Tyler Stepke
@TylerAStepke
http://biosafetynow.org
I agree with the long-term goal, but it's far off. Our BSL3/4 labs currently lack bare minimum security regulations like mandatory cameras and sensors in critical equipment monitored by an independent regulator. No government agency even knows the total number of BSL3/4 in our…
We should ban humans from BSL4 labs and do all the work robotically instead. We need people working on developing defenses against the worst human diseases like Ebola — but to put actual humans in those labs with these viruses every day and then send them home to their…
"risk worth taking" Aged like milk.
A flu virus risk worth taking By Anthony Fauci, Gary Nabel and Francis Collins December 30, 2011 washingtonpost.com/opinions/a-flu…
LoL.
You're welcome. In the COVID origins debate, blocks from these natural-origin proponents often signal effective challenges to the status quo. Keep probing.
Naive as a young scientist I believed no scientist would ever lie. Following the fundamentals there'd never be a reason. But, indeed, as I learned, "confident liars" do seem to rise the highest. Grateful the "internal conflict" in my gut made me a horrible liar. H/t @hsu_steve
Someone pointed out to me that you cannot succeed in US "leadership positions" without being a "confident liar"! This applies to politics, business, and even higher levels of academia / technology. Not everyone is a confident liar. Thank God some people still feel internal…
Collins is a villain, not a victim. Here are some of the many things he said and did as NIH Director that helped destroy the agency’s credibility: 🫨Gain-of-function is a “risk worth taking” 😳Concerns about risky pathogen research are “science fiction” 🤯 Wuhan lab leak is…
After 32 years at the National Institutes of Health, including as director, Dr Francis Collins retired this year. “It became untenable,” he says. “Restrictions were placed on the research we were trying to do… Staff were being fired with no justification… We were also muzzled.”
Dr Roger Brent: if you canvassed any other sub-specialities of biologists who are not emotionally and professionally invested in issues surrounding research on viral pathogens, I suspect you would get a different 'wide scientific consensus'.
Francis Collins is a complete fraud who abused his position to shut down debate over the Wuhan lab leak, a leak that happened, in part, because his own institute funded the lab and because he personally championed gain-of-function research, which he called “a risk worth taking.”
After 32 years at the National Institutes of Health, including as director, Dr Francis Collins retired this year. “It became untenable,” he says. “Restrictions were placed on the research we were trying to do… Staff were being fired with no justification… We were also muzzled.”
Collins, like Fauci, violated federal policies on gain-of-function and enhanced potential pandemic pathogen research; committed conspiracy to defraud, fraud, and obstruction; used federal funds to commit crimes; and caused a pandemic that killed 20 million and cost $25 trillion.
Same vibes as for science fraudster Kristian Andersen and 2020 'Proximal Origin' paper that defrauded the public about the origin of COVID,
DID YOU KNOW? The bacterium at the center of this retracted 2010 paper was named GFAJ-1--short for “Give Felisa a Job”--a nod to lead author Felisa Wolfe-Simon. The strain’s name underscores the perverse incentives in science to over-hype non-results to advance your career.
"Instead of rigorously investigating the outbreak’s origin in Wuhan, international institutions chose to manage the pandemic as if the origin were irrelevant. There was no access to raw data, initial clinical samples, or the genetic database of the Wuhan Institute of Virology."
The Virus That Was Born an Orphan: The Origin of SARS-CoV-2 and the Silence of Institutions by @mises cc: @sciencecohen @johnstravis @sudipsparikh @julianbarnes @jocelynkaiser @kakape @martinenserink @ScienceInsider @Nature @aaas @Marcia4Science mises.org/mises-wire/vir…
The public has determined that many of your pandemic papers do not support key conclusions of evidence. When do you retract them?
Science is retracting the December 2010 Research Article, “A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus.” (THREAD 🧵) scim.ag/44TL1hq
This is "correction" is false and Flo is lying as usual, in this 2006 paper scientists inserted a FCS at the S1/S2 juncture, just as proposed in DEFUSE and just as likely occurred prior to the leak of sarscov2 from containment. pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16519916/
The fact that it took 15 years!!! to retract this paper—which was shown to be wrong only a few weeks after it was published—is yet another clear example of why scientific journals should be relegated to the dustbin of history.
Science is retracting the December 2010 Research Article, “A bacterium that can grow by using arsenic instead of phosphorus.” (THREAD 🧵) scim.ag/44TL1hq
Now retract Worobey et al., 2022 and Pekar et al., 2022...which are even worse, and far more consequential, papers. Fifteen years late, Science finally retracts false ‘arsenic life’ paper science.org/content/articl…
More important stuff from @gdemaneuf. Highly significant &alarming! This is the sort of lab leak accident that I'm certain ALL virologists have visited in their worst nightmares including even Dr Rasmussen. Have they conveyed a healthy respect of this fear? Absolutely not!
Here is the 20 Aug 2019 update of that PREDICT Sample Disposition Summary. The 1,276 human samples from Laos were lost when the freezer lost power, but the lab is still listed as being able to 'securely and appropriately' store samples. @pricklyresearch @R_H_Ebright
If I ask ChatGPT about the origin of COVID, it will cite the historically dangerous campaign of fraud used to cover up the lab leak. If I ask about how to improve open-source seq screening tools, my request is flagged + rejected. Alignment going well, I'm sure we'll be fine.
Good to see that--before USAID IG launched a criminal investigation, and HHS debarred him--Peter Daszak was working closely with amazeballs, totally unbiased reporters Kai Kupferschmidt and Jon Cohen of @ScienceMagazine. I'm sure the resulting article was 100% fact check true.
This time, we are comparing Deep Seek R1, DeepSeek V3, Grok 3, Llama 3.3 70B, Gemini 2.5 Pro, and GPT-4o on Daszak's calendar items about NatComms. DeepSeek R1 regularly surprises (image). @PeterDaszak @sciencecohen @Lake_Octopus @R_H_Ebright @emilyakopp @thackerpd @mattwridley
Is your PhD legitimate if you earn it by publishing completely invalid statistical garbage as part of the most dangerous campaign of fraud in history to cover up the deadliest accident in history?
I’m pretty sure it was the bulk of Pekar’s PhD dissertation. I’m not sure, but I think the fancy MCMC moves that Magee implemented with the non-reversible substitution model might have been similar. I, H and S were kids.
Garry, Holmes, Rambaut, Suchard, Andersen, Worobey, Wertheim weren't. Multiple gross errors of basic reasoning now stand as the last word in the peer-reviewed scientific record on this topic. Regardless of which authors wrote or even read the paper, a correction is needed.