@quisp65.bsky.social
RN at Sharp (San Diego): Cared for likely early COVID case (onset late Dec 2019). Previously healthy 30s pt—ICU, unusual clotting, highly contagious, nearly died. No travel. Hospital reported unknown viral pneumonia early Jan.
Papers do make it through; however, they typically won't imply wrongdoing in order to get published.
December 8, 2025 at 5:14 PM
Papers do make it through; however, they typically won't imply wrongdoing in order to get published.
Here is an epidemiologist and biosec expert pointing to the field's history; I've seen this noted by many in the field. There are zero GOOD papers providing evidence for natural spillover. Natural spillover requires an animal host. Also, the peer review process tends not to allow accusatory papers.
December 8, 2025 at 5:08 PM
Here is an epidemiologist and biosec expert pointing to the field's history; I've seen this noted by many in the field. There are zero GOOD papers providing evidence for natural spillover. Natural spillover requires an animal host. Also, the peer review process tends not to allow accusatory papers.
This, of course, is met with the usual over certainty. Scientists disagree here. What would this look like after a leak and a few weeks of adaptation in the local population? Good scientists, not influenced by an “undesirable” hypothesis, wouldn’t be so certain.
December 8, 2025 at 1:20 PM
This, of course, is met with the usual over certainty. Scientists disagree here. What would this look like after a leak and a few weeks of adaptation in the local population? Good scientists, not influenced by an “undesirable” hypothesis, wouldn’t be so certain.
COVID was strangely already well-adapted to human transmission when it was first noticed. ⬇️ What a coincidence! Were there more than two viruses being worked on there? Do we really know what those two were?
December 8, 2025 at 1:16 PM
COVID was strangely already well-adapted to human transmission when it was first noticed. ⬇️ What a coincidence! Were there more than two viruses being worked on there? Do we really know what those two were?
Here’s what that scientist working with the WIV proposed doing. I love this post because the first sentence cuts through every line of BS that’s been thrown at it—there’s been a lot, including from so-called fact-check sites.
December 8, 2025 at 1:07 PM
Here’s what that scientist working with the WIV proposed doing. I love this post because the first sentence cuts through every line of BS that’s been thrown at it—there’s been a lot, including from so-called fact-check sites.
Lab-leak denial is a product of misinformation. If people had been properly informed that a scientist working with the WIV thought it might be a leak, this culture-war stubbornness wouldn’t exist. That’s where all of this started.
December 8, 2025 at 12:53 PM
Lab-leak denial is a product of misinformation. If people had been properly informed that a scientist working with the WIV thought it might be a leak, this culture-war stubbornness wouldn’t exist. That’s where all of this started.
Quality? This whole lab leak denial nonsense started with disinformation when the press misreported about the scientist working at WIV saying it might be a leak.
December 4, 2025 at 7:31 PM
Quality? This whole lab leak denial nonsense started with disinformation when the press misreported about the scientist working at WIV saying it might be a leak.
Examining all hypotheses is science. Ralph Baric, who was working with the lab in question, told us COVID might be a bioaccident. Why did so many get stubborn with tribal groupthink?
November 29, 2025 at 11:49 PM
Examining all hypotheses is science. Ralph Baric, who was working with the lab in question, told us COVID might be a bioaccident. Why did so many get stubborn with tribal groupthink?
Senator Cotton's comments were a paraphrase of coronavirus expert Dr. Ralph Baric, a scientist with direct research collaboration experience at the lab in question.
November 8, 2025 at 5:52 PM
Senator Cotton's comments were a paraphrase of coronavirus expert Dr. Ralph Baric, a scientist with direct research collaboration experience at the lab in question.
Not even their faulty poll showed there is consensus. This is the only poll there is and it used snowball sampling which is prone to showing bias by following networked beliefs. You can't guage opinion of a politicized & taboo hypothesis with snowball sampling.
November 3, 2025 at 2:02 PM
Not even their faulty poll showed there is consensus. This is the only poll there is and it used snowball sampling which is prone to showing bias by following networked beliefs. You can't guage opinion of a politicized & taboo hypothesis with snowball sampling.
Even if they find a sarbecovirus with an FCS, it won’t be a logical end to the “artificially inserted FCS” theory, simply because they proposed doing it. I often see findings like this in nature overstated.
November 2, 2025 at 12:25 PM
Even if they find a sarbecovirus with an FCS, it won’t be a logical end to the “artificially inserted FCS” theory, simply because they proposed doing it. I often see findings like this in nature overstated.
If we steelman the hypothesis, that wasn't really the main issue. I believe there was some small discussion about the FCS evolving naturally in bats but it wasn't central to the debate.
