So the Journal of Virology has a record of publishing this kind of unsafe GoF research?
What can be done about that?
I sent a complaint just out of principle, but of course, that won't change much.
So the Journal of Virology has a record of publishing this kind of unsafe GoF research?
What can be done about that?
I sent a complaint just out of principle, but of course, that won't change much.
The lab leak theory is perfectly plausible. In fact, when viewed objectively, it is a much more likely explanation than the problematic market theory.
The lab leak theory is perfectly plausible. In fact, when viewed objectively, it is a much more likely explanation than the problematic market theory.
“It is frightening to think that, in a large assembly, the air that each individual breathes has passed over and over again (…)through the lungs of all those present, and that it must have been charged with(…)putrid exhalations; but what is the nature of these emanations?”
“It is frightening to think that, in a large assembly, the air that each individual breathes has passed over and over again (…)through the lungs of all those present, and that it must have been charged with(…)putrid exhalations; but what is the nature of these emanations?”
What I missed a bit were some important but forgotten scholars from the 18th century, like Benjamin Marten, William Hillary, John Haygarth,… who were on the right track to the truth of airborne transmission. The history is more complex than just miasma vs contagion.
What I missed a bit were some important but forgotten scholars from the 18th century, like Benjamin Marten, William Hillary, John Haygarth,… who were on the right track to the truth of airborne transmission. The history is more complex than just miasma vs contagion.