We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Jesse Bloom
Evolutionary biologist, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center
We're not taking an advocacy position on one scenario being more likely than another. We're just pointing out that the existing scientific evidence is insufficient to know what happened.AI Verified source (Jun 14, 2021)
2h ago
Policy proposals and claims
abstains
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
The quote is directly about the source’s comparison between a possible lab accident and natural zoonosis, and it explicitly says the author is not taking a position on which scenario is more likely because the evidence is insufficient; that makes abstention on the complete statement clearly determinable. ([fredhutch.org](https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/center-news/2021/06/understanding-origins-sarscov2.html))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
The author explicitly declines to back the lab-origin claim, saying they are "not taking an advocacy position on one scenario being more likely than another" and that the evidence is "insufficient to know what happened." In context, he says both natural spillover and a lab accident are plausible, so the stance is explicitly undecided.
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
Quote authenticity verification history
Report thisQuote authenticity comments
AI Verified
The Fred Hutch article at the provided URL, published June 14, 2021, contains this quote verbatim in a Q&A response explicitly labeled “Bloom:”, so it is directly attributed to Jesse Bloom on that page. The stored author, date, source URL, and wording are all supported by the source. ([fredhutch.org](https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/center-news/2021/06/understanding-origins-sarscov2.html))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
replying to Jesse Bloom