The mystery of the Q samples. So China CDC got these environmental samples, found them sars-cov-2 positive, described them in table 1 of their preprint, but for whatever reason decided not to include them in their origin … assets.researchsquare.com/files/rs-13703…
… related analysis. The preprint simply says that they used positive samples collected on Jan 1. (The Q samples were collected on Jan 12.) This meant that, all the positive samples they got from stalls that are known to sell “domesticated wildlife” … science.org/action/downloa…
@zhihuachen The other odd thing about the Q samples: they contain the only PCR-/NGS+ samples.
@zhihuachen One would think that the Nature reviewers will ask for clarificaton. Surprising though that @ScienceMagazine reviewers did not ask Worobey to discuss the Peng et al Weibo data from 20 Dec 2019 to 18 Jan 2020 which showed an epicentre on the southern side of the river
@zhihuachen The conspiracy theorist love the lab leak angle, but it's more likely that China would want to cover up the illegal wildlife trade - breaking laws specifically introduced to prevent another 2003 SARS. But laws ignored.