“I have worked in this exact laboratory at various times for the past two years,” she said. “I can personally attest to the strict control and containment measures implemented while working there. The staff at WIV are incredibly competent, hardworking, and are excellent scientists with superb track records.”–Dr. Danielle Anderson, facebook fact checker
In addition to the recently published reports from the State Department, there have been worries about he the Wuhan lab going back many years:
. . .worries surround the Chinese lab, too. The SARS virus has escaped from high-level containment facilities in Beijing multiple times, notes Richard Ebright, a molecular biologist at Rutgers University in Piscataway, New Jersey. . .Ebright is not convinced of the need for more than one BSL-4 lab in mainland China. He suspects that the expansion there is a reaction to the networks in the United States and Europe, which he says are also unwarranted. He adds that governments will assume that such excess capacity is for the potential development of bioweapons.
“These facilities are inherently dual use,” he says. The prospect of ramping up opportunities to inject monkeys with pathogens also worries, rather than excites, him: “They can run, they can scratch, they can bite. . .
Note the disclaimer at the top of the Nature article. Nothing to see here, move on . . .
Dr. Anderson has not only worked at the lab at the center of controversy, she leads work at a similar lab studying bat viruses in Singapore.
Are scientists who lead work in a biolabs qualified to give unbiased reviews about the risks of leaks from the biolabs they work with?
Twitter and Facebook continue to censor postings about these risks. Are they basing their censoring on obviously biased sources?