Proximal origins paper

Extracted Attributes

The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2

The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 is the title of a scientific letter published the journal Nature Medicine on March 17, 2020, shortly after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. The letter was influential in representing an early investigation into the origin of COVID-19, and written by prominent virologists including Kristian G. Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin, Edward C. Holmes and Robert F. Garry. The authors explained that the genomes of SARS-COV-2 and related coronaviruses, and the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, suggested that the virus spilled into human populations naturally via zoonosis, and not through a laboratory leak. In 2023, House Republicans released private messages shared by the authors of the paper, expressing a range of views, including credibility for a lab leak hypothesis, not included in the final and peer-reviewed publication.

Web Search Results

• investigating the proximal origin of a cover–up hearing

  Proximal Origins paper is the result of sci-entific work by international well-known experts. I think it’s impor-tant to realize that if you look at the recent report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence community is that one of their conclusions is that there’s no indication that there is pre-pan-demic research holdings, including—— Dr. JOYCE. Please allow me to address what information we had in front of us. I’m addressing what we heard Ratcliffe tell this— to tell us as a Committee that that wasn’t the case. That over-whelmingly the information at hand provided by the intelligence 31 communities showed that this was not a naturally occurring proc-ess. Dr. Andersen, in your testimony, you said the recently declas-sified report from the Office of the Director of [...] of the Select Subcommittee, I’m Kristian 8 Andersen, professor of Scripps Research. I’ve spent most of my sci-entific career studying infectious diseases, including origins. Today’s hearing has targeted a paper my colleagues and I pub-lished, titled, The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV–2. In this paper, we concluded that the virus very likely emerged as the result of a zoonosis, that is, a spillover from an animal host. This remains the only scientifically supported theory for how the virus emerged. If convincing new evidence were to be discovered suggesting otherwise, we would, of course, revise our conclusions. This is science. My initial hypothesis starts that SARS-CoV–2 was likely an engi-neered virus. This was based on limited data and preliminary anal-yses where I had observed features [...] testified. In that testimony, Director Ratcliffe said, and I quote, ‘‘If our intelligence and evidence sup-porting a lab leak theory was placed side by side with our intel-ligence and evidence pointing to a naturally occurring spillover the-ory, the lab leak side of the ledger would be long and over-whelming, while the spillover side would be nearly empty.’’ Nearly empty. Dr. Andersen, this quote came from the former director of Na-tional Intelligence and someone who has access to the most sen-sitive information provided by our intelligence community. If this is the case, can you explain how the Proximal Origins piece of which you are an author totally contradicts that information from our intelligence community? Dr. ANDERSEN. The Proximal Origins paper is the result of sci-entific work

• Proximal Origins, Scientific Integrity, and "Shadow" Science Advice | American Enterprise Institute - AEI

  April 16, 2024 - The so-called Proximal Origins[1] paper that dismissed the plausibility that COVID-19 may have resulted from a research-related incident sits among the most consequential failures of scientific integrity that I have seen in more than 30 years

• Proximal Origins, Scientific Integrity, and "Shadow" Science Advice

  The so-called Proximal Origins(#_ftn1) paper that dismissed the plausibility that COVID-19 may have resulted from a research-related incident sits among the most consequential failures of scientific integrity that I have seen in more than 30 years working on science and technology policy. My testimony documents these failures and argues that the production of Proximal Origins violated the Scientific Integrity policies of the Department of Health and Human Services and represented an improper mechanism of “shadow” science advice led by government officials that compromised possibilities for a formal and institutionally-appropriate investigation of COVID-19 origins. Three Take-Home Points [...] Three Take-Home Points 1. The production, publication, and post-publication treatment of the so-called “Proximal Origins” paper represents a major failure of scientific integrity by its authors, its unacknowledged ghost contributors (including U.S. government officials), and the academic journal that published it. 2. In their roles contributing to the coordination of Proximal Origins, U.S. government officials, specifically Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. Francis Collins,(#_ftn2) likely violated the Scientific Integrity Policies of the Department of Health and Human Services.(#_ftn3) 3. Proximal Origins was a form of “shadow science advice” and, at least in the United States, effectively served as an alternative to the empaneling of a formal expert committee to investigate COVID-19 origins. [...] The remainder of my written testimony elaborates on these take-home points. Elaboration of the Three Take-Home Points 1. The production, publication, and post-publication treatment of the so-called “Proximal Origins” paper represents a major failure of scientific integrity by its authors, its unacknowledged ghost contributors (including U.S. government officials), and the academic journal that published it. The events and timeline surrounding the publication of Proximal Origins are well established, thanks to the work of this committee, investigative journalists, and others, including members of the so-called DRASTIC community.(#_ftn4) Throughout this statement I highlight selected parts of the timeline relevant to my testimony.

