Remember peter Daszak, the WHO expert who "just"faced" The New York Times fake news?
In February 2021, Dasak was interviewed by The New York Times on the issue of virus traceability, but the latter took it out of context and concluded that "China refuses to share key data". Dasak immediately denounced the New York Times on social platforms as "too shameless! ”
Today, more and more WHO experts are no longer silent.
Recently, Thea Fisher, a member of the WHO International Scientific Advisory Group on the Origin of Novel Pathogens (SAGO) and a Danish epidemiologist who participated in the first phase of whose joint research on traceability, published a new book, "Virus Detective: Tracing the Origin of the Epidemic", which details the personal experience of the WHO expert team in China to carry out the joint research on traceability, and her interviews with the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and other US media, but was distorted to report the truth.
Danish epidemiologist Thea Fisher
Cover of Thea Fisher's new book, Virus Detective: Tracing the Origins of the Outbreak
One
Only by witnessing it in person can we know the hardships of China's fight against the epidemic
In mid-January 2021, the WHO expert team arrived in Wuhan to carry out traceability work. Chinese researchers have invested great efforts in preparing massive amounts of data for us to use and analyze, and have shared their knowledge with us without reservation.
Our visit to Hubei Provincial Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine (also known as "Xinhua Hospital") was very successful, and Chinese experts described the medical process of early case emergence and hospital response strategies. We understand that Chinese doctors have long studied the association between COVID-19 infection and the Huanan seafood market and conducted correct epidemiological investigations.
In a meeting with "Patient Zero", Dr. Zhang Jixian of Xinhua Hospital detailed a large number of professional details of early cases. We asked all the questions we wanted to ask and heard many touching stories about the fight against the epidemic.
On December 27, 2019, Dr. Zhang Jixian of Hubei Provincial Hospital of Integrated Traditional Chinese and Western Medicine took the lead in reporting three suspicious pneumonia cases, known as "the first person to report the epidemic situation in China". Just one week later, China informed WHO of the situation.
I remembered that long before Denmark reported the epidemic, Chinese medical workers were already on the front line to fight the unknown and dangerous new crown virus, and I saluted the medical staff in Wuhan.
The Wuhan Institute of Virology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences has the world's largest P4 laboratory, which has absorbed the expert opinions of various countries in the design and construction process, has the most advanced equipment, and adopts the highest operating standards of the world's general biosecurity. Shi Zhengli, a Chinese expert, patiently answered our questions for 2 hours. She was calm and professional, and we quickly understood her every word.
Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences
Researchers wear protective equipment in the P4 laboratory of the Wuhan Institute of Virology
Shi Zhengli, a researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences and director of the Research Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases of the Wuhan Institute of Virology. She has researched and confirmed that bats are the natural hosts of the SARS coronavirus. After a two-week field trip, we found no evidence to support the "laboratory leak theory." All experts agree that viruses are most likely of natural origin and transmitted from animals to humans.
According to our phase I study, the introduction of the virus into the population through the intermediate host can be locked in September to December 2019, most likely from October to mid-December. Before the final conclusions and press conferences, WHO, the expert group and the Chinese government had a careful discussion, striving to make every word meaningful and reflect consensus and conclusion.
Two
The difficulties exist objectively, but the results are satisfactory
I and other experts were selected to join the WHO panel not because of our friendly or hostile attitude toward China or the United States, but because I personally have an absolutely neutral view of China and the United States. We were selected based solely on scientific and professional competence. Our principle is to believe in objective information, to be close to the truth, not to prejudge in advance, and not to engage in presumption of guilt.
The origin of the virus is not to blame a certain country, but to prevent the recurrence of a similar pandemic. However, no matter how scientifically cautious scientists are, traceability will inevitably involve political factors. Once science and politics are mixed together, only politics remains.
Promoting the "laboratory leak theory" is to make China more responsible. Countless experiences have shown that science is the only way to fight the epidemic, and only by making concerted efforts can mankind truly defeat the epidemic.
