Pienso que no sois derecho. Discutiremos.
Sobre nosotros
Group social work what does degree bs stand for how to take off mascara with eyelash extensions how much is heel balm what does myth mean in theorjes english ox power bank 20000mah price in bangladesh life goes on lyrics quotes full form of cnf in export i love you to the moon and back meaning in punjabi what pokemon cards are the best to buy black seeds arabic translation.
The Chinese Embassy in Vanuatu herein clarifies China's position and answers inquiries to set the record straight. Q: What are China's position and propositions regarding origin-tracing? A: China's position on global origin-tracing is consistent and clear-cut. First, origin-tracing is a matter of science. It should be and can only be left to scientists to identify, through scientific research, the zoonotic source of the virus and animal-human transmission routes.
No country has the right to put its own political interests above people's lives, nor should a matter of science be politicized for the purpose of slandering and attacking other countries. Second, the findings and recommendations of the WHO World Health Organization -China joint study report are widely recognized by the international community and scientists, and must be respected and implemented by all parties, including the WHO.
The future work of global origin-tracing should and must proceed from that basis, instead of reinventing the wheel. Third, China has all along supported and will continue to take part in science-based origin-tracing what are the theories of state origin. What China opposes is politicizing origin-tracing, or origin-tracing that goes against the World Health Assembly WHA resolution and disregards the joint study report.
Fourth, the WHO Secretariat should act on the WHA resolution, conduct thorough consultation with member states on the global origin-tracing work plan, including the follow-up mechanism, and fully respect the views of member states. Very importantly, the plan for origin-tracing involving a particular country must be decided through consultation with the country concerned, as it provides the basis for effective cooperation to be conducted. A: China has all along attached great importance to what are the theories of state origin global efforts on origin-tracing.
It has actively engaged in origin-tracing cooperation with the WHO since the early outbreak of COVID, shared the genome sequencing of the virus at the earliest time possible, and invited WHO experts to China twice for origin-tracing research. The Chinese side is actively implementing the recommendations of the WHO-China joint study report and is willing to share China's research results on origin-tracing with all parties.
What are its conclusions? A: From January 14 to February 10 this year, Chinese experts and international experts from the WHO and ten countries formed a joint team and conducted joint research for 28 days in Wuhan, China. The Chinese side offered necessary facilitation for the team's work, fully demonstrating its openness, transparency and responsible attitude. On 30 March in Geneva, the WHO released the report of the joint study, reaching clear conclusions that COVID introduction through a lab leak is "extremely unlikely" and introduction through an intermediate host is "likely to very likely".
The report highlights the importance to investigate early cases in different countries. The report also gives a series of recommendations for future researches, including developing a comprehensive information database, conducting further retrospective and systematic research around earlier cases and possible hosts, and analyzing the roles of cold chains and frozen foods in the transmission of the virus. It has been proven to be a valuable and authoritative report that can stand the test of science and time.
The report has been officially published by the WHO, and ought to serve as the basis and guideline for global origin-tracing efforts. Any attempt to repudiate and distort the conclusions of the joint study report is a political manipulation and disrespectful to global scientists and science. Q: The WHO Secretariat has notified its member states of its work plan on the second-phase origins study.
What is China's position on that? A: First, this work plan is inconsistent with the requirements of the resolution of the 73rd WHA. The resolution clearly stipulates that the WHO Director-General will continue to work closely with member states to identify the zoonotic source of the virus and the route of introduction to the human population. This means that the formulation of the next-phase origin-tracing work plan needs to be led by WHO member states, and the WHO has what is impact analysis in business analysis reach consensus with its member states after full consultation.
Second, this work plan is inconsistent with the conclusions and recommendations of the WHO-China joint study report. The authoritative conclusions and scientific recommendations in the report should serve as the important foundation for next-phase global origins study. A: We noted with regret that this work plan was heavily disrupted by politicization and was a document that lost scientific principles and lacked a spirit of cooperation.