November 2, 2025 at 11:50 AM
If we steelman the hypothesis, that wasn't really the main issue. I believe there was some small discussion about the FCS evolving naturally in bats but it wasn't central to the debate.
Many of them spin every little thing they find, rather than act like good scientists.
November 2, 2025 at 11:38 AM
Many of them spin every little thing they find, rather than act like good scientists.
JFC... your misinformation is keeping me busy.
October 31, 2025 at 10:15 PM
JFC... your misinformation is keeping me busy.
That's mischaracterization of the argument.
October 31, 2025 at 3:26 PM
That's mischaracterization of the argument.
I believe when they’ve found what’s implied here, they’ll have a documented alternate hypothesis to artificial insertion. Though artificial insertion would still be a possibility. Over my head though.
October 30, 2025 at 3:14 PM
I believe when they’ve found what’s implied here, they’ll have a documented alternate hypothesis to artificial insertion. Though artificial insertion would still be a possibility. Over my head though.
But this also highlights that the FCS remains a relevant argument regarding COVID origins, and why we should be skeptical of those who hand-wave it away.
Also ⬇️
Also ⬇️
October 30, 2025 at 2:55 PM
But this also highlights that the FCS remains a relevant argument regarding COVID origins, and why we should be skeptical of those who hand-wave it away.
Also ⬇️
Also ⬇️
No field can be trusted to objectively investigate its own potential blame for a disaster that killed millions. The conflict of interest is too great. We saw this bias in action when the 'likely accident' theory was improperly falsified from day one.
October 27, 2025 at 11:16 AM
No field can be trusted to objectively investigate its own potential blame for a disaster that killed millions. The conflict of interest is too great. We saw this bias in action when the 'likely accident' theory was improperly falsified from day one.
I believe this situation was largely a case of media exaggeration.
October 26, 2025 at 9:38 AM
I believe this situation was largely a case of media exaggeration.
I'm most concerned about an issue that is seldom addressed: The field often becomes extremely biased when assessing potential accidents. In the case of the lab leak, it seems supporters grow quiet while dissenters get loud.
October 23, 2025 at 12:08 AM
I'm most concerned about an issue that is seldom addressed: The field often becomes extremely biased when assessing potential accidents. In the case of the lab leak, it seems supporters grow quiet while dissenters get loud.
He mentions it briefly, not in detail. It appears to be the exception rather than the rule. I’ve seen numerous lab-leak videos on YouTube, but he ranks higher on the expert ladder.
October 4, 2025 at 3:28 PM
He mentions it briefly, not in detail. It appears to be the exception rather than the rule. I’ve seen numerous lab-leak videos on YouTube, but he ranks higher on the expert ladder.
Poor child has to block and hide.
The field showed it lacks of ability to be objective at the beginning of this pandemic when it improperly ruled out a lab leak. People need to broaden where they get their info.
Here's an epidemiologist and biosecurity expert on the issue.
The field showed it lacks of ability to be objective at the beginning of this pandemic when it improperly ruled out a lab leak. People need to broaden where they get their info.
Here's an epidemiologist and biosecurity expert on the issue.
September 29, 2025 at 2:13 PM
Poor child has to block and hide.
The field showed it lacks of ability to be objective at the beginning of this pandemic when it improperly ruled out a lab leak. People need to broaden where they get their info.
Here's an epidemiologist and biosecurity expert on the issue.
The field showed it lacks of ability to be objective at the beginning of this pandemic when it improperly ruled out a lab leak. People need to broaden where they get their info.
Here's an epidemiologist and biosecurity expert on the issue.
However, there’s plenty of indirect evidence pointing to the lab. Journalism failed to confirm this important leak.
Scientists working with WIV state they believe they inserted a furin cleavage site into a virus closer to Covid-19 than RaTG13 — and serial passaged it in humanized mice.
Scientists working with WIV state they believe they inserted a furin cleavage site into a virus closer to Covid-19 than RaTG13 — and serial passaged it in humanized mice.
July 17, 2025 at 1:22 PM
However, there’s plenty of indirect evidence pointing to the lab. Journalism failed to confirm this important leak.
Scientists working with WIV state they believe they inserted a furin cleavage site into a virus closer to Covid-19 than RaTG13 — and serial passaged it in humanized mice.
Scientists working with WIV state they believe they inserted a furin cleavage site into a virus closer to Covid-19 than RaTG13 — and serial passaged it in humanized mice.
Here's another virologist I was thinking about at the moment.
July 9, 2025 at 1:15 AM
Here's another virologist I was thinking about at the moment.