China News Agency, Beijing, June 11 (Li Jingze, Huang Yuqin) In response to a paper published by Harvard University on inferring the time of the outbreak, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hua Chunying pointed out four obvious loopholes at a regular press conference on the 11th. She emphasized that such a so-called essay with many loopholes and indiscriminate fabrications was regarded as new "evidence" by China's politicians and media for concealing the epidemic.

　　The ABC reported that a recent paper by Harvard Medical School analyzed the traffic flow and keyword search volume near several hospitals in Wuhan and believed that the new coronary pneumonia may have occurred in Wuhan as early as the end of August last year.

　　Relevant papers have been strongly questioned by some Chinese media and experts, arguing that there are a lot of obvious and low-level loopholes in the papers. On the 10th, the World Health Organization responded by saying that it should not make too many interpretations of the changes in the number of cars in the hospital parking lot, and then "jump" two or three steps to draw an inference, which is related to the new coronary pneumonia epidemic.

　　At the regular press conference that day, a reporter asked the Chinese side for comments on this.

　　"I also read the reports carefully." Hua Chunying responded that in addition to extrapolating the number of cars in the parking lot to infer the time when new coronary pneumonia may initially occur, this paper has several very obvious loopholes, as you just mentioned. , Is a very obvious and low-level loophole.

　　First, Harvard’s DASH academic platform is only an open database for the collection, preservation, and publication of the academic opinions of Harvard’s teaching and research staff, rather than strictly peer-reviewed journals. Can relevant papers represent the official views and standards of Harvard Medical School? I am afraid to draw a big question mark.

　　Second, one of the authors of the relevant paper "coincidentally" was an ABC writer who exclusively reported on the paper, and "coincidentally" got more data and reported before the paper was even pre-released. .

　　Third, the time marked on the chart in the ABC report was actually May 2019. I don't know if this is an inadvertent negligence, or is there any other problem?

　　Fourth, this paper believes that one of the key evidences is the retrieval volume of "cough" and "diarrhea". I noticed that some Chinese media have done some in-depth research on this, and found that the increase in the search volume for the two keywords "cough" and "diarrhea" cited in the paper in September 2019 is not as great as the same period in 2017 and 2018. Does this mean that an epidemic occurred in Wuhan in 2017? This is a very strange association.

　　She pointed out that, as Ryan, the executive director of the WHO Health Emergency Program, said on June 10, one should not overinterpret the changes in the number of cars in the hospital parking lot, and then "jump" two or three steps to get an inference that this is the same as the new coronary pneumonia The epidemic situation is connected, which does not explain any problem.

　　Hua Chunying said that in fact, it is really strange that such a serious scientific problem should be handled in such a non-serious way. However, it is such a so-called so-called essay that is full of loopholes and indiscriminately made, and some US politicians and media have gained great treasures and spread it widely, treating it as new "evidence" for China to conceal the epidemic.

　　"The intention and manipulation behind this ridiculous phenomenon may not be so ridiculous. This is new evidence that some people in the US deliberately create and disseminate false information against China, and should be unanimously condemned and resisted by the international community," she said.

　　Hua Chunying pointed out that perhaps the author of this paper should change the direction and study the relationship between the closing of the Fort Detrick Biological Laboratory last year and the subsequent outbreak of e-cigarette disease, pandemic flu and new coronary pneumonia?

　　"It's such an important question. Why haven't American scientists conducted in-depth and scientific investigations on this? Why haven't the U.S. media conducted in-depth and independent investigation reports on this?" Hua Chunying said, " This is worth considering." (End)