The WHO-China joint study report clearly concludes that "lab leak is extremely unlikely", and there is broad consensus in the international scientific community on this. However, this work plan still lists the hypothesis that "a Chinese violation of laboratory protocols had caused the virus to leak" as a research priority, and deliberately ignores important research directions including the early cases globally and cold-chain transmission of the virus. One cannot help but think that this work plan is made to echo the "lab leak theory" advocated by certain countries such as the United States.
The lack of transparency in the drafting process also added to the suspicion that the work plan what are the theories of state origin the product of political manipulation. Origins study is a serious scientific issue that requires cooperation of global scientists. We hope the WHO can adhere to the spirit of science, professionalism and objectivity and work with the international community to jointly uphold the scientific integrity of origins study, resist politicization and safeguard the sound atmosphere of global anti-epidemic cooperation.
Q: Why does China insist that the next phase origins study should be carried out in various places and countries around the world? A: For some time, more and more reports have pointed to separate outbreaks in multiple places in the world in the latter half ofand at least five states in the United States alone had earlier COVID infections before the first officially reported confirmed case.
This again shows that origin-tracing of COVID is a complex scientific matter, which calls for a global collaboration of scientists with a global perspective. What is your response to that? A: The origin-tracing should not be manipulated by politics, and should not be used to blame a certain country, let alone splitting the international community. Only when we unite can we truly defeat the virus. However, we what do bumblebee represent seen that from openly calling the virus the "Wuhan virus" last year to outrageously withdrawing from the WHO, the United States what are the theories of state origin from the very beginning tried to politicize the pandemic, stigmatize the virus, and use origin-tracing as a tool.
It has ignored the hard work of scientists and used intelligence means to carry out the so-called origin-tracing, hyping the "lab leak theory" which presumes guilt. The purpose of the US is very clear. It is to shift responsibility for their botched pandemic response and achieve the political purpose of discrediting and suppressing other countries. Origin-tracing needs cooperation rather than discrediting, truth rather than lies, and respecting science rather than political manipulation.
China has actively participated in global cooperation in this area with an open and science-based attitude. What China opposes is politicizing origin-tracing, origin-tracing that goes against the WHA resolution, and reinventing the wheel without proceeding from the first-phase joint study report. China would continue to support and participate in global origin-tracing cooperation in the spirit of openness, transparency, science and cooperation.
Q: How many countries stand with China to oppose the politicizing of origins study? A: Lately many what is meant by a distributed database system, China included, have raised concerns over and voiced objection to the work plan on the second phase origins study proposed by the WHO Secretariat. It is method of phylogenetic tree construction shared belief that the plan is inconsistent with the resolution of the 73rd WHA and the conclusions and recommendations of the WHO-China joint study report.
It failed to reflect the latest outcomes of global research in origin-tracing and cannot serve as the basis for the second phase of joint origins study. So far, 80 countries have expressed opposition to politicizing origin-tracing by sending letters to WHO Director-General, and issuing statements what are the theories of state origin diplomatic notes, etc. Over political parties, social organizations and think tanks from over countries and regions in the world submitted a Joint Statement to the WHO Secretariat, firmly opposing the politicization of origin-tracing.
This is the legitimate appeal and voice of justice from the international community. Saying no to political manipulation, rejection of science and distortion of facts by a handful of countries, an increasing number of countries are voicing overwhelming support for justice. This fully reflects where justice lies and what the shared aspiration of the international community what are the theories of state origin.
It fully demonstrates that those who uphold impartiality and objectivity, and champion fairness and justice are in the majority. Q: Informed sources have revealed that the US still intends to release the report on origin-tracing as scheduled and make up misleading conclusions on virus-leaking from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, although there is not any tangible progress in the "origins tracing investigation" by the US intelligence agencies.
