FabSwingers.com mobile

Join us FREE, we're FREE to use

Web's largest swingers site since 2006.

Already registered?
Login here

Back to forum list
Back to Virus

Dr John Campbell interview

Jump to newest
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

https://youtu.be/XzPophi-9M

Reporting on a study from. Italy where the sars cov 2 virus was known to have been circulating as far back as Sept the 3rd 2019,

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittleMissCaliWoman
over a year ago

all loved up


"https://youtu.be/XzPophi-9M

Reporting on a study from. Italy where the sars cov 2 virus was known to have been circulating as far back as Sept the 3rd 2019, "
I was reading the reports from Italy as I spent a lot of time at the end of 2019 on Italy..and am sure I had covid Dec 2019 after a visit to Milan.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

[Removed by poster at 05/11/22 07:38:57]

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alandNitaCouple
over a year ago

Scunthorpe


"Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though. "

To be fair, the report doesn't supply any evidence to support that claim. It suggests that a lack of evidence "Critical corroborating evidence" for a jump from animals is enough to cast doubt on the theory.

Unlike most of the "conspiracy theories" the idea that the virus was the result of a Lab Leak was always feasible, and was investigated by the teams trying to establish the origins of the virus. Their conclusion was that there was "no supporting evidence" for the theory, and that a "Zoonotic transmission" was "Most Likely". They did also state that they didn't receive the level of cooperation that they would have liked in Wuhan.

Unfortunately, we will never know the definitive truth.

Cal

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ylonSlutTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham


"https://youtu.be/XzPophi-9M

Reporting on a study from. Italy where the sars cov 2 virus was known to have been circulating as far back as Sept the 3rd 2019, "

When it did actually infect people in certain countries is an interesting question. With the exception of China, who hide stuff, you have to conclude it will be a short time before it was officially found,because covid at the beginning spread so easily and rapidly you would see hospitalizations and deaths. Italy would be the first inline as they have a fair amount of Chinese labour. Officially first case in Italy was 31st Jan probably the 1st cases were a few weeks before but I think Sept is unlikely but not impossible. They do know when widespread covid hit in some cities because they can detect it in retrospective sewage samples. Obviously these are very dilute so there has to be quite a few people with covid.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lirty-CoupleCouple
over a year ago

Bexley

Campbell talks a lot of sense and is always very careful about what he presents as information. His recent video on excess deaths in the UK is truly horrifying and backs up what a lot of people were saying would happen at the time but being written off as Covid deniers, cancelled and worse. A trawl through this forum will quickly give a feel of some of the abuse which was levelled at those who dared to express genuine concerns about what was going on.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ylonSlutTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham


"Campbell talks a lot of sense and is always very careful about what he presents as information. His recent video on excess deaths in the UK is truly horrifying and backs up what a lot of people were saying would happen at the time but being written off as Covid deniers, cancelled and worse. A trawl through this forum will quickly give a feel of some of the abuse which was levelled at those who dared to express genuine concerns about what was going on."

I do listen to what he says because not everything he says is rubbish. But he has got an awful lot wrong, ivermectin being the biggest elephant in the room mainly citing withdrawn papers and data. He is sometimes not always, very very selective in the data he picks. So use him as a source of information along with a wide breath of sources but always check the science behind it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town


"Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though. "

But that trustworthy organisation the WHO said after their forensic examination it was a bat in me kitchen. What am I gonna do?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alandNitaCouple
over a year ago

Scunthorpe


"Campbell talks a lot of sense and is always very careful about what he presents as information. His recent video on excess deaths in the UK is truly horrifying and backs up what a lot of people were saying would happen at the time but being written off as Covid deniers, cancelled and worse. A trawl through this forum will quickly give a feel of some of the abuse which was levelled at those who dared to express genuine concerns about what was going on."

To be fair, he has a tendency to misrepresent data to further his chosen narrative. Often presenting specific (real) data but then extrapolating incorrect links to other things.

The phrase "follow the money" often pops up on discussion about conspiracy, so it is worth being aware that anyone who is a "big name" on the scene is making millions from social media Clicks and fees for their public speaking.

