January 12, 2022
The Telegraph reports on evidence that scientists tried to shut down the debate over the lab origins of the coronavirus, despite the fact that they believed it was the most probable source of the pandemic.
The analysis here, in The Trenchant Observer and in The International Coronavirus Journal, got it right, citing articles which discussed the science and the issues involved in great depth. Their analysis has be borne out.
1) Sarah Knapton (Science Editor), “Scientists believed Covid leaked from Wuhan lab – but feared debate could hurt ‘international harmony’; Emails to Dr Anthony Fauci show ‘likely’ explanation identified at start of coronavirus pandemic, but there were worries about saying so,” The Telegraph, January 11, 2022 (9:31 pm);
2) Matt Ridley, “I was duped by the Covid lab leak deniers
That senior scientists saw evidence for theories that they trashed in public has shattered trust in science,” The Telegraph, January 12, 2022 (5:48 pm).
3) “Did China manipulate the coronavirus to make it more dangerous?” The Trenchant Observer, June 4, 2020;
4) “Evidence increasingly points to Wuhan Institute of Virology as source of nouvel coronavirus,” The Trenchant Observer, March 9, 2021.
Sarah Knapton (Science Editor), “Wuhan lab leak ‘now the most likely origin of Covid’, MPs told; Dr Alina Chan says there is also a risk that Covid-19 is an engineered virus,” The Telegraph, December 15, 2021 (12:46 pm).
It turns out that the analyses of the former Director of MI-6 and of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists were on to something, when they laid out in great detail the facts pointing to the likelihood of a lab leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology being the source of the coronavirus and the Covid-19 pandemic, which has now cost over 800,000 lives in the United States alone.
1) “Did China manipulate the coronavirus to make it more dangerous?” The Trenchant Observer, June 4, 2020;
2) “Evidence increasingly points to Wuhan Institute of Virology as source of nouvel coronavirus,” The Trenchant Observer, March 9, 2021.
Sarah Knapton, the Science Editor of The Telegraph (not just any cub reporter) reports on a briefing to Members of Parliament by Dr. Alina Chan of Harvard and MIT, which suggested a lab leak was the most likely source of the coronavirus and the Covid-19.pandemic.
Knapton quotes Dr Chan on the opaqueness of the inquiry into the origin of the virus as follows
I think the lab origin is more likely than not. Right now it’s not safe for people who know about the origin of the pandemic to come forward. But we live in an era where there is so much information being stored that it will eventually come out.
Viscount Ridly, Dr. Chan’s co-author of a book on the subject, had the following to say regarding the dangerous nature of the experiments:in question:
We know now that experiments were being done at biosecurity level 2 (similar to a dentist’s office) that resulted in 10,000 times increases in infectivity of viruses and three or four times their lethality. The important thing is to stop doing these experiments that are risky.
The really disturbing information concerns the extremely dangerous experiments that were being performed in China, and the possibility that the coronavirus was deliberately engineered to be much more dangerous that it otherwise would have been, that is, that it was engineered as a so-called “chimera” virus.
Also disturbing is the revelation of deep conflicts of interest, undisclosed until now, on the part of Peter Daszak, “the head of EcoHealth Alliance, who had worked closely with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) engineering bat coronaviruses.” In a letter to the Lancet, Daszak had dismissed the “lab origin” theory, helping to shut down scientific debate.
Those who dismissed the “lab origin” theory never seemed persuasive to careful analysts, because while their dismissals were vehement and categorical in nature, they never rebutted the specific facts cited by those who pointed to the likelihood of a lab leak as the origin of the virus.
The Trenchant Observer