This is the user sandbox of Empiricus-sextus. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the user and is not an encyclopedia article. Create or edit your own sandbox here.
Finished writing a draft article? Are you ready to request review of it by an experienced editor for possible inclusion in Wikipedia? Submit your draft for review!
My observation is that the clarification of the origin of the corona virus is a multidisciplinary research where very different disciplines (like animal virology), molecular biology, even physics are involved and publish their results in scientific journals that are not MEDRS . The best example is certainly this French basic research which was also discussed, from the second largest research institution in Europe which also fell through the grid. MEDRS explicitly serves not to publish misinformation for non-evidence-based treatments (of diseases) - this rule is very important. I also work in health-related science, including pandemic response -I can definitely differentiate. However, we have discussed the so-called "laboratory leak story" in the article. Everything that is relevant regarding laboratories including possible accidents and outbreaks is explicitly not a medical topic but belongs to biosecurity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biosecurity#Laboratory_safety and biosafety. This is also a multidisciplinary field where medicine also plays a role, for example in the infection of employees by virus in the laboratory, but it is also about waste, bioethics, environmental protection, ventilation systems, as well as about the issue of building security, risk management, etc. I have used only scientific sources and statements in the section on biosecurity, some of which come from this laboratory itself. On author Yuan Zhiming works in the National Biosafety Laboratory (Wuhan), Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Wuhan 430071. The risk of laboratory accidents has been discussed intensively for years internationally as well as in China, also very openly.The Journal of Biosafety and Biosecurity unites the entire discussion on this.My point there was less about the content and more about answering the big-wooper question of why the laboratory issue is primarily a technical/professional issue of biosafety standards than a medical one. But everything falls through the MEDRS grid. For this reason, I agree with @JPxG: that our rules and guidelines must be adapted here - because they are not really helpful and leads to endless discussions without result and article improvement. We must include the entire scope of scientific research results on the question of the origin also to the laboratory here. What I observe is a new phenomenon which can be understood as "WP:source blocking". I am not the only one who has noticed this, it runs through the entire discussions, scince on year. The interest behind it is not neutrality, medical interests or science, but the confirmation of own ideological positions (fight against right-wing media, conspiracy, etc.), this has its justification, but we must be neutral. Reliable information, based on reliable sources is our moral obligation.--Empiricus-sextus (talk) 07:23, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