It is always good to question everything, but remember that everyone regardless of their arguments has got their own bias and motivation.

Cal

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hirleyMan
over a year ago

somewhere


"Campbell talks a lot of sense and is always very careful about what he presents as information. His recent video on excess deaths in the UK is truly horrifying and backs up what a lot of people were saying would happen at the time but being written off as Covid deniers, cancelled and worse. A trawl through this forum will quickly give a feel of some of the abuse which was levelled at those who dared to express genuine concerns about what was going on."

Bloke is misleading, has been found out misleading people too, but people have their own choices I guess.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Unfortunately I think John Campbell has fallen victim to playing to his audience. He's realised that a certain type of content provides more engagement and therefore more revenue.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ophieslutTV/TS
over a year ago

Central

I'm assuming that he's published all his evidence for peer-review and it has been? Or, probably it hasn't been. Too many people stepping outside of the appropriate channels for the presentation of essential scientific materials.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *lirty-CoupleCouple
over a year ago

Bexley

Just to be clear, is anyone seriously dipsuting the excess death figures Campbell is highlighting?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site) OP   
over a year ago

Doctor baffled cannot explain the excess deaths, or the sudden Adult deaths, bells palsy, heart attacks, bloodclots, it's all totally baffling, friends, neighbours, people on TV, musicians ect collapsing and dying, young, old, all a complete mystery to Doctor baffled.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago

Mr Misinformation himself eh. Don't care.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ucka39Man
over a year ago

Newcastle

Their is a movie that was created years before the pandemic with exactly same finding unaware what it is or how to treat it yet a virus that quickly spreaded

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton


"Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though.

To be fair, the report doesn't supply any evidence to support that claim. It suggests that a lack of evidence "Critical corroborating evidence" for a jump from animals is enough to cast doubt on the theory.

Unlike most of the "conspiracy theories" the idea that the virus was the result of a Lab Leak was always feasible, and was investigated by the teams trying to establish the origins of the virus. Their conclusion was that there was "no supporting evidence" for the theory, and that a "Zoonotic transmission" was "Most Likely". They did also state that they didn't receive the level of cooperation that they would have liked in Wuhan.

Unfortunately, we will never know the definitive truth.

Cal"

I think you have underplayed that somewhat.

Several of the WHO investigating team were openly critical of a range of factors surrounding the investigation including, but not limited to, the 12 month delay in allowing an investigation, the requirement from the Chinese authorities that every member of the WHO team had a shadowing/corresponding Chinese counterpart, that the final report required each of these Chinese counterparts to both edit and approve any content, that the WHO team were not given unfettered access to various sites including the lab, that the data was incomplete, that the Wuhan lab was not approved to the right level of biosecurity required for the type of work they were doing, etc etc

Now that still doesn’t mean it was an accidental lab leak but it is sufficient to cast significant doubt on the findings.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alandNitaCouple
over a year ago

Scunthorpe


"Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though.

To be fair, the report doesn't supply any evidence to support that claim. It suggests that a lack of evidence "Critical corroborating evidence" for a jump from animals is enough to cast doubt on the theory.

Unlike most of the "conspiracy theories" the idea that the virus was the result of a Lab Leak was always feasible, and was investigated by the teams trying to establish the origins of the virus. Their conclusion was that there was "no supporting evidence" for the theory, and that a "Zoonotic transmission" was "Most Likely". They did also state that they didn't receive the level of cooperation that they would have liked in Wuhan.

Unfortunately, we will never know the definitive truth.

Cal

I think you have underplayed that somewhat.

Several of the WHO investigating team were openly critical of a range of factors surrounding the investigation including, but not limited to, the 12 month delay in allowing an investigation, the requirement from the Chinese authorities that every member of the WHO team had a shadowing/corresponding Chinese counterpart, that the final report required each of these Chinese counterparts to both edit and approve any content, that the WHO team were not given unfettered access to various sites including the lab, that the data was incomplete, that the Wuhan lab was not approved to the right level of biosecurity required for the type of work they were doing, etc etc

Now that still doesn’t mean it was an accidental lab leak but it is sufficient to cast significant doubt on the findings."

