Strategic Advisor on biotech @Kreftforeningen and author of The Wuhan Mystery. Tweets are my own.
Oslo
- Tweets 1,605
- Following 352
- Followers 3,156
- Likes 4,961
Pinned Tweet
The Wuhan Mystery (English edition) – Serialized, Open access – coming soon! 📖🔥
I have a rep for being quite stubborn, and this is no exception: My critics increasingly try to portray me as someone only looking to make money off my book on Covid origins. That couldn’t be further from the truth. I am deeply and solely invested in this to find true answers to one of the most important questions of our time, and to prove it, I will be publishing (with my publisher’s approval) the English Edition of the Norwegian bestselling non-fiction / true crime hybrid 'The Wuhan Mystery' completely open access on Substack.
It will be serialized for that extra suspense, a new installment dropping every week until Christmas - starting next week on tuesday 29th sept.
By subscribing (at no cost whatsoever) you get installments directly in your inbox the moment they go live, and you also get access to a downloadable PDF at the end of the serial.
Appreciate all help to spread the word! 🙏
Here's the full story behind why I'm doing it this way, and how to read along 👇
sigridbratlie.substack.com/p…
119
48
126
12,233
The first installment of The Wuhan Mystery serial is out. Read it on my Substack 👇
sigridbratlie.substack.com/p…
2
24
56
3,827
Sigrid Bratlie retweeted
Anthropic recently described scientists using Claude in ways it says could support biological weapons development. In the latest episode of 'In Defense of Virology,' virologist Simon Wain-Hobson and I discuss those cases, what may have motivated the researchers, and what AI actually changes about the risks of dangerous biological research.
0:44 Anthropic’s report on AI and biological misuse
1:49 The chikungunya virus case
6:26 Military research, the 1918 Spanish flu reconstruction, and questions of intent
10:48 “Observer bias” and H5N1 gain-of-function research
16:18 Scientific incentives and dangerous experiments
24:09 Dangerous biological information in the age of AI
28:22 What is the real biological threat from AI?
34:11 What responsibility do scientific journals have?
3
4
22
2,159
Are you a ‘searcher’ or a ‘blocker’? That is the only relevant divider in the search for root causes of catastrophes - including the origins of Covid, as elegantly explained by @bgurley . This talk is a must watch!
All-In Summit: Bill Gurley
(0:00) Bill Gurley takes the stage at the All-In Summit
(1:29) Bill's Presentation: Searching for Feynman
Links to additional resources mentioned in talk and used in research:
p3.institute/searching_for_f…
@bgurley
3
9
28
3,394
Sigrid Bratlie retweeted
It’s a race against time, but we are moving fast toward justice and transparency. We have 195 of the 218 signatures required to force a vote on Epstein Files Transparency Act II !!
axios.com/2026/09/15/house-r…
834
4,123
19,554
247,209
«Anthropic said it had disrupted several potential plots this year by scientists who used its leading artificial intelligence models to conduct research that could have helped develop biological weapons».
…
«Anthropic said the scientists circumvented its controls intended to prevent users from blocked regions from gaining access to its A.I. models and worked to “obfuscate the purpose of their research to evade our safeguards.»
I believe AI x Bio is the most disruptive technology of our time, for good and bad. A worst case scenario presents an existential risk for humanity. We need to rein in this technology and establish stronger global policy tools to avoid disaster. Policymakers must make this a priority.
Breaking News: Anthropic said it halted potential plots by scientists who used its A.I. models to do research that could have helped develop biological weapons. nyti.ms/3V3epAE
2
2
10
841
My recent op-ed on how the political debate about Fauci misses the bigger picture - that the US’ role in the genesis of the pandemic and the lack of transparency about it is the result of misguided policy and a biological arms race spanning decades and several administrations from both sides of the political spectrum - is now republished in English in The Free Press.
