comments

Why did scientists suppress the lab-leak theory?

(Matt Ridley, Spiked Online, 12 January 2022)There has been an ongoing debate about whether the Covid virus was the product of natural evolution in an animal host or leaked from a lab in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, with the further possibility that it might have been modified or engineered in the lab. Recently released emails show a marked disparity between what scientists were saying privately and public statements several days later.

This article draws on the emails and other information to provide a good summation and timeline of these developments. The emails from the scientists followed a conference call on 1 February 2020, and indicated their view that the virus structure was strongly indicative of non-natural origin, with one saying he "has a hard time to explain that outside the lab", while another said he "can't think of a plausible natural scenario... can't figure out how this gets accomplished in nature".

Yet within 48 hours this same group of scientists publicly repudiated this view, and followed up with an influential paper that effectively shut the debate down until early 2021, with the lab-leak theory dismissed as a "conspiracy theory" and censored on social media.

How to account for this switch? The emails, only released because of Congressional pressure, reveal some disturbing possibilities as to motive. 

Excerpts   Read the article   Discuss the article   View in graph

Now we know what those leading scientists really thought. Emails exchanged between them after a conference call on 1 February 2020, and only now forced into the public domain by Republicans in the US Congress, show that they not only thought the virus might have leaked from a lab, but they also went much further in private. They thought the genome sequence of the new virus showed a strong likelihood of having been deliberately manipulated or accidentally mutated in the lab. Yet later they drafted an article for a scientific journal arguing that the suggestion not just of a manipulated virus, but even of an accidental spill, could be confidently dismissed and was a crackpot conspiracy theory.

Now, however, we have an email from Farrar, sent on Sunday 2 February to Francis Collins, head of the National Institutes of Health, and Anthony Fauci, head of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. It recounts the overnight thoughts of two other virologists Farrar had consulted, Robert Garry of Tulane University and Michael Farzan of the Scripps Research Institute, as well as Farrar’s own thoughts. Even after the call, their concern centred on a feature of the SARS-CoV-2 genome that had never been seen in any other SARS-like coronavirus before: the insertion (compared with the closest related virus in bats) of a 12-letter genetic sequence that creates a thing called a furin cleavage site, which makes the virus much more infectious.

Farzan, said Farrar, ‘has a hard time to explain that outside the lab’ and Garry ‘can’t think of a plausible natural scenario… can’t figure out how this gets accomplished in nature’. Farrar himself thought, on that Sunday, that ‘a likely explanation could be something as simple as passage [of] SARS-like CoVs in tissue culture on human cell lines (under BSL-2) for an extended period of time, accidentally creating a virus that would be primed for rapid transmission between humans via gain of furin site (from tissue culture) and adaption to human ACE2 receptor via repeated passage’. Translated: repeatedly growing a virus in human cells in a lab will alter its genome through natural selection so it adapts to human hosts.

RELATED ARTICLESExplain
⌅
Readings
■
Why did scientists suppress the lab-leak theory?
□
Why Putin is beholden to Stalin's legacy
□
Russia's surprising military blunders in Ukraine
□
Why John Mearsheimer blames the U.S. for the crisis in Ukraine
□
A lesson in energy masochism
□
NATO members mount huge resupply operation
□
Regathering of the Russian lands
□
Vladimir Putin's clash of civilizations
□
Germany, in historic reversal, abandons pro-Putin Russia policy
□
The Russian spy boss humiliated by Putin
□
War propaganda becoming more militaristic, authoritarian and reckless
□
What's on Putin's mind?
□
NATO enlargement and Russia: Die-hard myths and real dilemmas
□
Can Russia actually control Ukraine?
□
China's Ukraine crisis
□
Do race academics matter?
□
How China captured Hollywood
□
Putin's spiritual destiny
□
Introducing Race Marxism
□
The West is sleepwalking into war in Ukraine
□
Are we closer to Bradbury's dystopia than Orwell's or Huxley's?
□
Stunning new evidence re Trump spying allegations
□
Would permanently excluding Ukraine from NATO have satisfied Russia?
□
How Russia hooked Europe on its oil and gas
□
Why "anti-racism" should be resisted
□
Free speech in the UK?
□
Taking the low road: China's influence in Aust states and territories
□
The neoliberal war on dissent in the West
□
Fusion power is coming
□
The Silencing: a special report on China and the Uyghurs
□
Is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez an insider now?
□
A life that doesn't matter
□
America's asymmetric civil war
□
Anomalies in the Chinese Covid data
□
Australia's surprising Covid excess death count
□
Biden's budget priorities and the China threat
□
Big help with a little badmouth
□
Cancelled New York Times journalist's anti-woke manifesto
□
China: Friend or Foe? Oxford Union debate
□
China's sway over Australian universities
□
Covid and Big Pharma: The debate about cheap generic drugs
□
CRT in schools— Virginia puts NSW to shame
□
Data scientist fired from Reuters for questioning BLM
□
Does the CCP control Extinction Rebellion?
□
Facebook versus the BMJ: when fact checking goes wrong
□
Gallant little Lithuania
□
How Britain became Putin's playground
□
How feminism ate itself
□
How our universities became sheep factories
□
How to deal with the "seditionists"
□
If you hate the culture wars, blame liberals
□
Imperial College London cancels Thomas Huxley
□
Intel's groveling China apology
□
Johns Hopkins analysis disputes the effectiveness of lockdowns
□
Killing the Wuhan lab leak theory
□
Meritocracy's cost
□
New study says lockdowns don't work. Fact or fiction?
□
Proposed new terrorism law would exclude jihadists
□
Reuters: FBI finds scant evidence U.S. Capitol attack was co-ordinated
□
Should race matter when choosing Supreme Court justices?
□
The CCP and the problem of "elite capture"
□
The dispensable Mrs Merkel
□
The end of progressive America?
□
The failure of "Latinx"
□
The foolishness of "ugly freedoms"
□
The Ghost of Jim Crow
□
The green threat to effective climate policy
□
The histrionics and melodrama around 1/6
□
The Law of Group Polarization
□
The liberal fantasy of the Capitol coup
□
The Marxist who antagonizes liberals and the Left
□
Victims of the unvaccinated
□
Welcome to the end of democracy
□
What if democracy and climate mitigation are incompatible?
□
What the Right gets wrong about Ukraine...
□
White supremacy: The identarian Left's Theory of Everything
□
Why is the Right so unattractive?
□
Yes, there is a counter revolution
□
Graph of this discussion
Enter the title of your article


Enter a short (max 500 characters) summation of your article
Enter the main body of your article
Lock
+Comments (0)
+Citations (0)
+About
Enter comment

Select article text to quote
welcome text

First name   Last name 

Email

Skip