I don't think I underplayed it at all, I just remained objective. Cooperation could have been better, the team reported what they "thought" that "most likely" source of the virus. Them"s the facts.

The Chinese authorities would rather not have allowed outsiders to investigate. They generally don't trust the western world, but obviously that serves to propagate the world's mistrust of China.

Cal

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton


"Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though.

To be fair, the report doesn't supply any evidence to support that claim. It suggests that a lack of evidence "Critical corroborating evidence" for a jump from animals is enough to cast doubt on the theory.

Unlike most of the "conspiracy theories" the idea that the virus was the result of a Lab Leak was always feasible, and was investigated by the teams trying to establish the origins of the virus. Their conclusion was that there was "no supporting evidence" for the theory, and that a "Zoonotic transmission" was "Most Likely". They did also state that they didn't receive the level of cooperation that they would have liked in Wuhan.

Unfortunately, we will never know the definitive truth.

Cal

I think you have underplayed that somewhat.

Several of the WHO investigating team were openly critical of a range of factors surrounding the investigation including, but not limited to, the 12 month delay in allowing an investigation, the requirement from the Chinese authorities that every member of the WHO team had a shadowing/corresponding Chinese counterpart, that the final report required each of these Chinese counterparts to both edit and approve any content, that the WHO team were not given unfettered access to various sites including the lab, that the data was incomplete, that the Wuhan lab was not approved to the right level of biosecurity required for the type of work they were doing, etc etc

Now that still doesn’t mean it was an accidental lab leak but it is sufficient to cast significant doubt on the findings.

I don't think I underplayed it at all, I just remained objective. Cooperation could have been better, the team reported what they "thought" that "most likely" source of the virus. Them"s the facts.

The Chinese authorities would rather not have allowed outsiders to investigate. They generally don't trust the western world, but obviously that serves to propagate the world's mistrust of China.

Cal"

Tomarto Tomayto

The investigation was highly compromised whichever way you look at it. If there was nothing to hide then why go to the lengths they did?

The content in the report is very carefully worded. Basically nothing is ruled out and nothing is definitive. Arguably it was a waste of time. An attempted whitewash.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *exy Pretty FeetCouple
over a year ago

Live in Scotland Play in England


"https://youtu.be/XzPophi-9M

Reporting on a study from. Italy where the sars cov 2 virus was known to have been circulating as far back as Sept the 3rd 2019,

When it did actually infect people in certain countries is an interesting question. With the exception of China, who hide stuff, you have to conclude it will be a short time before it was officially found,because covid at the beginning spread so easily and rapidly you would see hospitalizations and deaths. Italy would be the first inline as they have a fair amount of Chinese labour. Officially first case in Italy was 31st Jan probably the 1st cases were a few weeks before but I think Sept is unlikely but not impossible. They do know when widespread covid hit in some cities because they can detect it in retrospective sewage samples. Obviously these are very dilute so there has to be quite a few people with covid."

An analysis of blood bank samples in Italy found covid 19 in October 2019 samples so I think it's highly possible it was around before that too

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irty_DeedsMan
over a year ago

Teesside

I honestly don't understand how the lab leak was ever dismissed as a conspiracy. Just so happens there's a lab working on coronaviruses, where the virus originates, that also has history with terrible safety violations.

Nah, must've been a bat/pangolin/great white buffalo

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alandNitaCouple
over a year ago

Scunthorpe


"Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though.

To be fair, the report doesn't supply any evidence to support that claim. It suggests that a lack of evidence "Critical corroborating evidence" for a jump from animals is enough to cast doubt on the theory.

Unlike most of the "conspiracy theories" the idea that the virus was the result of a Lab Leak was always feasible, and was investigated by the teams trying to establish the origins of the virus. Their conclusion was that there was "no supporting evidence" for the theory, and that a "Zoonotic transmission" was "Most Likely". They did also state that they didn't receive the level of cooperation that they would have liked in Wuhan.

Unfortunately, we will never know the definitive truth.

Cal

I think you have underplayed that somewhat.