Behind the controversy over his silence lies a decades-long American gamble on dangerous virus research as part of a global biological arms race, writes Sigrid Bratlie. thefp.com/p/anthony-fauci-co…
42
19
94
5,539
Sigrid Bratlie retweeted
Fauci Senior Advisor David Morens pleads guilty to "Conspiracy to Commit Offenses and to Defraud the United States" in connection with conspiring with Fauci, Daszak, Keusch, and others to defraud the public about NIH-funded gain-of-function research and the origin of COVID.
242
3,405
8,818
916,542
Sigrid Bratlie retweeted
Check out @sigridbratlie guest post at THB today!
rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p…
3
11
68
9,928
Alina Chan proposes several steps to improve oversight of risky virus research to reduce the risk of (another) lab generated pandemic in this excellent NYT opinion. I would add, though, that the need to tighten policy not only applies to the US, but to the global community. The bioweapons convention (BWC), @WHO guidelines and sanctions, and/or new international treaties should seek to harmonize lab safety rules and restrict the most risky research. Attribution and Accountability should be core elements, including right to inspection of labs. The most hard core defenders of GOF research or those operating in BWC grey zones will likely object and say that no country will agree to having such inspections, but that is not a valid argument imo; profound change is needed to avoid future disasters from biotechnology - not least because the benefits of biotechnology are enormous, and by not taking threats seriously we gamle with people’s trust in both the technologies themselves and the ability of scientists to handle them responsibly.
nytimes.com/interactive/2026…
207
23
97
6,132
Forgot to add your handle @Ayjchan ☝🏻 Congrats on the excellent piece!
11
391
100 % agree with David Relman, professor of medicine and microbiology at Stanford University: the pandemic was most likely started by a lab leak, but no definitive evidence exists (in public). We need better answers through a thorough and independent investigation. Those that argue it would be a waste of time or wish to prevent such an investigation, put us all at greater peril because we cannot learn from past failures, regardless of the origin.
51
79
348
73,233
I wrote an opinion piece on how the superficial political debacle about Fauci and the origin of the pandemic masks the true nature of the matter; that it is the result of decades long bipartisan politics in a global biodefense/biowarfare arms race. Fauci was merely the figurehead. The piece is written in Norwegian (for the newspaper Minerva, the only Norwegian medium to do proper investigative reporting on Covid origins), but I have added a link to a translated version 👇🏻
www-minerva-no.translate.goo…
Original Norwegian version: minerva.no/fauci-saken-handl…
21
20
84
7,260
The Worobey et al (2022) claims of wet-market spillover as the origin of Covid were always fatally flawed, but if you haven’t yet been convinced, please read this comprehensive and devastating take-down by Michael Weissman @mbw61567742 . Not only does it give a great summary of all the many, many factors pointing away from the Huanan market as the site of origin, it also picks apart the statistical contradictions and highlights the motivated reasoning by the authors to grasp at any explanation other than the glaringly obvious one that is even stated by the WHO (and more recently in Faucis diary); that early covid cases had nothing to do with the market and later cases were biased because they specifically looked for cases close to the market. It is high time @ScienceMagazine issued a correction or retraction of the Worobey et al paper and its accompanying paper from Pekar et al that has earlier been picked apart by @nizzaneela
The Huanan wet market was not the site of origin covid, it was a superspreader, everyone knows it, and as long as the scientific record is not corrected it will be detrimental to our understanding of pandemic origins and spread.
