@benjaminmateus.bsky.social

Lab leak propaganda is so mainstream that a bioweapons-book pusher gets away on Amanpour claiming "we got a lot of evidence from the senate... that a lab leak was a far more plausible situation than a release from the wet market." without even raising a follow up question. Biased media coverage...

Bild

I try not to comment on Alina Chan anymore, because I do not know how many times her self-serving commentary needs to be exposed for what it is for people to not fall for it anymore, but alas it seems she is planning her comeback tour so let me just explain what she tries to do here 🔽 1/

The virologists who brought us & the media the "overwhelming evidence" for a natural origin of Covid have been exposed. Their private messages refute their own key arguments for a natural origin & they were fearful that Covid-19 had been genetically engineered in an Wuhan lab.


Jul 28
The card-carrying virologists who published just about every influential paper claiming a natural origin of Covid reacted to the Defuse put-furin-cleavage-sites-in-SARS-like-viruses proposal as so:

What made me 💢 while reading their messages is they had the same suspicions & reactions to damning evidence of a lab origin of Covid - as one would expect from intelligent scientists - and they wasted years of our lives, pushing nonsensical double spillover raccoon dog theory.


It's one thing to have a genuine disagreement with another scientist.

It's another to have to waste years of your energy arguing with scientists who are smart enough to know you're right but choose to attack you as an unqualified conspiracy theorist.


How many more years of our time and energy are these virologists going to waste when we could be creating better guardrails and oversight for catastrophic pathogen research that's proliferating around the world?
Alina Chan

Anyone, if you see journalists or scientists or people online citing the double spillover raccoon dog papers, please show them the above slack messages from the senior authors of those papers.

Most people should be able to grasp the situation.Bild

Thoughtful, intelligent takedown of Matt Ridley's self-contradictory nonsense about a lab leak origin for COVID-19. Ridley's blatant backpedaling on key issues, & lack of interest in having his theories peer-reviewed should be disqualifying, but this is politics, not real science..

Bild

NIH Director is about to create a system that does the exact opposite of creating the “transparency” this group said they would bring. Funding decisions made in full darkness will remove the global leadership in health sciences that we’ve enjoyed for decades.

Jeremy Berg@jeremymberg.bsky.social · 3mo ago

I heard from several sources yesterday that NIH is planning to release a Request for Information (RFI) that apparently will include this: Scores and percentiles for NIH grant applications will not be shared with applicants although they will be provided to NIH program officers and staff. 1/3

David Morens' name should be trending. A 78-year-old doctor who worked in the NIH and has no criminal record was abducted from his home by armed federal agents and *stripped* before being transported away--all because the DOJ now works to validate right-wing conspiracy theories like the lab leak.

The lab leak bullshit has only ever been a tool of politically motivated right-wing operatives and politicians looking to undermine public health and doctors and scientists. And why? Because big business didn’t like shutdowns. www.politico.com/news/2026/04...

Former Fauci aide charged with conspiring to evade Covid-related records requests

Ex-NIH official David Morens is accused of concealing emails about potentially risky virus research.

politico.com

Looking back at this after a couple weeks, it's amazing that this "20% divergent viruses" data point was the very first point in Matt Ridley's summary of his case for a lab origin of SARS-CoV-2. Here's a figure folks can use who run into this argument in the future. 20% divergence is the norm.

A figure demonstrating that approximately 20% divergence between Spike genes of SARS-CoV and SARS-like viruses is extremely common.

Left: Distribution of pairwise amino acid identities for Spike for SARS-CoV compared to a deduplicated dataset of 112 sarbecovirus Spike genes (Hassanin et al 2024 with the addition of BtSY2).

Right: A phylogenetic tree estimated from the nucleotide sequence encoding the receptor binding motif (RBM) of Spike genes for the same data et has leaves colored by pairwise amino acid identity of Spike to SARS-CoV. Only 11 out of 111 other Spike genes are much less than 20% divergent from the SARS-CoV spike gene.
Kristian G. Andersen@kgandersen.bsky.social · 5mo ago

Matt Ridley gave the inaugural "NIH Scientific Freedom Lecture Series" earlier today and I just wanted to run through some of the main claims he made - you'll be unsurprised to learn that almost all of them are false. Here's his summary slide - let's start there. 🧵👇