Several of the WHO investigating team were openly critical of a range of factors surrounding the investigation including, but not limited to, the 12 month delay in allowing an investigation, the requirement from the Chinese authorities that every member of the WHO team had a shadowing/corresponding Chinese counterpart, that the final report required each of these Chinese counterparts to both edit and approve any content, that the WHO team were not given unfettered access to various sites including the lab, that the data was incomplete, that the Wuhan lab was not approved to the right level of biosecurity required for the type of work they were doing, etc etc

Now that still doesn’t mean it was an accidental lab leak but it is sufficient to cast significant doubt on the findings.

I don't think I underplayed it at all, I just remained objective. Cooperation could have been better, the team reported what they "thought" that "most likely" source of the virus. Them"s the facts.

The Chinese authorities would rather not have allowed outsiders to investigate. They generally don't trust the western world, but obviously that serves to propagate the world's mistrust of China.

Cal

Tomarto Tomayto

The investigation was highly compromised whichever way you look at it. If there was nothing to hide then why go to the lengths they did?

The content in the report is very carefully worded. Basically nothing is ruled out and nothing is definitive. Arguably it was a waste of time. An attempted whitewash."

The Chinese government go to the length that they do, because they believe that the western investigators would plant evidence and create a false narrative implicating them in some sort of wrong doings presumably because it's what they (the chinese) would do. Obviously to us, their paranoid behaviour makes them look guilty.

Cal

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *exy Pretty FeetCouple
over a year ago

Live in Scotland Play in England


"I honestly don't understand how the lab leak was ever dismissed as a conspiracy. Just so happens there's a lab working on coronaviruses, where the virus originates, that also has history with terrible safety violations.

Nah, must've been a bat/pangolin/great white buffalo "

Lol well said

Not as if there hadn't been lab leaks before....New York...rockefeller... Polio

But i guess this kinda thing isn't widely known..

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *agneto.Man
over a year ago

Bham


"Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though.

To be fair, the report doesn't supply any evidence to support that claim. It suggests that a lack of evidence "Critical corroborating evidence" for a jump from animals is enough to cast doubt on the theory.

Unlike most of the "conspiracy theories" the idea that the virus was the result of a Lab Leak was always feasible, and was investigated by the teams trying to establish the origins of the virus. Their conclusion was that there was "no supporting evidence" for the theory, and that a "Zoonotic transmission" was "Most Likely". They did also state that they didn't receive the level of cooperation that they would have liked in Wuhan.

Unfortunately, we will never know the definitive truth.

Cal"

Yes this.

It wasn't a conspiracy theory, it a was a credible possible explanation. Considering the facility in Wuhan.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *alandNitaCouple
over a year ago

Scunthorpe


"I honestly don't understand how the lab leak was ever dismissed as a conspiracy. Just so happens there's a lab working on coronaviruses, where the virus originates, that also has history with terrible safety violations.

Nah, must've been a bat/pangolin/great white buffalo

Lol well said

Not as if there hadn't been lab leaks before....New York...rockefeller... Polio

But i guess this kinda thing isn't widely known.. "

Obviously you can't overlook the fact that the lab was there "because" of location of the bats. Or that there have been previous virus outbreaks linked to these wet markets (such as the 2002 Sars-Cov-1 outbreak)

The investigation team concluded that The Lab wasn't the source of the outbreak, because they had zero data on the variant from before the outbreak was recognised.

Obviously it IS possible that all of the evidence was destroyed prior to the investigation, but it's a speculative claim with no evidence available to support it.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittleMissCaliWoman
over a year ago

all loved up


"https://youtu.be/XzPophi-9M

Reporting on a study from. Italy where the sars cov 2 virus was known to have been circulating as far back as Sept the 3rd 2019,

When it did actually infect people in certain countries is an interesting question. With the exception of China, who hide stuff, you have to conclude it will be a short time before it was officially found,because covid at the beginning spread so easily and rapidly you would see hospitalizations and deaths. Italy would be the first inline as they have a fair amount of Chinese labour. Officially first case in Italy was 31st Jan probably the 1st cases were a few weeks before but I think Sept is unlikely but not impossible. They do know when widespread covid hit in some cities because they can detect it in retrospective sewage samples. Obviously these are very dilute so there has to be quite a few people with covid."
Italy was suffering what they called a pneumonia epidemic from about October 2019. They were very concerned about the high numbers when I was there in October and late November

..