@gdemaneuf @BillyBostickson @Ayjchan @jbloom_lab @R_H_Ebright @mattwridley
An Article in Science on Wet-Market Covid Origins is Unreliable
by Michael B. Weissman
An influential paper by Worobey et al. and 17 other authors published in Science in 2022 claimed that case locations and nucleic acid samples showed that SARS-CoV-2 had first been introduced to humans at the Huanan Seafood Market. Several lines of evidence suggest the introduction to humans was earlier and elsewhere.
econjwatch.org/file_download…
7
18
114
4,401
I would also add that the integrity of the Worobey et al paper should be questioned in light of the recent release of new Slack messages between key authors who were the architects behind the paper; Kristian Andersen, Eddie Holmes, Robert Garry and Andrew Rambaut. They knew the cases were biased. They strategized how to get ‘big hitters’ (Nobel prize winners etc) to co-author the paper, but without actually contributing to the contents of the paper - a clear violation of ethics and publishing standards. They agreed to stay off emails to avoid FOIA or even create fake emails as FOIA-bait. They even stated, six months before the preprint was published (when DEFUSE leaked), that a lab leak with an engineered virus was plausible! Yet they went ahead and immediately wrote an uncompromising paper, designed to put the lab leak theory to rest, based on biased data, flawed modeling and media push.
4
2
17
546
Sigrid Bratlie retweeted
Breaking News: Scientists have used A.I. to create new viruses for the first time, raising hopes for medical advances while also raising the possibility that the technology could someday be used to invent dangerous pathogens. nyti.ms/4bxx7Wy
710
1,250
3,828
4,169,652
Sigrid Bratlie retweeted
We now finally have the story of the behind-the-scenes crisis management by Peter Daszak and Shi Zhengli regarding RaTG13 (and other unpublished viruses).🧵👇
The story begins in May 2021, when yours truly posted Yu Ping's 2019 WIV thesis on Twitter. It listed, among other things, "Ra4991" with lower spike identity to SARS (75.4%) than the published RaTG13 (76.6%).
About a month later, on 23 June 2021, Clare Thomas (Nature Senior Editor) emails Shi Zhengli, saying she had been "contacted by someone" but had "not looked at the thesis itself," and requests clarification regarding the discrepancy.
54
399
1,148
174,335
Kristian Andersen and his supporters have been adamant that he did not question his own conclusions in the Proximal origin paper (that a lab leak wasn’t even plausible) after it was published, and that any reading of their private communications in that way is ludicrous. Well, we now have even more of their Slack messages that puts the discussion to rest; Andersen wrote in June 2020, months after the paper was published that: “we can’t rule out that somebody put [the furin site] in there” and “our paper was pretty strong in saying “there’s no way”, but I have less confidence in that statement at this stage”.
23
62
285
30,661
He has been planning to leave the US for some time, specifically to move to Norway where his friends at the University of Oslo are preparing for his arrival, as documented both in the Norwegian newspaper Khrono and in a piece by @thackerpd 👇🏻 last year.
Now that the heat is turned up after the latest ODNI release, he is probably in a hurry.
www-khrono-no.translate.goog…
disinformationchronicle.subs…
Fauci’s pandemic origin stooge Kristian Andersen says he’s planning to leave the US because of lack of funding. Is Scripps firing him?!
Or maybe he’s fleeing because Morens & Munster’s arrests spooked him and thinks he’s next for his PO role & his dubious Congress testimony?!⏱️😅
5
8
45
3,512
Sigrid Bratlie retweeted
Hello @SpringerNature,
There are many reasons why the fraudulent Proximal Origin paper should have been retracted long ago. Not least among them is the fact that its purported authors privately admitted they did not believe their own conclusions, including lead author Kristian Andersen, who confessed that “the lab escape version of this is so friggin' likely.”
But let's set that aside for a moment.
We now have an email from Francis Collins, then Director of the NIH, explicitly acknowledging that he, Fauci, and others helped write the paper while deliberately keeping their names off it. According to Nature's authorship policies, this constitutes a serious breach of professional ethics and scientific integrity that demands an urgent investigation.
The paper should be retracted immediately pending that investigation.
Looking forward to your prompt action.
For nearly 20 years, Dr. Anthony Fauci was wired into America's intelligence and defense apparatus.
Newly released documents from our investigation show how that access let him shape the COVID-19 origins debate — across science, the IC, and the public.
🧵 READ MORE: hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/…
16
180
449
24,424