Regarding the WHO investigation report, what exactly did "Secretary Tan" say?

author Xu Shiping

First of all, I declare that I and "Secretary Tan" are not relatives, and they are ironclad in the relationship of "unmatched by eight poles". I know him, and he never knows me. .

Who is "Secretary Tan"? Tan Desai also. Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO).

The term "Secretary Tan" is probably also used by netizens. The meaning of these requires careful taste. The reason is that people think that Mr. Tedros is partial to China and speaks for China everywhere, and he even dared to challenge the United States to Trump . Therefore, Mr. Tan is very likely to be the "secretary" of our party in the past.

However, two days ago, I heard that "Secretary Tan" turned his face. At the press conference for the release of the WHO investigation report, "Secretary Tan" actually accused China of not cooperating in the investigation process and not providing data. He also said that there is no conclusion about the laboratory leak. Continue to investigate.

This time, Chinese netizens are upset. There was a lot of scolding online. The most spoken word is that "Secretary Tan" turned his face and refused to recognize anyone.

At first, I was puzzled when I heard this news. The mood is the same as that of netizens. But when I think about it, I feel a little skeptical.

As we all know, international organizations and chairpersons are usually platforms and people who show their faces (of course there are exceptions, such as the International Olympic Committee, FIFA, etc.), and the secretary-general (or director-general) is the person in power .The Director-General of WHO is actually the boss. No one doubts this. Needless to say, his authority.

However, the WHO survey report, such an important report, as the boss, if he disagrees, is unsatisfied, and unhappy, how can he officially publish it? In other words, how could he not sign? If this is the case, then the WHO is too unorganized and disciplined? ! Let's close the door early.

Obviously, something must be wrong.

I am always curious, and I have to ask "why" in everything.

So, I asked someone to find the original text of "Secretary Tan". I can’t speak English well, and I basically returned it to the teacher when I studied at university (representative of mixed English courses in the university), but good English is available everywhere. I asked my colleague to find the original text. The source is the official website of the WHO. This should be the most authoritative, right?

After reading the whole article, I was also surprised. The original text of "Secretary Tan"'s conversation is generally neutral and objective, and has no intention of viciously attacking China at all.

For example, regarding the problem of "incomplete data", he said this:

In my discussion with the team, they expressed their difficulties in accessing raw data. I hope that future collaborative research will include more timely and comprehensive data sharing.

See you understand, this difficulty, "Secretary Tan" did not specify the non-cooperation of the Chinese government, and it may be a variety of practical difficulties, including early data, because people’s understanding at the time was It may be erased in the process of killing the virus. and many more.

Regarding the "lab leak" issue,He said:

The research team also visited several laboratories in Wuhan and considered the possibility of viruses entering the human population due to laboratory events.

However, I think this assessment is not broad enough. Further data and research are needed to draw more powerful conclusions.

Although the team concluded that laboratory leaks are the most unlikely hypothesis, this requires further investigation and there may be additional tasks involving experts. I am going to deploy these tasks.

The meaning of "Secretary Tan" means that it is too early to draw conclusions and investigations should be conducted more extensively. This is also a correct and scientific attitude. Because the investigation report only put forward "extremely impossible", but did not say "no." The key to the understanding of the words is the angle and standpoint. If it were me, I would say that Chinese laboratories have seen it, shouldn't the American laboratories also go to see it?

Regarding the issue of "continuing investigation", "Secretary Tan" said:

This report is a very important beginning, but it is not the end. We have not found the source of the virus, we must continue to follow the science, just like we spare no effort.

It takes time to find the origin of the virus. It is our responsibility to let the world find the source of the virus, so that we can collectively take measures to reduce the risk of this virus recurring. No research trip can provide all the answers.

"Secretary Tan" did not say that China's investigation work will continue endlessly, but that the issue of virus traceability requires "spare no effort." There is nothing wrong with this.

However, the words of "Secretary Tan" came into the hands of the Western media,The taste has changed.

For example, many media have included data difficulties in the "lead". American, reactionary, no longer quoted. Let's just talk about the relatively neutral Reuters that I have always identified with. Their introduction is like this.

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said on Tuesday that World Health Organization investigators who went to China to study the origin of the coronavirus had concealed data.

The United States, the European Union and other Western countries immediately called on China to "fully contact" independent experts with all data on the initial epidemic at the end of 2019.

and so on, not much to quote. All in all, everyone agrees. Foreigners believe it, and Chinese netizens believe it. There are actually Chinese people who are eloquent and have written articles against Tedros.

However, Western media ignored two important messages in the press conference. In one sentence, a WHO official in charge of the investigation said: The team felt political pressure, including pressure from outside China, but he Never forced to delete anything from the final report.

