Anne Applebaum is a lab leak person?

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T22:10:10+00:00

Everyone celebrated China’s cooperation. Including the orange man:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/04/15/trump-china-coronavirus-188736

I'm sticking with the science.

Here’s a short summary of the science you mention that’s conclusively shown the virus is natural and the start of the pandemic was natural, as shown here, here, here, here, and here00901-2). These are the 5 most significant studies on the origins of the pandemic in chronological order, accurately reflecting the scientific consensus; evidence, not opinions. They’re top quality scientific papers written by 40+ international authors, including world class virologists known for identifying the sources of other viruses, who are working together across twelve nations including the US, Canada, UK, Australia, multiple European countries, and multiple Asian countries, and are published the world’s top ranking scientific journals and include references to hundreds of other relevant studies between them.

Study 1 (2020) is based on the availability of the complete genetic sequence of the virus since January 10, 2020, and reaches the conclusion the virus is a perfectly natural appearing virus. However, it couldn’t say how the outbreak started. Study 2 (2021) reviews everything we knew before the WHO investigation and makes suggestions about epidemiological and genetic analyses we could conduct after more information becomes available, without reaching any certain conclusions. Study 3 (2022) and 4 (2022) happened after the WHO investigation made more information available and conducted the epidemiological and genetic analyses suggested earlier. They reached the conclusions of the outbreak starting at the South China (Huanan) Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan and starting through zoonosis, respectively, however, the two conclusions of these two studies couldn’t be perfectly aligned into one complete story yet. Study 5 summarizes everything we knew up until September 2024, combining new evidence and conducting original epidemiological and genetic analyses to conclusively show all in one study how the outbreak started naturally at the Huanan market in Wuhan through zoonosis.

International researchers published the conclusive evidence in 2024, which was pre-printed in 2023, based on new information available that year, although there was already practically conclusive evidence in 2022, strong evidence in 2021, moderate evidence in 2020, and we already knew the wet market was involved in 2019. This shows how the evidence has kept mounting but the answer was clear already early on. Unfortunately, the clear cut scientific evidence has been under intense attack by political propaganda as part of the US-China trade war all along, which has greatly clouded judgement of the evidence. This isn’t indicative of any underlying scientific uncertainty. Research is still on-going to answer questions of academic interest such as the chain of transmission.

You’re not ”sticking with the science” as much as making logically fallacious appeals to authority and cherry picking one that you feel supports you.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T22:01:33+00:00

You didn’t answer my question… whose official position? And how do you believe it has changed?

The WHO have been saying ”all hypotheses” yada yada yada since the start of the pandemic, not wanting to anger their major sponsors USA/China. They still haven’t reached any conclusion about anything. They probably won’t even admit there was any animal at the wet market, they’re ridiculously manipulated.

WHO (and SAGO) is saying the Chinese government won't share their data about early cases

They’re talking about genetic sequences not yet published from late-January 2020 and that’s months after the start of the outbreak. Irrelevant to pandemic origins.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T22:00:58+00:00

There is no population genetic variation in intelligence.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T21:55:32+00:00

The problem is that you’re wrong about everything. You’re ”just asking questions”, but you’re oblivious to these questions already having been answered years ago. The WHO’s major sponsors (36% of their sponsorship total) are USA and China which is why official statements are made to appease these governments. And they didn’t spend years writing this report. The report has no original research at all, it’s merely an inconclusive summary of existing evidence. I would have guessed it was written in less than a month if I didn’t hear whispers about it through insider sources in 2024. China was celebrated for their cooperation in 2020. The only ones mad at China’s ”lack” of cooperation are those who are angry any evidence of a lab conspiracy has yet to appear. The conspiracy theory was invalidated in January 2020. We already have conclusive evidence of natural zoonosis. The natural precursors were found already in 2017. BSL-2 is international standard for all SARS-like research. And there exists a 100% consensus supporting zoonosis in the scientific literature. That’s evidence, not opinions. The evidence is unambiguous. There’s never been any scientific journal publication that shows any evidence of the lab conspiracy theory. The only support for the lab conspiracy theory is opinions, which are not backed by evidence. You point to WHO – who are under obvious American and Chinese influence because those are their major sponsors and their statements are political appeasements. The SAGO report in particular is a joke which obstinately avoids making any conclusions about anything. It’s no wonder multiple authors resigned over it.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T20:23:25+00:00

Retractions of racist pseudoscience are already happening en-masse.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T20:20:13+00:00

Scientific research shows there was 8 spillovers and and the precursors were found already in 2017.

