Nicholas Wade #COVID-19 Article Posits Lab Leak Theory

Nicholas Wade is one of the most distinguished science writers in the country. He has worked for Nature, Science, The New York Times and is the furthest thing from a conspiracy theorist. After appearing on Jesse Watters’ Fox News show, I learned about his article on Medium which is very long, and technical but also fascinating. In his tract, Wade seeks to not only weigh the evidence for the origins of the coronavirus, but also answer the questions of whether COVID-19 originated naturally that infected people or if the virus was artificially constructed in a laboratory and, somehow, leaked.

One part of Wade’s essay describes the potential improbability of natural beginnings:

“No one has found the bat population that was the source of SARS2, if indeed it ever infected bats. No intermediate host has presented itself, despite an intensive search by Chinese authorities that included the testing of 80,000 animals. There is no evidence of the virus making multiple independent jumps from its intermediate host to people, as both the SARS1 and MERS viruses did. There is no evidence from hospital surveillance records of the epidemic gathering strength in the population as the virus evolved. There is no explanation of why a natural epidemic should break out in Wuhan and nowhere else. There is no good explanation of how the virus acquired its furin cleavage site, which no other SARS-related beta-coronavirus possesses, nor why the site is composed of human-preferred codons. The natural emergence theory battles a bristling array of implausibilities.”

Wade also examined the proof available about the virus itself, the Wuhan lab, safety standards, and the funding made available by the NIH and NAID, authorized by Doctors Francis Collins and Anthony Fauci. It all points to one thing:

“Dr. Shi set out to create novel coronaviruses with the highest possible infectivity for human cells. Her plan was to take genes that coded for spike proteins possessing a variety of measured affinities for human cells, ranging from high to low. She would insert these spike genes one by one into the backbone of a number of viral genomes (“reverse genetics” and “infectious clone technology”), creating a series of chimeric viruses. These chimeric viruses would then be tested for their ability to attack human cell cultures (“in vitro”) and humanized mice (“in vivo”). And this information would help predict the likelihood of “spillover,” the jump of a coronavirus from bats to people.

The methodical approach was designed to find the best combination of coronavirus backbone and spike protein for infecting human cells. The approach could have generated SARS2-like viruses, and indeed may have created the SARS2 virus itself with the right combination of virus backbone and spike protein.

It cannot yet be stated that Dr. Shi did or did not generate SARS2 in her lab because her records have been sealed, but it seems she was certainly on the right track to have done so.”

What Wade is saying is that it’s not only about lab creation as much as it is about coronavirus being lab leaked, but its very likely that the virus’s release was an accident. A careless and predictable event that even Dr. Fauci was warned about.

Wade also comments on the seeming naivete of the media and his fellow science journalists, including their bias against claims President Donald Trump made too:

“People round the world who have been pretty much confined to their homes for the last year might like a better answer than their media are giving them. Perhaps one will emerge in time. After all, the more months pass without the natural emergence theory gaining a shred of supporting evidence, the less plausible it may seem. Perhaps the international community of virologists will come to be seen as a false and self-interested guide. The common sense perception that a pandemic breaking out in Wuhan might have something to do with a Wuhan lab cooking up novel viruses of maximal danger in unsafe conditions could eventually displace the ideological insistence that whatever Trump said can’t be true.”

Wouldn’t it be something if the mainstream press actually did some objective reporting? You can read the entire article here.