This is from the Telegraph, and it’s quite a story:
Leading British and US scientists thought it was likely that Covid accidentally leaked from a laboratory but were concerned that further debate would harm science in China, emails show.
They were concerned that the truth would harm science?
An email from Sir Jeremy Farrar, director of the Wellcome Trust, on February 2 2020 said that “a likely explanation” was that Covid had rapidly evolved from a Sars-like virus inside human tissue in a low-security lab.
The email, to Dr Anthony Fauci and Dr Francis Collins of the US National Institutes of Health, went on to say that such evolution may have “accidentally created a virus primed for rapid transmission between humans”.
I would say this is evidence Fauci has known the whole time, but Fauci was the one who approved the EcoHealth proposal to be conducted at the Wuhan lab. Fauci has known Covid-19 was created in a lab for years now; in fact he was the one who green-lit its creation.
But a leading scientist told Sir Jeremy that “further debate would do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular”. Dr Collins, the former director of the US National Institutes of Health, warned it could damage “international harmony”.
Again, the truth posed a threat to “science” and “international harmony.” So the truth had to be suppressed.
Viscount Ridley, co-author of Viral: the search for the origin of Covid, said: “These emails show a lamentable lack of openness and transparency among Western scientists who appear to have been more interested in shutting down a hypothesis they thought was very plausible, for political reasons.”
So how did they know the virus was lab-created? The “furin cleavage sites”:
In the emails, Sir Jeremy said that other scientists also believed the virus could not have evolved naturally. One such scientist was Professor Mike Farzan, of Scripps Research, the expert who discovered how the original Sars virus binds to human cells.
Scientists were particularly concerned by a part of Covid-19 called the furin cleavage site, a section of the spike protein which helps it enter cells and makes it so infectious to humans.
Summarising Professor Farzan’s concerns in an email, Sir Jeremy said: “He is bothered by the furin site and has a hard time (to) explain that as an event outside the lab, though there are possible ways in nature but highly unlikely.
“I think this becomes a question of how do you put all this together, whether you believe in this series of coincidences, what you know of the lab in Wuhan, how much could be in nature – accidental release or natural event? I am 70:30 or 60:40.”
This guy was 60-70% sure of the lab leak in February 2020. But he later revised his own estimates–one wonders who got to him:
Later emails showed that by February 4, Sir Jeremy had revised his estimate of a laboratory leak to 50:50, while Professor Eddie Holmes, of the University of Sydney, gave a 60:40 estimate in favour of an accidental release.
More scientists were skeptical of the natural origins theory:
The emails also show that Bob Garry, of the University of Texas, was unconvinced that Covid-19 emerged naturally. “I just can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature,” he said.
Professor Andrew Rambaut, from the University of Edinburgh, also said that furin cleavage site “strikes me as unusual”.
He added: “I think the only people with sufficient information or access to samples to address it would be the teams working in Wuhan.”
These guys simply weren’t buying it from the very start.
The new details came to light after members of the US Republican House Oversight Committee were granted access to the documents, after complaining that their content had been heavily redacted when released under Freedom of Information requests.
The emails were sent in response to a teleconference between 12 scientists including Sir Patrick Vallance, the [UK] Government’s chief scientific adviser, on February 1.
They’ve been stonewalled the whole way, naturally.
The emails show that by February 2 2020, scientists were already trying to shut down the debate into the laboratory leak theory.
An email from Dr Ron Fouchier to Sir Jeremy said: “Further debate about such accusations would unnecessarily distract top researchers from their active duties and do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular.”
In other words, shut up.
Dr Collins, former director of the NIH, replied to Sir Jeremy stating: “I share your view that a swift convening of experts in a confidence-inspiring framework is needed or the voices of conspiracy will quickly dominate, doing great potential harm to science and international harmony.”
By “voices of conspiracy” he meant many top scientists around the world who were not going along with the Official Narrative.
Institutions which held the emails have repeatedly resisted efforts to publish their content.
Bureaucrats believing themselves unaccountable and above the law? Real shocker.
The University of Edinburgh recently turned down an Freedom of Information request from The Telegraph asking to see Prof Rambaut’s replies, claiming “disclosure would be likely to endanger the physical or mental health and safety of individuals”.
James Comer, the Republican congressman who secured the unredacted emails, said it showed that experts like Dr Fauci had taken the Wuhan lab leak theory “much more seriously” than they had let on.
They took it seriously, and then they shut down all debate.
Investigators are getting closer and closer to the truth.