You are here: Welcome » DRASTIC

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
Both sides next revision
drastic [2022/12/03 15:24]
pamela [Interviews] 		drastic [2023/04/20 23:07] (current)
liam [DRASTIC PUBLICATIONS]
Line 203: Line 203:
  
 7. An appeal for an objective, open, and transparent scientific debate about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 7. An appeal for an objective, open, and transparent scientific debate about the origin of SARS-CoV-2
-By Jacques van Helden, Colin D Butler, Guillaume Achaz, Bruno Canard, Didier Casane, Jean-Michel Claverie, Fabien Colombo, Virginie Courtier, Richard H Ebright, François Graner, Milton Leitenberg, Serge Morand, Nikolai Petrovsky, Rossana Segreto, Etienne Decroly, José Halloy ((https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34543608/))+By Jacques van Helden, Colin D Butler, Guillaume Achaz, Bruno Canard, Didier Casane, Jean-Michel Claverie, Fabien Colombo, Virginie Courtier, Richard H Ebright, François Graner, Milton Leitenberg, Serge Morand, [[Nikolai Petrovsky]], Rossana Segreto, Etienne Decroly, José Halloy ((https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34543608/))
  
 8. Outlines of a probabilistic evaluation of possible SARS-CoV-2 origins By Gilles Demaneuf, Rodolphe de Maistre ((https://zenodo.org/record/4067919)) 8. Outlines of a probabilistic evaluation of possible SARS-CoV-2 origins By Gilles Demaneuf, Rodolphe de Maistre ((https://zenodo.org/record/4067919))
Line 234: Line 234:
  
  
 +{{ ::drastic_lab_leak_vanity_fair.png?600|}}
 ==== DRASTIC - Vanity Fair Reporting ==== ==== DRASTIC - Vanity Fair Reporting ====
  
Line 244: Line 245:
 On February 19, 2020, The [[:Lancet]], among the most respected and influential medical journals in the world, published a statement that roundly rejected the lab-leak hypothesis, effectively casting it as a xenophobic cousin to climate change denialism and anti-vaxxism.  On February 19, 2020, The [[:Lancet]], among the most respected and influential medical journals in the world, published a statement that roundly rejected the lab-leak hypothesis, effectively casting it as a xenophobic cousin to climate change denialism and anti-vaxxism. 
  
-[[:Gilles Demaneuf]] published his findings in a Medium post, titled “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: a review of SARS Lab Escapes.” By then, he had begun working with another armchair investigator, [[:Rodolphe de Maistre]]. A laboratory project director based in Paris who had previously studied and worked in China, de Maistre was busy debunking the notion that the Wuhan Institute of Virology was a “laboratory” at all. In fact, the WIV housed numerous laboratories that worked on coronaviruses. Only one of them has the highest biosafety protocol: BSL-4, in which researchers must wear full-body pressurized suits with independent oxygen. Others are designated BSL-3 and even BSL-2, roughly as secure as an American dentist’s office.+[[:Gilles Demaneuf]] published his findings in a Medium post, titled “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly: a review of SARS Lab Escapes.” By then, he had begun working with another armchair investigator, [[:Rodolphe de Maistre]]. A laboratory project director based in Paris who had previously studied and worked in China, de Maistre was busy debunking the notion that the [[:Wuhan Institute of Virology]] was a “laboratory” at all. In fact, the WIV housed numerous laboratories that worked on coronaviruses. Only one of them has the highest biosafety protocol: BSL-4, in which researchers must wear full-body pressurized suits with independent oxygen. Others are designated BSL-3 and even BSL-2, roughly as secure as an American dentist’s office.
  
-Having connected online, Demaneuf and de Maistre began assembling a comprehensive list of research laboratories in China. As they posted their findings on [[:Twitter]], they were soon joined by others around the world. Some were cutting-edge scientists at prestigious research institutes. Others were unemployed science enthusiasts. Together, they formed a group called DRASTIC, short for Decentralized Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating [[:COVID-19]]. Their stated objective was to solve the riddle of COVID-19’s origin. ((https://web.archive.org/web/20210603100523/https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins))+Having connected online, Demaneuf and de Maistre began assembling a comprehensive list of research laboratories in China. As they posted their findings on [[:Twitter]], they were soon joined by others around the world. Some were cutting-edge scientists at prestigious research institutes. Others were unemployed science enthusiasts. Together, they formed a group called DRASTIC, short for Decentralized Radical Autonomous Search Team Investigating [[:COVID-19]]. Their stated objective was to solve the riddle of COVID-19’s origin.  
 + 
 +As they posted their findings, the DRASTIC researchers attracted new allies. Among the most prominent was [[:Jamie Metzl]], who launched a blog on April 16 that became a go-to site for government researchers and journalists examining the lab-leak hypothesis. A former executive vice president of the Asia Society, Metzl sits on the World Health Organization’s advisory committee on human genome editing and served in the Clinton administration as the NSC’s director for multilateral affairs. In his first post on the subject, he made clear that he had no definitive proof and believed that Chinese researchers at the WIV had the “best intentions.” Metzl also noted, “In no way do I seek to support or align myself with any activities that may be considered unfair, dishonest, nationalistic, racist, bigoted, or biased in any way.”((https://web.archive.org/web/20210603100523/https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/06/the-lab-leak-theory-inside-the-fight-to-uncover-covid-19s-origins))
  
  
Back to top