All this poses an interesting question. Why is popular press amplifying the voice of somebody with a BA in biology, when the fundamental process of science involves inviting specialists to critique the Nature letter?

If that letter contained specific errors of fact or reasoning, you would expect qualified virologists to pounce on them. (You might expect them in private over drinks to cackle as they pounced, but I digress. Lol!)

I think anyone who reads scientific journals would laugh at the idea that an erroneous letter would simply be ignored.

One of the reasons scientists publish in formal journals is to invite qualified criticism. To a large extent, that criticism is why the journals exist.