zlacker

Let's assume that at least some key superiors at WHO are biased, but the majority of the lower-level investigators are honest and not especially biased. What can the WHO superiors do to try to prevent the investigation from producing an embarrassing report? Stratagems that come to mind: choose which investigators to send, choose who to lead the teams of investigators, get involved in writing up the final reports (either directly or by leaning on those who do). The investigators' work was presumably divided up; perhaps someone could have arranged for a CCP-friendly investigator to be in charge of a particularly sensitive area. Or the report summaries could omit or spin certain issues. I don't know how the investigation was organized, or the reports for that matter, but there's probably at least some room for the superiors to inject their bias into the overall outcome.

>>waterh+(OP)
But that isn’t what happened. Investigators have been from US, Australia, Europe. Findings have been critical of China in terms of access to data, and access to sites.

They still have confirmed that it is not a lab grown virus, and have consistently confirmed it’s from the wild.