09:2009:20, 5 June 2020diffhist−1,669
Shi Zhengli
→2020: CANNOT CLAIM "LEADING VIROLOGISTS" WITHOUT REPRESENTING BOTH SIDES. THE NIH ITSELF SAID SARS COV 2 COULD HAVE LABORATORY ORIGINS. IS THIS NOT LEADING EXPERTS? TOO MUCH BIAS
14:3314:33, 28 April 2020diffhist+16
Shi Zhengli
→Research: you're rewording it in a way that is scientifically inaccurate. the "natural" SARS CoV viruses could NOT bind to hACE2 receptors without the HIV chimeric insertions. that is the basis and conclusion of both of the references. also, you cannot say 'determined', it needs to say 'may' or 'possibly' because it is not 100% fact and is too suggestive that the science is currently concrete.
07:3807:38, 28 April 2020diffhist−25
Shi Zhengli
→Research: scientific inaccuracy in previous wording. Shi did not study how "natural CoV" binded to hACE2. Actually, she needed to engineer a chimera with SARS/HIV in order to make that binding occur at all. That needs to be clear from the description because it was the basis of her work.
13:0813:08, 26 April 2020diffhist+241
Shi Zhengli
→Research: including relevant information from the referenced article into one sentence. relevant information about her previous work cannot be silenced due to current politcal slants. Nature is a high quality source. Removals are unjustified and break WP policies.
10:2810:28, 26 April 2020diffhist+553
Shi Zhengli
→Research: this references prior work performed by Shi and doesn't suggest covid-19 was engineered. it is a valid source and information about her work in the past that should not be suppressed because of current issues. direct quote included so as to not mistate any facts about the article's contents. Neither is it connected to any paragraph talking about covid-19.