WHO’s inquiry into COVID-19 outbreak ‘highly chaperoned,’ says ex-NSC official

A senior fellow at the Atlantic Council called for a substantial, international investigation into the origins of the coronavirus and said the World Health Organization’s inquiry has been dreadfully inadequate.

Jamie Metzl, who served in the National Security Council during the Clinton administration, told CBS’ "60 Minutes" that the WHO’s investigation in Wuhan should actually be referred to as a "highly chaperoned, highly curated study tour."

"Everybody around the world is imagining this is some kind of full investigation," he said. "It’s not. This group of experts only saw what the Chinese government wanted them to see."


Linkage


Post from 2-9-2021

A team of World Health Organization scientists said on Tuesday in China that the coronavirus had probably first spread to humans through an animal and was “extremely unlikely” to have been the result of a lab accident.

The findings, delivered after 12 days of field work by the team visiting Wuhan, China, were the first step in a painstaking process to trace the pandemic’s origins, a question that is critical to helping prevent a recurrence.

“All the work that has been done on the virus and trying to identify its origin continue to point toward a natural reservoir,” said Dr. Peter K. Ben Embarek, a food safety scientist with the W.H.O. who is leading the team of experts. He was speaking at a news conference in Wuhan, the city where the coronavirus was first discovered late in 2019.

Dr. Embarek dismissed the idea that the virus might have emerged from a laboratory in Wuhan, a theory that has gained currency among some officials and experts in the United States and elsewhere. “It was very unlikely that anything could escape from such a place,” he said, citing safety protocols.

12 days huh? What a joke

As I stated in another thread, when it comes to the theory about it escaping from a lab, it strikes me as remotely possible but very unlikely:

1. It was NOT developed in a lab. Quite simply, the virus has none of the thumbprints of lab development and just as importantly has all of the thumbprints of natural evolution.
2. Since it was not lab developed, this means the lab isolated it from the wild where it was already spreading. In which case, the escape from the lab becomes an unnecessary step (Occam's Razor), since it was already in the wild.

I think this idea is pushed heavily because it is actually misinformation intended to protect the real source. I think the most likely source is either the factory mink farms (for furs) or the factory meat farms in the region. Both of these are VERY VERY profitable and are owned either by the state or individuals VERY well connected to the state. In particular the mink farms are interesting because we discovered in Denmark (I believe) that this virus RAPIDLY and heavily infects minks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by PedroDaGr8

As I stated in another thread, when it comes to the theory about it escaping from a lab, it strikes me as remotely possible but very unlikely:

1. It was NOT developed in a lab. Quite simply, the virus has none of the thumbprints of lab development and just as importantly has all of the thumbprints of natural evolution.
2. Since it was not lab developed, this means the lab isolated it from the wild where it was already spreading. In which case, the escape from the lab becomes an unnecessary step (Occam's Razor), since it was already in the wild.

I think this idea is pushed heavily because it is actually misinformation intended to protect the real source. I think the most likely source is either the factory mink farms (for furs) or the factory meat farms in the region. Both of these are VERY VERY profitable and are owned either by the state or individuals VERY well connected to the state. In particular the mink farms are interesting because we discovered in Denmark (I believe) that this virus RAPIDLY and heavily infects minks.

---

I don't think anyone thinks it was bioengineered in a lab. OK, people do, but I don't think that's the basis of the suggestion that it came from a Wuhan lab by more serious sources.

But there is a lot of evidence it probably came from the Wuhan lab b/c of the work being done there, and that the facility was already known to be sub-standard.

This is from Politico, hardly a right wing source or pro Trump in any way. They have documented reports from 2018 that the lab was a) doing coronovirus research and b) was poorly enough run to be a risk due to poorly trained staff and procedures.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazi...excerpt-474322

Obviously that's still circumstantial, but when you have prior reports of a lab in that exact city doing research on these viruses and is known to be a risk due to poor handling of the viruses, I'd say it's a fairly strong case.

The mink farm angle is certainly possible, but the Wuhan lab angle I would say is also quite possible. Not for sure, but certainly as likely as any other option. And of course the Chi-Com government would certainly bury such a happening. Though they have now blamed the US army, Italy and probably the recent NASA probe on Mars in an attempt to deflect its origins.

Quote:

---

probably the recent NASA probe on Mars in an attempt to deflect its origins.

---

Yea, there is a lot of basic research on viruses being done by the Chinese in their Martian labs. They do not want to risk the USA's Martian research landers sniffing out their labs. It is rumored that they got their original base virus samples from Ming the Merciless of Mongo. It is well known (by some) that Ming abandoned his alliance with Adolph Hitler in the later years of WWII, and retreated to Mars to establish bases and mining operations.

Gee it took them a year, but maybe their opinion is finally correct.

Linkage

Sky News Australia

Totally untrustworthy, IMO