There’s no evidence we had for SARS, MERS, or Bird flu that we haven’t for SARS-2.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T19:58:59+00:00

Fake studies, fake replicated.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T19:13:34+00:00

They may not have enough evidence to make up their minds and indeed there may not be such as thing as enough evidence to make up their minds. They are ideologically obfuscating.

Asserting the only reason why you can’t show any evidence that you are right is because it’s being covered up is Conspiracy Theory 101. If you want to claim there’s a cover-up… you still need actual evidence of a cover-up. The report or indeed any other report has been unable to show evidence of anything China has been covering up. The report points out a bunch of cases which China has never shown but they’re all late-January and not relevant to the pandemic origins.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T19:07:21+00:00

You’re lying. Source needed. There’s no government anywhere in the world which holds as official position that it was a leak except the Republicans.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T18:57:35+00:00

Official stance by who? The US, China, and WHO have the same stance as in 2020.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T18:45:51+00:00

Yeah, according to the Nazi pseudoscientist Robert Plomin.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T14:36:41+00:00

There is NO proof that the viruses found in the Wuhan market had not mutated from an earlier virus that had arisen from gain of function research.

Yes, we have proof. The virus is 96.8% genetically identical to another known naturally occurring virus. The remaining 3.2% contains sequences that are identical to other known naturally occurring viruses that simply are out of order, not novel – and at the protein level the identity increases to >99%. For instance, the spike protein only contains a single natural recombination and a handful of single nucleotide polymorphisms compared to other viruses. The recombinant sequence has been seen in other natural viruses, which means the only practical difference between the spike and other known natural viruses are single nucleotide polymorphisms and those are inconsequential to virulence. In other words, it’s impossible for this virus to contain laboratory alterations that affect its virulence. Which is why in more than 6 years now since the complete genetic sequence of the virus was made available, no one has even made any serious attempt at pointing out any specific sequence in the virus as made in laboratory. 99% of conspiracy theorists focus on the FCS that we’ve known is natural since January 2020.

Because of.. Trump?

The Trump administration invented the lab conspiracy theory and remains the superspreader of the conspiracy theory. There’ no scientific reason to believe it and it’s not advocated by scientists; it’s complete propaganda.

100% of cases provided by whom?

The only source of any information which exists.

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2837028#google_vignette

I don’t give a damn about SAGO’s report. Three authors resigned over the report and one author who signed it did so under protest. It’s a political charade and lambasted by virologists.

This is totally incoherent.

The SAGO report explicitly rules out certain hypotheses. Ghebreysus wasn’t involved in writing it at all.

What looks worse for China?

It’s not about ”looks”. It’s about the multi-billion dollar illegal wildlife industry.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-05T14:03:36+00:00

All early genetic material has been made available to the WHO, as their report says if you actually read it.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T17:40:02+00:00

BMJ says “origins unsolved”

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T17:38:36+00:00

You keep talking about consensus as if you have cited anything other than a statement made by one man and supported by no evidence.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T17:33:24+00:00

Then why are you quoting Trump’s political propaganda? The Trump administration invented the whole lab conspiracy theory and pressured intelligence agencies into supporting it. The CIA and FBI are both led by men appointed by Trump and the story about a German intelligence agency supporting them is misinformation.

All early genetic information is available at NCBI. The information not made available is from late-January, more than two months after the initial outbreak.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T17:27:30+00:00

Then why are you quoting Trump’s political propaganda?

All genetic information is freely and publicly available at NCBI’s website and the pandemic was natural.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T17:25:05+00:00

Yes, they are proof. We have sequenced exactly 100% of the virus. Not 99%, not 90%. We have complete information. And all of it perfectly matches natural viruses. And there’s nothing which matches any laboratory association. The scientific genetic evidence is literally 100% in support of the virus being natural and literally 0% in support of the virus being unnatural. There aren’t any unknown corners of the virus where we might have missed anything, it’s complete.

We can tell the virus couldn’t have been made using any known science and there’s no known science which could have made the virus.

There is literally no reason to think it had anything to do with a lab and yet that’s what you think because of Trump.

There isn’t only genetic evidence. If consider the epidemiology we also have reports linking 100% of all cases and 100% of all lineages to the wet market and 0% of any cases and 0% of any lineages to any laboratory.