However there have been reports since that have said it was covid not pneumonia... I haven't read anything from Dr Campbell though. Just stuff that was coming out on research

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town


"https://youtu.be/XzPophi-9M

Reporting on a study from. Italy where the sars cov 2 virus was known to have been circulating as far back as Sept the 3rd 2019,

When it did actually infect people in certain countries is an interesting question. With the exception of China, who hide stuff, you have to conclude it will be a short time before it was officially found,because covid at the beginning spread so easily and rapidly you would see hospitalizations and deaths. Italy would be the first inline as they have a fair amount of Chinese labour. Officially first case in Italy was 31st Jan probably the 1st cases were a few weeks before but I think Sept is unlikely but not impossible. They do know when widespread covid hit in some cities because they can detect it in retrospective sewage samples. Obviously these are very dilute so there has to be quite a few people with covid. Italy was suffering what they called a pneumonia epidemic from about October 2019. They were very concerned about the high numbers when I was there in October and late November

..

However there have been reports since that have said it was covid not pneumonia... I haven't read anything from Dr Campbell though. Just stuff that was coming out on research "

But they don't have bat's in wet markets on milan? Or a lab with viruses being made?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ittleMissCaliWoman
over a year ago

all loved up


"https://youtu.be/XzPophi-9M

Reporting on a study from. Italy where the sars cov 2 virus was known to have been circulating as far back as Sept the 3rd 2019,

When it did actually infect people in certain countries is an interesting question. With the exception of China, who hide stuff, you have to conclude it will be a short time before it was officially found,because covid at the beginning spread so easily and rapidly you would see hospitalizations and deaths. Italy would be the first inline as they have a fair amount of Chinese labour. Officially first case in Italy was 31st Jan probably the 1st cases were a few weeks before but I think Sept is unlikely but not impossible. They do know when widespread covid hit in some cities because they can detect it in retrospective sewage samples. Obviously these are very dilute so there has to be quite a few people with covid. Italy was suffering what they called a pneumonia epidemic from about October 2019. They were very concerned about the high numbers when I was there in October and late November

..

However there have been reports since that have said it was covid not pneumonia... I haven't read anything from Dr Campbell though. Just stuff that was coming out on research

But they don't have bat's in wet markets on milan? Or a lab with viruses being made? "
no but they have work houses full of Chinese people working there... apparently

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ylonSlutTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham


"https://youtu.be/XzPophi-9M

Reporting on a study from. Italy where the sars cov 2 virus was known to have been circulating as far back as Sept the 3rd 2019,

When it did actually infect people in certain countries is an interesting question. With the exception of China, who hide stuff, you have to conclude it will be a short time before it was officially found,because covid at the beginning spread so easily and rapidly you would see hospitalizations and deaths. Italy would be the first inline as they have a fair amount of Chinese labour. Officially first case in Italy was 31st Jan probably the 1st cases were a few weeks before but I think Sept is unlikely but not impossible. They do know when widespread covid hit in some cities because they can detect it in retrospective sewage samples. Obviously these are very dilute so there has to be quite a few people with covid. Italy was suffering what they called a pneumonia epidemic from about October 2019. They were very concerned about the high numbers when I was there in October and late November

..

However there have been reports since that have said it was covid not pneumonia... I haven't read anything from Dr Campbell though. Just stuff that was coming out on research "

I am not doubting what you say or a previous poster that commented but shortly after covid was detected in every country pretty much people started ending up in hospital and dying, obviously excepting China who hid everything til it was impossible.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hagTonightMan
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.

It sais that the video is unavailable, is it that for you to? If so I wonder why and did john remove it?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *hagTonightMan
over a year ago

From the land of haribos.


"It sais that the video is unavailable, is it that for you to? If so I wonder why and did john remove it?"
I got the correct right link now too

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton


"Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though.

