In diesem Interview antwortet Daszak auf die Eröffnungsvorlesung „Wissenschaftliche Freiheit“, die an den National Institutes of Health unter der Schirmherrschaft von NIH-Direktor Dr. Jay Bhattacharya gehalten wurde, der vom Impfleugner Robert F. Kennedy Jr. für diese Position ausgewählt wurde, weil er jede ernsthafte Reaktion der öffentlichen Gesundheit auf die COVID-19-Pandemie ablehnte.
https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2026/04/06/jhmx-a06.html
11 Kommentare
Hmm, I thought it was commonly excepted that COVID came from a lab leak at this point. Let me know if their are any better theories.
It’s not proven but I’d love to hear any other ideas.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. The virus emerged from the one place in the world they were studying it.
It was not a leak it was a hack.
Why is this guy not in jail by now?
Surely this disease has been studied enough that we can extrapolate it’s origins.
If it’s a lab leak then the only people who have anything to be ashamed of are the lab workers.
If it’s a zoonotic spillover then everyone on earth should be alarmed about habitat destruction, climate change, and biodiversity loss.
Freedom should not mean any idea that runs through your brain because it aligns with your worldview. You want to speak at a reputable institution? Demonstrate that your ideas align with the evidence. If you have a history of dishonesty (looking at you, Jay and Bob), don’t demand an invitation.
Mfs still want to pretend it wasn’t from atrocious treatment of animals and that we don’t have much more in store for us…. It’s ok, keep on factory farming animals and keep eating the meat…. This is fine
Dr. Peter Daszak? The one that wanted to fund gain of function research at the Wuhan lab?
If it was fraud, then why did the CIA and FBI conclude it?
Expert groups are the best assessment of this question. There will always be individuals with strong opinions to cite.
* SAGO (WHO, who Daszak helped investigate) – zoonotic but all hypotheses remain on the table due to lack of evidence. (softer than their original assessment)
* Office of the Director of National Intelligence – Natural low confidence
* Department of Energy – Lab low confidence
* FBI – Lab moderate confidence
* Several other intelligence groups remain undecided, along with many countries
* UK Intelligence – natural highly likely, but lab possible
* EU – has not endorsed a position and calls for more research into both theories
* Most published scientific papers on the topic support natural
So any fair assessment of this topic would conclude that both theories remain plausible theories and there isn’t enough good evidence to know the origin. It is fine to believe one theory over the other, but calling lab leak a ‚fraud‘ is not supported, and unfairly dismisses a legitamate theory.