Note: Xiao et al was first rejected then delayed because it showed that no pangolins were sold, against Proximal Origin main narrative.
It was not rejected/delayed because of the authors. But because the peer-reviewers had problems with something that went against the narrative.
Yes, the paper was quite clear about no pangolins being sold at the market.
Something that Worobey and Holmes now agree, after switching to the raccoon dogs.
See also these tweets where I argue with Flo Debarre, Worobey and Andersen that the Nov 2020 Terms of Reference of the WHO report precisely list raccoon dogs as being sold at the market in Dec 2019.
They were not much interested. Too busy building up a new narrative.
Andersen: