Again these are all valuable points as to how it is possible to see the validity of this paper and other related research as questionable.
The main failure is in simply not addressing the evidence that DURC and LAI resulted in COVID outbreak.
The first evidence of Lab origin of COVID is the evidence that has been suppressed in ways that are easily recoverable using the most basic bioinformatic methods, where this highlights the problem and questions that remain unanswered until now, it does require institutional change to go one step further where the institutions themselves, mostly university and other academic institutions realise it is in their own interest to clean up their act.
Here you are attempting to have an editorial team reverse their own decision to accept a paper where there are obvious key authors that are known to have disqualifying conflicts of interest due to their involvement in the DURC that led to COVID related research in the labs where it has escaped.
Good luck.
I have attempted to have Genbank’s own institutional limits addressed as there are many areas that are simply not up to the standards required of a DURC area of research.
What this means is that Genbank must be able to access for BOTH the overt bioinformatics linked to safe and necessary virology research AND still maintain a database that can withstand the test of less obvious dangerous and indirect Biological Weapon’s programs.
Here it is failing, just as many of the masthead journals have failed the test of DURC, otherwise known as biological weapons research programs.
The key failures have been in basic data integrity features.
Missing data and management of COVID origin linked contamination.
Failure to disclose even the most basic details of important features of COVID research ongoing suppression and censorship.
The way your team has engaged with Journal editors and tried and failed to achieve change, these journals have made their position clear and are simply not going to back down no matter how obvious the valid concerns are…perhaps this means it is time to attempt to engage a different level of institutional change.
The funding level of virology, even institutions participating in DURC, is actually too effective and I do not advocate this…there are too many good and necessary programs defunded in a way that is simply ad hoc
But the government institutional level can be leveraged to make it simply more difficult to:
1) hide conflict of interest;
such as with Holmes &WIV’s 2019 Genbank submissions which remain suppressed or worse…
4) other emerging issues of concern as with scientific areas that develop quickly the university based programs, especially those involved with DURC Virology, can come and go, but the public institutions that remain need to have policies that are fit for purpose and future ready…for example suppression of the SARS-CoV-2 reference sequence by Genbank indexers without explanation…where there is a note to contact them about how this crucial data became suppressed but then when contacted no information is given besides that this was apparently on the request of the submitting authors?
It is the same Michael Worobey who claimed that HIV had been circulating unnoticed by American doctors in the USA since 1969, even though the first AIDS cases were only recognized in 1981 and the first evidence of HIV in the USA were found in blood samples taken from gay prticipants in a hepatitis B vaccination study from 1978.
Dear Bryce et al,
Again these are all valuable points as to how it is possible to see the validity of this paper and other related research as questionable.
The main failure is in simply not addressing the evidence that DURC and LAI resulted in COVID outbreak.
The first evidence of Lab origin of COVID is the evidence that has been suppressed in ways that are easily recoverable using the most basic bioinformatic methods, where this highlights the problem and questions that remain unanswered until now, it does require institutional change to go one step further where the institutions themselves, mostly university and other academic institutions realise it is in their own interest to clean up their act.
Here you are attempting to have an editorial team reverse their own decision to accept a paper where there are obvious key authors that are known to have disqualifying conflicts of interest due to their involvement in the DURC that led to COVID related research in the labs where it has escaped.
Good luck.
I have attempted to have Genbank’s own institutional limits addressed as there are many areas that are simply not up to the standards required of a DURC area of research.
What this means is that Genbank must be able to access for BOTH the overt bioinformatics linked to safe and necessary virology research AND still maintain a database that can withstand the test of less obvious dangerous and indirect Biological Weapon’s programs.
Here it is failing, just as many of the masthead journals have failed the test of DURC, otherwise known as biological weapons research programs.
The key failures have been in basic data integrity features.
Missing data and management of COVID origin linked contamination.
Failure to disclose even the most basic details of important features of COVID research ongoing suppression and censorship.
The way your team has engaged with Journal editors and tried and failed to achieve change, these journals have made their position clear and are simply not going to back down no matter how obvious the valid concerns are…perhaps this means it is time to attempt to engage a different level of institutional change.
The funding level of virology, even institutions participating in DURC, is actually too effective and I do not advocate this…there are too many good and necessary programs defunded in a way that is simply ad hoc
But the government institutional level can be leveraged to make it simply more difficult to:
1) hide conflict of interest;
such as with Holmes &WIV’s 2019 Genbank submissions which remain suppressed or worse…
https:/web.archive.org/web/20220809085043/https:/www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/?term=Spread+and+Geographic+Structure+of+SARS-related+Coronaviruses+in+++++++++++++Bats+and+the+Origin+of+Human+SARS+Coronavirus
2)hide contamination of Genbank submission with DURC
For example here a record is contaminated with data relevant to COVID origin DURC yet it has been removed without identifying the contaminant.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Traces/wgs/JAMOGK01?display=contigs
3) ongoing data integrity and cybersecurity issues that still have not been addressed which on the one hand lead to removal of valid data…
https://url.au.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/i8gMClx1YYtWrR00cyijuzR-JA?domain=science.org
…and on the other hand have resulted in the most farcical of Genbank submissions…
https://url.au.m.mimecastprotect.com/s/4lv0Cp81YYtg2411T7CwuGbL2C?domain=web.archive.org
4) other emerging issues of concern as with scientific areas that develop quickly the university based programs, especially those involved with DURC Virology, can come and go, but the public institutions that remain need to have policies that are fit for purpose and future ready…for example suppression of the SARS-CoV-2 reference sequence by Genbank indexers without explanation…where there is a note to contact them about how this crucial data became suppressed but then when contacted no information is given besides that this was apparently on the request of the submitting authors?
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/NC_045512.2?report=girevhist
Data hostage in this DURC field has gone on for far too long!
Happy to have any feedback on this work in progress from you or any of the coauthors that you list here in your layers retraction letter.
https://aep.unc.edu/2023/06/07/playing-the-expert-doing-your-own-research-as-epistemic-cosplay/
Kind regards
Tommy Cleary
Postgraduate student UNDA
They parade their stupidity like an ostentatious hat. They can’t help themselves - bad habits.
So Worobey doesn’t believe that a Covid-pandemic with flue-like and often only mild symptoms could have spread undetected for 2 months?
https://aron2201sperber.wordpress.com/2024/09/20/12-years-of-aids-vs-2-months-of-covid/
It is the same Michael Worobey who claimed that HIV had been circulating unnoticed by American doctors in the USA since 1969, even though the first AIDS cases were only recognized in 1981 and the first evidence of HIV in the USA were found in blood samples taken from gay prticipants in a hepatitis B vaccination study from 1978.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2141817/
Thank god we have people fighting the paid fire hose of propaganda.