even know what the one planet development scheme is?
There are certain subjects that bring out the herding tendencies of this audience. It’s quite ironic given the philosophy of the website.
I subscribed to Unherd, hoping for some unbiased opinions on world /societal events. Boy, was I wrong. Unherd is so blatantly right-wing it is laughable. Talk about one-sided discussions… The only thing I regret is having wasted money on a yearly subscription which I will cancel at the first opportunity. PS The only opinions worth reading are those by Kathleen Stock!