there were these others, the other 20 or so who had some connection. maybe they had spoken at a conference. maybe they had professional relationship. many of those, i think, don t rise to the level of conflict of interest. but, whatever the case, all 27 of these people were absolutely wrong by making an assertion in february 2020 that they essentially knew there it was a natural, quote, unquote, natural origin to this pandemic that wasn t connected to a lab incident and that any suggestion that people like me and others were making, raising the possibility of a possible lab incident origin was a conspiracy theory. that was not just wrong. it was dangerous that s why i have repeatedly called for all 27 of the signatories of this letter to publicly state that they were wrong to recant it and join our demands for a full investigation into pandemic origin. rachel: i mean anthony fauci himself laundered u.s. funds
joint press event in china alongside their chinese government counterparts that a lab incident origin was extremely unlikely, their words, it now turns out they were essentially lying. that the leaders of this international committee actually believed a lab incident origin ranged from unlikely to likely but that they did a deal with their chinese government counterparts who didn t want to mention the lab incident origin at all. so the deal was well, we ll mention this possibility and then we ll say it is extremely unlikely and not call for a further investigation. so the leader of that independent expert committee has now essentially come clean. it is just outrageous that this happened and it s why the entire world must come together and demand a full investigation into the origins of the pandemic in china with full access to record, samples and
the organization saying quote w.h.o. is committed to following the science and we call on all governments to put differences aside and work together to provide all data and access required. the next series of studies can be commenced as soon as possible. joining us now jamie metzl one of the member of the w.h.o. advisory committee. thank you for being here. for months now you have had the world health organization down playing this lab leak theory. now why the reversal and need for more information before you can reach a conclusion? just to be clear, the world health oh organization itself hasn t been down playing the likelihood of a lab incident origin. it was an international expert committee that was doing so. actually the director general of the w.h.o. has been pretty strong saying we have to examine all hypotheses. this international committee which in my view very shamefully announced in february of this year in a
personnel. sandra: china is unlikely to cooperate him. they ve been propagating from day one on this thing. rather than looking for a virus and origins they seem to know where it came from day one and started propagating a cover story. when i hear you talking about a full investigation, why was anything ruled out so early on when we didn t have all the details and certainly didn t have all the evidence that is out there? i totally agree with david and with the premise of the question. as you know, i was one of the earliest people early last year raising the possibility of lab incident origin and calling for a full investigation. it s outrageous that we don t have it. and in sum the reason we don t is what david said, china began its cover-up immediately and
real thought that it could have escaped from a lab in this pandemic did have some jump in the wild. that s why we need record samples with personal. it s amazing that after year and a half of the initial outbreak we still don t have that. bill: what do you think. what do i think? i think it s terrible. bill: in terms of the origin. what do you think? speak up i have this on my jamie metal.com website. i think it s most likely a lab incident origin. it starts and wuhan where they don t have any horseshoe bats in the wild. they have china s only level for virology institute with the