Six months ago careful scientists called for a revision of the pangolin papers. The China Joint Mission Team of the WHO stated in February 2020:
“Since the COVID-19 virus has a genome identity of 96% to a bat SARS-like coronavirus and 86%-92% to a pangolin SARS-like coronavirus, an animal source for COVID-19 is highly likely.”
The Chinese scientists big attention on a source from wild animals has helped to slow down a laboratory investigation. The Wuhan Institute of Virology is a place where animal coronaviruses have long been stored and genetically manipulated. In this way, they channeled resources and efforts of the international scientific and political community towards understanding factors that have determined the contact between people and wildlife.
Earlier this year four studies emerged (Liu et al. ; Xiao et al. ; Lam et al. ; Zhang et al.) which further provided scientific credibility to the zoonotic hypothesis. The narrative was that SARS-CoV-2 originated from bats and then passed to humans via a type of anteater called a pangolin, one of the most trafficked wild animals in the world.
Non-profit organization discovered strange clues
US Right to Know (USRTK) discovered, however, that two of the four articles that form the basis of zoonotic theory contained serious errors. Furthermore, the editor PLoS Pathogens and Nature was studying main data behind studies again. The other two studies also seemed to contain errors.
“Problems with these research papers raise serious questions and concerns about the validity of zoonotic theory in general“, according to Dr. Sainath Suryanarayanan. Suryanarayanan is a biologist, sociologist of science and USRTK staff scientist. For him, moreover, the studies lacked sufficiently reliable, verifiable data and a transparent peer review editorial process.
Six months have now passed since the discovery of the errors,. Despite a “warning” highlighted in the online papers, no revision of the pangolin papers has been done. We at laboratoryleak.com hope that the process of obtaining scientific truth is not far off yet.