Did you see it? Political pressure comes from many sources, including those outside China. Who are these people? You can think of it with your ass. The important thing is that the report did not delete anything. This sentence is too important.

There is another sentence, I am an Australian expert (Australia and China are not very good) Dominic Dwyer (Dominic Dwyer). He is convinced that the Wuhan Institute of Virology "has no obvious evidence" to prove that there is a problem. WHO experts, including experts from many European and American countries, including the president of the American Ecological Health Alliance, a member of the "Lancet" New Crown Epidemic Committee, the British zoologist Peter Daszak, and the Erasmus Medical Center in Rotterdam, the Netherlands Center Virology Director Marion Koopmans (Marion Koopmans),Thea Fisher, Director of the Clinical Research Center of North Sealand Hospital, Denmark, and Dominic Dwyer of Australia, etc.

These two sentences, which western media put them in the lead? I am studying journalism, and I have a background in a major. I know a little bit about the basic requirements of news writing. Is it because the basic journalism courses of the western media have not been studied well? of course not.

"Secretary Tan" was hacked, the root of which is that the right to speak of the world media has gone wrong. The Western media is too powerful. If we want to reflect, we can reflect on the right to speak.

Chinese media guys, it's time to cheer.

Finally, I decided to put the original text of "Secretary Tan" below for your reference.

The opening words:

At last year’s World Health Assembly, Member States asked me to perform an important and specific task as Director General.

(The second paragraph is not interesting, and the translation is a bit difficult, but it is correct in Mandarin)

As you know, an international scientific and cooperative field mission went to China in January this year. The scientists collaborated for four weeks.

The team has now completed the preliminary study and the report was provided to the WHO Secretariat and Member States last weekend.

has a team of scientists from all over the world: Australia, China, Denmark, Germany, Japan, Kenya , the Netherlands, Qatar, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Vietnam.

I thank this group of experts from all over the world who worked tirelessly on this report under tremendous pressure. I want to thank them for their dedication and commitment.

Now, I would like to invite the co-leaders of the international team, Dr. Peter Ben Embarek and Professor Liang Wannian to introduce their main findings.

Dr. Ben Embarek and Professor Liang, thank you again for your cooperation and hard work.

Dr. Peter Ben Embarek and Professor Liang Wannian introduced the situation.

Concluding words:

Thank you Dr. Peter Ben Embarek, Professor Liang and the whole team for sharing your report and presenting your findings.

I welcome your report, it has enhanced our understanding in important ways. The

report also raises further questions that require further research, as the group itself pointed out in the report.

As Member States have heard, the report conducted a comprehensive review of existing data, indicating that there were unconfirmed transmissions in December 2019 and possibly earlier.

The team reported that the first detected case developed symptoms on December 8, 2019. But in order to understand the earliest cases, scientists will benefit from obtaining data including biological samples from at least September 2019.

In my discussion with the team, they expressed their difficulties in accessing raw data. I hope that future collaborative research will include more timely and comprehensive data sharing.

I welcome suggestions for further research to understand the earliest human cases and communities, track the animals sold in Wuhan and its surrounding areas, and better understand the range of potential animal hosts and intermediaries.

The role of the animal market is unclear.

The team has confirmed that there is widespread SARS-CoV-2 pollution in the South China market in Wuhan, but the source of the pollution cannot be determined.

I once again welcome suggestions for further research, including a comprehensive analysis of the animal and product trade in the Wuhan market, especially those related to early human cases.

I agree with the team’s conclusion that it is necessary to interview farmers, suppliers and their contacts.

The research team also discussed the possibility of viruses entering humans through the food chain.

Further research is very important to determine what role farmed wild animals may play in introducing the virus to the market in Wuhan and surrounding areas.

The research team also visited several laboratories in Wuhan and considered the possibility of viruses entering the human population due to laboratory events.

However, I think this assessment is not broad enough. Further data and research are needed to draw more powerful conclusions.

Although the team concluded that laboratory leaks are the most unlikely hypothesis, this requires further investigation and there may be additional tasks involving experts. I am going to deploy these tasks.

We will keep you informed of the progress of the plan. As always, we welcome your comments.

Let me make it clear that as far as WHO is concerned, all assumptions are on the table.

This report is a very important beginning, but it is not the end. We have not found the source of the virus. We must continue to follow the science and spare no effort like we do.

It takes time to find the origin of the virus. It is our responsibility to let the world find the source of the virus, so that we can collectively take measures to reduce the risk of this virus recurring. No research trip can provide all the answers.

Obviously, we need to conduct more research in a range of areas, which will require further field visits.

Before concluding my speech, I would like to thank the experts from all over the world and China who participated in the report, and look forward to continuing this important work.

, as always, we thank you for your continued participation and we look forward to your questions and comments.

I thank you!

.