of the scientific voices we heard early on had connections to this lab and to this research. and said that does raise to very troubling questions about the bias that went into some of these initial efforts. i mean, it seems rather clear as it did then that the lab theory had to be plausible. do not mean that it was the correct theory, but you had a lab doing this research near the wet market and wuhan. you had a very competent and respected scientist saying we don t understand how this thing is constructed or how it could occur naturally, this does not answer the question, but instead of allowing the debate, the social media, many people in congress, and people at the cdc shut it down and made these people pariahs for even mentioning it. john: as joe concha observed, he said if there was an outbreak of chocolatey goodness in hershey,
dr. fauci and dr. collins. now february 8, there is a comment by dr. anderson which said my main focus is to disprove the lab her toy. t the lab theory. the question is why? collins then emails fauci and says this didn t do enough to put down the last theory. dr. fauci on the white house lawn said it came from nature. there are sequences inify around that are similar. but privately they are saying there is no evidence that that sequence is related to related .
dr. fauci and dr. collins. now february 8, there is a comment by dr. anderson which said my main focus is to disprove the lab her toy. th the lab theory. the question is why? collins then emails fauci and says this didn t do enough to put down the last theory. dr. fauci on the white house lawn said it came from nature. there are sequences inify around that are similar. but privately they are saying there is no evidence that that sequence is related to related .
their claims today that they have been providing information to the united states, it s a guessing game in many ways. you re a diplomat. you say china hasn t cooperated. they have destroyed every piece of evidence, they have scrubbed that town within an inch of its life. look, you have to believe in a lot of coincidences that wuhan which is the site of all of these institutions involved in this kind of research that it s somehow just a coincidence, it s the wet markets there. i lean in the direction, and i don t have hard proof. again, i don t believe in coincidences, i tend to lean in the direction that it came from a lab. not purposely, but accidentally. the fact that the chinese have gone to such extraordinary lengths to cover it up reinforces the view. if there was something out of the wet markets why wouldn t they be cooperating? it s very hard to be dismissive of the lab theory. i was thinking about it, the china argument is entering the
natural origin, from animals to humans, that that s where it happenbut giving to circumstantial evidence to the lab theory, it s about a 30 minute drive to the institute of virology. but jake, go two blocks to the seafood market and that s where the wuhan cdc is located so that in itself is very speculative. and the cdc is a bsl-2, a little lower level of research, they still looked into that and coronaviruses. i do want to read you what the chinese have to say about this, by the way. the foreign ministry coming out quite strong. they from the podium today said that china has always actively supported and participated in global science-based origin tracing. the relate parties should stop stir-frying the argument of a laboratory leak and stop vilifying china and politicizing the issue. they also said, jake, that the w.h.o. concluded in the field