China aims to vaccinate the entire city 5 days after the outbreak


Bloomberg

WHO Origin Hunter pushes back as a report of being attacked in every way

(Bloomberg)-Approximately 30 scientists scrutinized by the World Health Organization and the Chinese government gathered in Wuhan, China earlier this winter to discover the origin of Covid-19 and how it was like wildfire. We have begun the painstaking task of deciding whether to spread. Six weeks after the trip, this week’s working group presented four possible scenarios and conducted an analysis recommending the next steps to dig deeper to find the origin of the pandemic. The 123-page report and nearly 200-page supplement were quickly caught up in criticism, with 12 countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, and Japan, questioning its structure and insights. The most unexpected critic was WHO Executive Director Tedros Adhanom Gebreyes. , Helped negotiate the details of the trip and agreed to the scope of work in July. He said the theory that the virus had escaped in a laboratory accident needs to be scrutinized more thoroughly. This hypothesis has been severely denied by the Chinese government. “There is clearly a lot of politics,” said Australian virologist John Mackenzie. 2003 WHO convened a mission in China to study the origin of SARS and was familiar with the deliciousness of doing such research. “He should support the report of his committee.” “I think it’s very strange that he insults it and he deviates from it,” said Professor Emeritus of Curtain University in Perth. , Said Mackenzie, a member of WHO’s Covid Emergency Committee. 19. The controversy was not unexpected. The mission failed from the beginning, and after months of resistance to scientists, China succumbed to a team of experts consisting of local experts from all foreigners. Nonetheless, the turmoil could undermine scientific progress in understanding how the coronavirus occurred, and is WHO-led in both China and other countries, where experts say it is always needed. Opportunities for further investigation are fading. There are multiple attacks every day, and obviously wrong, but deceived believers believe them, “said New York-based zoologist Peter Daszak, who was part of an international team of scientists. Said in a Twitter post about what he described as a “right-wing media outlet.” .. “The real problem is that this undermines science and, ironically, puts us at risk by leading us to a rabbit hole plot, rather than better understanding how to prevent a pandemic. A complex process WHO experts who traveled to China in January after months of negotiations were allowed to perform their own analysis in a post-travel media interview with reports from local researchers. Said it wasn’t. They also did not have free access to the controversial Wuhan raw materials and laboratories. Instead, they were required to work within the parameters negotiated by the Chinese government and WHO more than six months before the mission began. Their official report itself was delayed by a few weeks, but was questioned even before the official announcement. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has “real concerns about the methodology and process” of the report on Sunday, including that the Chinese government “clearly helped write it.” A joint statement from 14 countries, including the United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, South Korea and Norway, was released, lamenting the lack of access to “complete original data and samples.” Scientists from five countries participated in the mission. China dismissed the criticism on Wednesday as “serious or irresponsible.” “They want to spread rumors and push the hidden political agenda,” Hua Chunying, a spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said in a briefing in Beijing. “Experts said they went where they wanted and met the people they wanted,” she said, with WHO taking the lead in respecting the conclusions of scientists. Epidemiologists and other public health experts argued that not many countries allow unlimited access to sensitive data, saying their work appears to be out of context. At the heart of the controversy seems to be the inconsistency between the slow speed and prudent accuracy of scientific research and the political symbols posed to the investigation of origin. The Dutch virus, which was a member of the WHO team. Scholar Marion Coupmans meditated on Twitter about whether other countries would allow outsiders to do similar investigations. Much of the criticism focuses on the report’s dismissal of the laboratory leak theory, but the scope of the study includes references specifically to Wuhan’s laboratory studies or the role they may play. Dominic Dwyer, a Sydney-based microbiologist who was part of a team that wasn’t there, said that a true audit of the lab was “a much more complex process, not what we’re doing.” It states. Lab Leak theory has begun. When promoted by the Trump administration. Peter Ben Embarek, who headed the WHO mission, said there was nothing to suggest that it emerged from laboratories in China or elsewhere, and Maria Van, Covid’s WHO tech leader. Kelhob is the most comprehensive epidemiological and molecular data she has seen in 2019, and the Animals section provides details of sampled species. “We were able to create space for science,” says Ben Enbarek. “I wasn’t pressured to remove important elements from the report. Personally, I’m very proud of this report and, like my other colleagues, over the past few months. Despite all the concerns and pressures we faced, and the extremely difficult environment, we all stand behind this report. A spokeswoman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China commented in the 12th paragraph. Previously The identity of the expert posted on Twitter has been corrected in this version.) For articles like this, visit bloomberg.com. Subscribe now to get the most trusted business news sources. Please. © 2021 Bloomberg LP

Posted on