DISCLOSURES
This commentary is being provided to you as general information only and should not be taken as investment advice. The opinions expressed in these materials represent the personal views of the author(s). It is not investment research or a research recommendation, as it does not constitute substantive research or analysis. Any action that you take as a result of information contained in this document is ultimately your responsibility. Epsilon Theory will not accept liability for any loss or damage, including without limitation to any loss of profit, which may arise directly or indirectly from use of or reliance on such information. Consult your investment advisor before making any investment decisions. It must be noted, that no one can accurately predict the future of the market with certainty or guarantee future investment performance. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.
Statements in this communication are forward-looking statements.
The forward-looking statements and other views expressed herein are as of the date of this publication. Actual future results or occurrences may differ significantly from those anticipated in any forward-looking statements, and there is no guarantee that any predictions will come to pass. The views expressed herein are subject to change at any time, due to numerous market and other factors. Epsilon Theory disclaims any obligation to update publicly or revise any forward-looking statements or views expressed herein.
This information is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of any offer to buy any securities.
This commentary has been prepared without regard to the individual financial circumstances and objectives of persons who receive it. Epsilon Theory recommends that investors independently evaluate particular investments and strategies, and encourages investors to seek the advice of a financial advisor. The appropriateness of a particular investment or strategy will depend on an investor’s individual circumstances and objectives.
I agree 1,000%. Anything to establish plausible deniability for a large patron. Thanks for calling this out…a year ago! Hence there is no surprise in these findings, except the particular (and helpfully vague) excuse they have settled on.
I find The WHO’s announcement astonishing. It came to China on US pork packaging? Really!? Then why did the problem not begin in the US? Russian squid or Saudi shrimp, 2 animals that do not harbor Covid viruses, as far as I know. It count not possibly have originated in the Human biolab? Thou protesteth too vigorously, dear Lady China.
Such an announcement can have no purpose other than oiling the feathers of the CCP. It gets an eye roll from any reasonably educated person. So The WHO cares nothing for non-China world governments. China is the 800 pound gorilla in their donor base.
Astonishing.
The WHO press conference rhymes a lot with Trump’s rant on Russian interference. “It could be a fat guy with a laptop”.
It could be anything, therefore it must be nothing.
Zietgeist writer- I read this news bit, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-who-china/covid-may-have-taken-convoluted-path-to-wuhan-who-team-leader-says-idUSKBN2A90BW, where there is no mention of the sensational conclusions you mention. Where do they come from? I feel I may have been click-baited by ET.
Since I do not subscribe to WSJ I cannot check that source.What do you suppose is really going on?
The WHO are running dogs for the CCP. They even tried to blame the spread on Australian beef. It is a contemptible organisation.
What I find scary is the ability of the Chinese to bend the entire narrative of 17 WHO members not even 1 dissident. Now that’s power. Not a Trump fan but he would be calling this out BIG TIME and so far nothing from BIDEN and other western leaders.
Quoting from the article “In laying out the possibilities for the origin of the pandemic, the WHO team on Tuesday said it was also possible that the virus may have been transmitted to humans through imported frozen food, a theory heavily promoted by Beijing.”
Here is a Reuters article with a timeline of China’s rigorous investigation of the risks in the frozen food supply chain.
https://www.reuters.com/article/health-coronavirus-china-food/timeline-chinas-battle-with-coronavirus-on-frozen-food-and-packaging-idUKL4N2I32C4
Deny, deny, counter-accuse. Classic. Pencil me in for the virology lab theory.
Click-baited? I understand that the WSJ article is behind a paywall, which is why I included so many direct quotes. I mean … unless your concern is that I’m making up the quotes, in which case I really don’t know how to respond.
The Australian member of the WHO team clearly took a different view: https://www.smh.com.au/national/australian-scientist-on-who-mission-confident-covid-19-originated-in-china-20210210-p571cz.html