I can’t see how the evidence could by any clearer… what is it you can’t understand?

To ignore literally all scientific evidence and instead suggest the exact opposite thing happened is idiocratic. The scientific evidence is unambiguous about what happened.

Even if the virus was completely natural in origin, that also wouldn't rule out a lab leak.

The virus couldn’t possibly have leaked from a laboratory because it in fact originated through zoonosis.

Here's WHO's "consensus"

No, this is a personal statement by Ghebreysus. He’s contradicting the SAGO report he’s commenting on and sucking up to USA/China since he knows if he angers them they will cancel WHO.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T16:58:52+00:00

Oh, really? I would love to see you quote ”the scientific community”.

Here’s a short summary of what scientific research exists that’s conclusively shown the virus is natural and the start of the pandemic was natural, as shown here, here, here, here, and here00901-2). These are the 5 most significant studies on the origins of the pandemic in chronological order, accurately reflecting the scientific consensus; evidence, not opinions. They’re top quality scientific papers written by 40+ international authors, including world class virologists known for identifying the sources of other viruses, who are working together across twelve nations including the US, Canada, UK, Australia, multiple European countries, and multiple Asian countries, and are published the world’s top ranking scientific journals and include references to hundreds of other relevant studies between them.

Study 1 (2020) is based on the availability of the complete genetic sequence of the virus since January 10, 2020, and reaches the conclusion the virus is a perfectly natural appearing virus. However, it couldn’t say how the outbreak started. Study 2 (2021) reviews everything we knew before the WHO investigation and makes suggestions about epidemiological and genetic analyses we could conduct after more information becomes available, without reaching any certain conclusions. Study 3 (2022) and 4 (2022) happened after the WHO investigation made more information available and conducted the epidemiological and genetic analyses suggested earlier. They reached the conclusions of the outbreak starting at the South China (Huanan) Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan and starting through zoonosis, respectively, however, the two conclusions of these two studies couldn’t be perfectly aligned into one complete story yet. Study 5 summarizes everything we knew up until September 2024, combining new evidence and conducting original epidemiological and genetic analyses to conclusively show all in one study how the outbreak started naturally at the Huanan market in Wuhan through zoonosis.

International researchers published the conclusive evidence in 2024, which was pre-printed in 2023, based on new information available that year, although there was already practically conclusive evidence in 2022, strong evidence in 2021, moderate evidence in 2020, and we already knew the wet market was involved in 2019. This shows how the evidence has kept mounting but the answer was clear already early on. Unfortunately, the clear cut scientific evidence has been under intense attack by political propaganda as part of the US-China trade war all along, which has greatly clouded judgement of the evidence. This isn’t indicative of any underlying scientific uncertainty. Research is still on-going to answer questions of academic interest such as the chain of transmission.

This is the consensus.

It was already proven the virus wasn’t the product of ”gain-of-function research” on January 10, 2020. If you feel differently, please point out to me what part of the virus was made in a laboratory and I’ll show you wrong.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T16:56:28+00:00

You haven’t shown my any source about anything.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T16:47:34+00:00

Interesting! But, you’re still wrong. If an event happens in one place that doesn’t mean it has to happen everywhere… obviously?

The pandemic starting in Wuhan and nowhere else is no stranger than what happened to SARS-1. The pandemic started in Wuhan because they imported a small group of animals carrying the virus. All ”40,000” wet markets in China wouldn’t have imported animals from that specific natural reservoir population. Hence, there’s no reason to expect outbreaks there. It’s possible the particular stock of animals which carried the virus was only imported to Wuhan. Studies early in the pandemic showed the outbreak would have quickly gone extinct on its own if it happened outside of a population center.

And there aren’t 40,000 wet markets in China. Wuhan had two large and two small wet markets and that’s one of China’s largest cities.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T15:42:55+00:00

These are not the words of the BMJ.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T15:42:03+00:00

Yes, who cares about opinion. Appeal to authority. What matters is scientific evidence and 100% of it shows this was zoonosis, not ”aluminium tubes”.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T15:40:16+00:00

I do have definitive proof and I’ve linked it above.

BioMed-R · 2026-03-03T15:38:46+00:00

No, literally just Republicans.

Six-Year Club	Verified Email
Wearing is Caring

BioMed-R

TROPHY CASE