> It is documented that the Chinese deleted sequences from a global database.

You're referring to something completely different, which has nothing to do with bat coronavirus research or the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

A group of researchers working on new sequencing techniques for patient samples (not bat coronaviruses) withdrew their raw data from a database. They then published the key data in a peer-reviewed journal.[1] It's better to have the raw data, but it's not as if the researchers hid their results. And again, this has nothing to do with bat coronaviruses or the WIV.

The WIV publishes the viruses it discovers. They published RaTG13, which is now recognized as the closest known relative of SARS-CoV-2 (but not the progenitor), in 2016. WIV scientists regularly publish papers, give talks at scientific conferences, and collaborate with international scientists. We have a very good idea of what they had and what viruses they were working with. Nobody from the WIV ever mentioned anything that looks like SARS-CoV-2 before the pandemic began.

1. https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.202002169

What about the purging that took place early in the virus (not this most recent "database purge" ... which as you point out may not be the important one.

March 2020:

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/chinese-scientists-destro...

You mean the order to either transfer patient samples to more secure labs or destroy them?

That's standard biosecurity when a new, dangerous pathogen is discovered. Regulatory agencies in other countries would have done the same thing.

A bunch of patient samples were sent out to diagnostic labs before anyone knew they contained a novel coronavirus. You can imagine regulators freaking out when they discover those samples contain a new, possibly dangerous virus.

I think you are not familiar with https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01731-3

And you are talking about something else.

No, I am talking about exactly that story.

From the Nature article you link to:

> The sequences were associated with a paper in which researchers used nanopore-sequencing technology to detect SARS-CoV-2 genetic material in samples from people. That study was published in the journal Small in June 2020, having been posted on bioRxiv in March of that year.

> the sequences Bloom recovered were not hidden: they are described in detail, with enough sequence information to know their evolutionary relationship to other early SARS-CoV-2 sequences, in the Small paper.

I’m not making an argument, I’m summarizing the article. Here’s the relevant sentence:

> The genetic code of SARS-CoV-2 does not resemble that of any virus the WIV was known to be culturing in its lab, such as WIV1

Again, you seem to trust the Chinese administration to their word. I bet during Chernobyl we should have trusted the USSR for information too. And since this famous Chinese investigator said "oh no it wasn't romantic our lab" we should stop digging for the origin of the most catastrophic event since WW2

You're misunderstanding parent's post. Parent is neither trusting nor mistrusting the Chinese administration. They are simply explaining (and quoting) the article.

Then I disagree with both parent and article and taking my opinion which is that we don't know and cant trust what the Chinese say on the subject.

The Chinese can't go back in time and change things they said before the pandemic. The viruses that the Wuhan Institute of Virology works with are fairly well known, because the WIV has published numerous papers on them.

We know, for example, that the WIV has three live coronaviruses that it works with. None of them is close to SARS-CoV-2.

We also know about a whole range of other viruses they've discovered (by sequencing RNA fragments), but which they haven't been able to culture in the lab. These include RaTG13, which they first published on in 2016. It's significant that among all these viruses they've published on over the years, none is similar enough to SARS-CoV-2 to be its ancestor.

I'll just add that some of the people we're talking about here, like Dr. Shi Zhengli, are very highly respected scientists who have contributed a huge amount to the field of virology. Just accusing them of lying with zero evidence is in pretty poor taste.

Did they give full access to all documents and facilities to WHO? NO. Why do you continue an argument that has 0 basis?

The WHO team went to the WIV and got detailed information about the research conducted by the various research groups there, and were able to question the groups.

Tedros said after they returned that he doesn't trust fully the results and they need to keep digging for this possibility. Are you in any way involved? This persistent blindness of facts and distortion of truth is too much for a non interested party.

Google a reference for my first sentence.