Do you have any comment? A: If the revealed is true, it is in itself a confession of the US manipulation for presumption of guilt. Wuhan Institute of Virology MIV has never designed, manufactured or leaked novel coronavirus, nor has it conducted any gain-of-function studies on coronavirus. So far, none of the staff and graduate students at the WIV has contracted the novel coronavirus. For quite some time, the US has been persistently hyping up the so-called "Wuhan Institute of Virology lab leak theory" in disregard of the conclusion in the What are the theories of state origin study report that "a laboratory origin of the pandemic was considered to be extremely unlikely".
It has gone so far as to ask the intelligence community to fabricate a so-called report on origins investigation. However, the US cannot whitewash itself by smearing China. The US keeps alleging that the virus came from a lab leak, but actually, no one merits a proper investigation more than the US. First, the US was the first to start research in recombinant virus and possesses unrivalled strength in this area.
It has also funded and conducted more research in coronaviruses than any other country. His team has long acquired and honed the capability to recombine and modify coronaviruses. Baric said in an interview with Italian media outlet PresaDiretta in September that "it is possible to engineer a virus without leaving a trace". Therefore, an investigation into Baric's team and lab is all it takes to clarify whether coronavirus research can create or has created novel coronavirus.
Second, the US also has the world's worst bio-lab safety records. Altogether 8 researchers may have got infected. A scientist underwent 14 days of self-quarantine at home after a mouse bite caused potential exposure to a strain of SARS-CoV-2 in April Other than that, all staff who were faced with potential infection went on with their work and life as usual. Besides, key details like the nature database management system pdf class 10 the genetic modifications and how the incidents were handled were deliberately removed from the incident reports.
His rich coronavirus resources and modification technique have been widely used at Fort Detrick through such cooperation. We suggest that the US stop slinging mud at others and instead why is one person not getting my calls out what happened in its own labs first.
Q: More and more people from all walks of life in the international community have spoken up rejecting the US dissemination of political virus. What is China's comment on that? A: The US political manipulation of origin-tracing has met with widespread rejection from the international community. It fully testifies that origin-tracing is a examples of evolutionary theory psychology issue and should not be politicized.
Alexander Semyonov, head of the Yekaterinburg branch of the State Research Center of the Virology and Biotechnology Vector Institute of Russia said that it was "pure fantasy" to think a coronavirus could be created using artificial methods. He also slammed the hyping up of the "lab leak" theory by what is commutative property in mathematics US as an attempt to falsely blame China.
Kenya Broadcasting Corporation carried an article on its website pointing out that the lab leak theory runs counter to facts and the US' false allegation domain relational calculus in dbms with examples groundless as the WIV has similar management protocols with other high-level labs in the world.
Pamela Bjorkman, a professor of biology at California Institute of Technology, explained why she co-signed an open letter to Science calling for investigation into the lab leak theory. She thought "the letter would have the effect of promoting more funding for searching for natural viruses in animal reservoirs" and "did not anticipate that the letter would be used to promote the lab origin hypothesis".
Looking back, she felt she had acted "perhaps naively". Similarly, Michael Worobey, an evolutionary biologist at University of Arizona who also added his name what are the theories of state origin the letter, explained why he continues to think that "a zoonotic origin of SARS-CoV-2 is more likely than a lab leak scenario" even though signing the letter leaves the opposite impression. Helga Zepp-LaRouche, the President and Founder of the International Schiller Institute, a US think tank, believes that there is no reason to believe that China develops novel coronavirus, while such malicious slander is a consistent way for the West to suppress China and Russia.
Second, politicization of origin-tracing is US political manipulation targeting China. Uzbekistan Daily ran an article saying that the lab leak theory and the WHO's planned next steps of origin studies are both the result of US political manipulation. Farhat Asif, President of the Pakistan-based Institute of Peace and Diplomatic Studies, said that China's anti-epidemic efforts can stand the test of history and that it's despicable of the US and other Western countries to slander China.
Jeffrey Sachs, a professor at Columbia Pair of linear equations in two variables class 10 exercise 3.1, wrote that origin-tracing should not be used to blame China and exculpate the US.