• Proximal Origin: the paper that locked the narrative to usher in the Plandemic

  VAERS is designed to detect safety signals in data. The anomalous number of reports in 2021 is a safety signal with documented PRR values greater than 2 (ie: foetal hypokinesia).4 The necessity of the Proximal Origin paper and Fauci’s role in getting it published One of the reasons that the lies about the “wet market” and the “natural origin” story were so successfully embedded in the minds of the human population was the Proximal Origin (PO) paper. Its authors are Kristian G. Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin, Edward C. Holmes and Robert F. Garry and it was published on March 17, 2020 in Nature Medicine. Anthony Fauci (and Francis Collins) made this paper happen, as per the February 1, 2020, conference call arranged by Jeremy Farrar of the Wellcome Trust. [...] Public praise: Fauci has publicly lauded Lipkin as a “master virus hunter” who “stands out from the crowd.” Northeast Biodefense Center: After 9/11/anthrax attacks, Fauci pushed a major biodefense initiative; Lipkin served as director of the Northeast Biodefense Center (consortium including Columbia) for 11 years. XMRV / ME-CFS study: In 2010–2011 Fauci asked Lipkin to coordinate a multi-center NIH study investigating claims of XMRV links to chronic fatigue syndrome. Proximal Origin paper: Lipkin is a co-author of the March 2020 Nature Medicine paper “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2.” Fauci and Collins were involved in the early February 2020 discussions that prompted the paper; Fauci later publicly cited it.

• Wenstrup Releases Alarming New Report on “Proximal Origin” Authors, NIH Suppression of the COVID-19 Lab Leak Hypothesis - United States House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

  Investigating any egregious COVID-19 cover-up is essential to preserving future scientific integrity. “Proximal Origin” is the 5th most impactful scientific paper in history. To date, it has been accessed over 5.8 million times and cited over 2,800 times. Given its colossal reach and its dubious conclusions, it is necessary to analyze the process and publication of this paper to prevent the suppression of scientific discourse in future pandemics. The Select Subcommittee’s investigation is not over. There are still outstanding requests for transcribed interviews and documents from Dr. Fauci and Dr. Collins. The Select Subcommittee will follow through on these requests. Read the final, comprehensive report here. [...] Share via Email WASHINGTON — Today, Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic Chairman Brad Wenstrup (R-Ohio) issued an interim staff report detailing the Select Subcommittee’s comprehensive investigation into the suppression of the lab-leak hypothesis by America’s leading public health officials through the drafting, publication, and critical reception of the infamous “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2” (“Proximal Origin”) publication. The report titled “The Proximal Origin of a Cover-Up: Did the ‘Bethesda Boys’ Downplay a Lab Leak?” reveals extensive influence by the NIH and the flawed analysis combined with an alarming lack of evidence that led the paper’s co-authors to argue in support of a zoonotic origin. [...] Included in the report are previously unrevealed Slack messages and emails between the co-authors, unabridged transcripts of interviews with every U.S.-based contributor to the paper, and a detailed analysis of the coordinated effort to suppress the lab-leak theory. Key findings from the report: Dr. Fauci, Dr. Collins, and the NIH exerted undue influence over the drafting and publication of “Proximal Origin.” Specifically, Dr. Fauci suggested the drafting of a paper regarding the lab leak theory to Dr. Andersen twice, while Dr. Collins pushed for publication and approved of the substance of “Proximal Origin.” The co-authors were so comfortable with the NIH’s involvement that they coined the name “Bethesda Boys” to describe the nation’s leading health officials.