To be fair, the report doesn't supply any evidence to support that claim. It suggests that a lack of evidence "Critical corroborating evidence" for a jump from animals is enough to cast doubt on the theory.

Unlike most of the "conspiracy theories" the idea that the virus was the result of a Lab Leak was always feasible, and was investigated by the teams trying to establish the origins of the virus. Their conclusion was that there was "no supporting evidence" for the theory, and that a "Zoonotic transmission" was "Most Likely". They did also state that they didn't receive the level of cooperation that they would have liked in Wuhan.

Unfortunately, we will never know the definitive truth.

Cal

I think you have underplayed that somewhat.

Several of the WHO investigating team were openly critical of a range of factors surrounding the investigation including, but not limited to, the 12 month delay in allowing an investigation, the requirement from the Chinese authorities that every member of the WHO team had a shadowing/corresponding Chinese counterpart, that the final report required each of these Chinese counterparts to both edit and approve any content, that the WHO team were not given unfettered access to various sites including the lab, that the data was incomplete, that the Wuhan lab was not approved to the right level of biosecurity required for the type of work they were doing, etc etc

Now that still doesn’t mean it was an accidental lab leak but it is sufficient to cast significant doubt on the findings.

I don't think I underplayed it at all, I just remained objective. Cooperation could have been better, the team reported what they "thought" that "most likely" source of the virus. Them"s the facts.

The Chinese authorities would rather not have allowed outsiders to investigate. They generally don't trust the western world, but obviously that serves to propagate the world's mistrust of China.

Cal

Tomarto Tomayto

The investigation was highly compromised whichever way you look at it. If there was nothing to hide then why go to the lengths they did?

The content in the report is very carefully worded. Basically nothing is ruled out and nothing is definitive. Arguably it was a waste of time. An attempted whitewash.

The Chinese government go to the length that they do, because they believe that the western investigators would plant evidence and create a false narrative implicating them in some sort of wrong doings presumably because it's what they (the chinese) would do. Obviously to us, their paranoid behaviour makes them look guilty.

Cal"

That is quite some reverse psychology leap you made there. The delay of over a year is all anyone needs to know. They covered their tracks. Whether the tracks they were covering was lab leak or poor natural outbreak control protocols, we will never know.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ylonSlutTV/TS
over a year ago

Durham


"Also a report by the senate states its looking far more likely that it was man made and noting to do with bats or the fish market.

Bloody conspiracy theories that turn out to be true.

None of this will be in the main media though.

I agree 100% with what you say but I think the previous poster didn't disagree with you either.

To be fair, the report doesn't supply any evidence to support that claim. It suggests that a lack of evidence "Critical corroborating evidence" for a jump from animals is enough to cast doubt on the theory.

Unlike most of the "conspiracy theories" the idea that the virus was the result of a Lab Leak was always feasible, and was investigated by the teams trying to establish the origins of the virus. Their conclusion was that there was "no supporting evidence" for the theory, and that a "Zoonotic transmission" was "Most Likely". They did also state that they didn't receive the level of cooperation that they would have liked in Wuhan.

Unfortunately, we will never know the definitive truth.

Cal

I think you have underplayed that somewhat.

Several of the WHO investigating team were openly critical of a range of factors surrounding the investigation including, but not limited to, the 12 month delay in allowing an investigation, the requirement from the Chinese authorities that every member of the WHO team had a shadowing/corresponding Chinese counterpart, that the final report required each of these Chinese counterparts to both edit and approve any content, that the WHO team were not given unfettered access to various sites including the lab, that the data was incomplete, that the Wuhan lab was not approved to the right level of biosecurity required for the type of work they were doing, etc etc

Now that still doesn’t mean it was an accidental lab leak but it is sufficient to cast significant doubt on the findings.

I don't think I underplayed it at all, I just remained objective. Cooperation could have been better, the team reported what they "thought" that "most likely" source of the virus. Them"s the facts.

The Chinese authorities would rather not have allowed outsiders to investigate. They generally don't trust the western world, but obviously that serves to propagate the world's mistrust of China.