The United States' propagation of the "laboratory leak theory" is an ugly attempt to politicize traceability. Uncle Sam stared at the innocent Wuhan laboratory, but turned a blind eye to fort Detrick in the United States, the "test field" of germ warfare. (Comic | Liu Rui)
Due to cultural differences, language barriers, and prevention and control measures, we will certainly encounter some difficulties in our work, but this does not mean that the Chinese government deliberately withholds information.
In the early stage of the exchange, the Chinese side and the WHO expert group had communication problems, so the two sides lacked trust in each other. Chinese researchers do not know who the WHO experts are concerned that the WHO experts will take the charts and data displayed by the Chinese side and upload them to the Internet, and this information is patient privacy. The WHO expert group repeatedly raised the same question about the data provided by the Chinese side, which also caused displeasure among the Chinese experts.
Another example is the WHO panel's request to study data from 1 September 2020. But before that, China had already started to study data from October 1, and 233 independent health research institutions had invested huge resources in this regard, and this work could not be reversed.
Imagine how the Danes would feel if a Chinese delegation visited Denmark and went back and forth on the ground to review the data provided by its hosts. Can the Chinese delegation visit danish hospitals and research institutes to see their work scenarios and achievements? I don't think it will go so well.
What I have seen and heard in China has made me realize that the Chinese government's allowing foreign experts to work deep into the hinterland reflects China's self-confidence and is also a huge contribution. The Chinese government's preparations and concessions throughout the process far exceeded our expectations.
Fisher in Wuhan
All in all, our cooperation with Chinese experts is very pleasant. At the end of the trip to Wuhan, we shook hands with them and said goodbye. For me, it is an honor to go to Wuhan to participate in the traceability work. I was satisfied and rewarding.
Three
Get involved in political games and see the US media turn black and white upside down
Shortly after returning to Denmark, a Reporter from the New York Times invited me to an interview. I was prepared for the attitude of the US media to criticize the WHO and the Chinese government. In an interview, I said that the expert group has been based on the scientific spirit of the traceability work, open and transparent, and the final conclusion is the result of the joint efforts of all parties. Disagreements with China are only inevitable in scientific research.
The reporters did not ask questions about the "laboratory leak theory" they had been advocating. But when I saw the draft interview afterwards, I was surprised to find that the reporter had come to a very different conclusion about my remarks. Their motives are not pure, they just want to make up the horrific story of "China's attempts to cover up data and constantly clash with the WHO expert group", which is completely inconsistent with the facts I have described. I immediately wrote a letter questioning it, but no one answered it. A few days later, the New York Times ran a report titled "China Refuses to Hand Over Key Data."
The New York Times report, titled "China refuses to hand over key data," takes the content of the interviewees' conversations out of context and reverses black and white.
In addition, WHO and the expert group agreed not to disclose the specifics until the official release of the traceability report on the afternoon of 30 March 2021. But in the morning, the Wall Street Journal preemptively published a number of articles, pointing directly at the report that has not yet been released. This was carefully arranged by them to fabricate the lie that the WHO report did not answer key questions due to the lack of data.
These two events involved me in the political game myself, which caused me great trouble, and also made me recognize the political role played by the American media, that is, to reverse black and white, and let unintentional words become a scandal on the front page of the media. I didn't expect the truth to be invincible to the lie...
In August 2021, the US intelligence agencies concocted the so-called "traceability report" with the intention of planting stolen goods from China, but they could not come up with any real evidence, becoming an international laughingstock, and could only cheekily continue to slander the Chinese side for "obstructing international investigations" and "refusing to share information". In addition, the United States continues to coerce and suppress professional scientists around the world and engage in "traceability terrorism."
Good and evil will be rewarded in the end. As authoritative experts such as Dasak and Fisher come forward to restore the truth, the so-called "opaque" and "non-cooperation" theories of the So-called "opaque" and "non-cooperation" of the Chinese side that are rumored by the United States have become more and more marketless, and the conspiracy of "political traceability" will inevitably be thrown into the garbage heap of history.
Source: Chaoyang Shaoxia