and if it hadn t been written and is extremely unlikely, or there is no further investigation needed, then it can appear on that report at all. we made it clear that the laboratory hypotheses is not off the table butjust out of the different ways this pandemic could have started, yeah, that it is on the bottom of our list. do you think the chinese scientist at pressure put on them from that perspective? that is quite likely because as you say, all sars research has been put under a national committee. of course, it is difficult to know exactly who knows what and controls what, but it is clear that there is a chain of command there but, having said that, it was a good group of scientists. i think there is a question of why do we need to know this and how do we move forward?
on the molecular and the animals susceptibility, and very little on the laboratory. it wasn t a mandate to begin with to cover that in full. dating didn t have the full capacity is to do laboratory audits. they did in there and they made their assessments. clearly, there is much more work that needs to be done for the laboratory hypotheses. do you sort of stand by your extremely unlikely categorisation? do i stand by it? yeah. i still think. so, obviously the exact wording has gone viral. so, had we known that, then maybe that exact wording would have been a little bit more careful. just unlikely as opposed to extremely? maybe. if that would take the sting out, yes. i would not mind saying that. both professors told me they would welcome new investigations into the laboratory leak theory if credible evidence was presented. so far, they say, they have
and to virus. they had a mandate to study and to team virus. they had a mandate to study and to learn from the chinese counterparts what they were willing to share counterparts what they were willing to share with them. and then you see the report to share with them. and then you see the report that was out. they reported the report that was out. they reported several hundred pages long and is reported several hundred pages long and is a reported several hundred pages long and is a lot reported several hundred pages long and is a lot of information on the molecular and is a lot of information on the molecular epee, and the animal s susceptibility, and very little on the laboratory. it wasn t a mandate to begin the laboratory. it wasn t a mandate to begin with to cover that in full. dating to begin with to cover that in full. dating didn t have the full capacity is to do dating didn t have the full capacity is to do laboratory audits. they did in there is to do lab
condition that we wouldn t recommend specific studies on that hypotheses, we would just leave it there. he we would ust leave it there. he basicall we would just leave it there. he basically suggested that yes, there was pressure, and that is why it was characterised in that way and if it hadn t been written and is extremely unlikely, or there is no further investigation needed, then it can appear on that report at all. igrate appear on that report at all. we made it appear on that report at all. 2 made it clear that the laboratory hypotheses is not off the table but just out of the different ways this pandemic could have started, yeah, thatis pandemic could have started, yeah, that is on the bottom of our list. do you think the chinese scientist at pressure put on them from that perspective? perspective? that is quite likely because as perspective? that is quite likely because as you perspective? that is quite likely because as you say, perspective? that is quite likely becaus