Cal

Tomarto Tomayto

The investigation was highly compromised whichever way you look at it. If there was nothing to hide then why go to the lengths they did?

The content in the report is very carefully worded. Basically nothing is ruled out and nothing is definitive. Arguably it was a waste of time. An attempted whitewash.

The Chinese government go to the length that they do, because they believe that the western investigators would plant evidence and create a false narrative implicating them in some sort of wrong doings presumably because it's what they (the chinese) would do. Obviously to us, their paranoid behaviour makes them look guilty.

Cal

That is quite some reverse psychology leap you made there. The delay of over a year is all anyone needs to know. They covered their tracks. Whether the tracks they were covering was lab leak or poor natural outbreak control protocols, we will never know. "

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton

“Produced by an international team of scientists after a carefully negotiated visit to China, where COVID-19 was first recognized, the report concludes that the likeliest start of the pandemic was a bat coronavirus that infected another, unidentified animal and then moved on to humans.

That's long been the favored hypothesis of many virologists, but the team convened by the World Health Organization (WHO) reports little fresh evidence to support it, and members acknowledge several other scenarios, including an accidental release from a lab, remain possible. The report does, however, lay out plenty of next steps. "We still don't know where the virus came from, but there's a clear plan to continue investigating," says virologist Angela Rasmussen of Georgetown University, who was not on the WHO team.

The report was jointly written by 17 international experts, selected by WHO and approved by China, and an equal number of Chinese scientists. The group had been working for months together leading up to the WHO experts' visit in January, when they reviewed data compiled by Chinese colleagues, went to sites potentially related to the pandemic's origin, and debated the probability of different scenarios.

The report's most definitive conclusion is also its most controversial: that it is "extremely unlikely" SARS-CoV-2 leaked out of a Chinese laboratory that was already studying coronaviruses, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV). There's little evidence to back the lab-escape hypothesis, but some researchers have criticized the WHO team members for all but ruling out the possibility when they were not authorized to investigate it independently. The WHO experts only spent a few hours at WIV and the report's discussion of the lab leak scenario is sparse.

That's understandable, some researchers say. "Given all the constraints and complexities here, they have probably done what they could," says Yanzhong Huang, a global health specialist at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York City.

Rasmussen agrees. "A team of scientists is not qualified to conduct a detailed audit of WIV's records, or get access to institutional files, lab notebooks, databases, or freezer inventories," she says. "Nor does the WHO have the authority to stroll into China and demand that they give them unfettered access to WIV, China CDC [Center for Disease Control and Prevention], or any other institution."

At a briefing today on the report, WHO Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus emphasized that further studies are needed to understand the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and criticized the access given to its international team on their fact-finding mission to China. Tedros said he expected "future collaborative studies to include more timely and comprehensive data sharing. … Although the team has concluded that a laboratory leak is the least likely hypothesis, this requires further investigation, potentially with additional missions involving specialist experts, which I am ready to deploy."

Also today, the U.S. government and 13 other countries issued a statement that echoed Tedros's critique and called for additional research on the pandemic's start. "Together we support a transparent and independent analysis, free from interference and undue influence, of the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic," the statement said. It was jointly released by Australia, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Israel, Japan, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, South Korea, Slovenia, the United States, and the United Kingdom.

"The international expert study on the source of the SARS-CoV-2 virus was significantly delayed and lacked access to complete, original data and samples," the statement said. It called for a "renewed commitment by WHO and all Member States to access, transparency, and timeliness."

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 

By *ackformore100Man
over a year ago

Tin town

They may as well have met in the dog and duck and inspected the spill trays. What can they possibly uncover 3 years on?

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
 
 

By *irldnCouple
over a year ago

Brighton


"They may as well have met in the dog and duck and inspected the spill trays. What can they possibly uncover 3 years on? "

Yep the whole WHO investigation was a seriously compromised whitewash. That doesn’t mean it was a lab leak but it also doesn’t rule it out and even the level of likelihood assigned to it was unreliable.

Reply privatelyReply in forumReply +quote
Post new Message to Thread
back to top