Here's a neatly threaded "oh fuck no" of my response to the @nymag's cover story of irresponsibility, asking "but what if" nCov2019 really was a lab escape.
Seems @nymag wanted to get “most irresponsible article of 2021” locked up early. Tho is beyond irresponsible; it’s an admitted flight of fancy ignoring the work of multiple scientists carefully explaining, repeatedly, as to why #covid19 is not a lab escape. #durc#gof#biorisk
The odds, as #durc and #gof expert @neva9257 has repeatedly explained, are pretty good, given that China is where most of the the bats natively live. “Oh no, what are the chances of bat diseases originating in places with bats?!” 🙄🙄🙄
No, he didn’t come to believe this. He believed it from the beginning, as the article notes, because of Baader-Meinhof phenomenon. Baker just wrote a book about bioweapons that covers lab accidents, so naturally, that’s what he sees everywhere 🙄🙄🙄
Oh sure. Come tell that to the BTWC. Science is fucking political, and so are lab accidents. If they weren’t, the US would actually carefully track them. They don’t, I know, I have the FOIAs. #biosecurity#biosafety#durc#gof
This is fiction dabbling in the what if’s of conspiracy. What if? Sure, what if the tides radically switched tomorrow? What if gravity stopped in 5 minutes? This is not the basis for a story. Especially when you reach out to & then ignore the people who disagree with your what if
This article is a walking logical fallacy of “just asking questions,” an intellectually dishonest tactic that makes wild accusations by framing them as questions; it shifts the burden of proof to people who disagree and poisons the well in the process. #biosecurity#durc#gof
And for the added final statement, here, read @neva9257 on where these coronavirus conspiracy theories really come from. Don't encourage respectable news orgs to "but what if" one of Alex Jones' favorite topics. #durc#gof#biosecurity#covid19 slate.com/technology/202…
Oh no. One more thing: this article conflates the idea of a recombinant virus with a lab escape. They’re not the same thing. 🙄
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
After we got all the OMG OMG OMG LUKE!!! 😭😭😭out, which took a good 45 minutes from the X-Wing, pretty much the first thing I said to @neva9257 was how much I loved the connection to bitter, angry Luke…see, my theory is, they gave us Grogu to love, for Kylo Ren to kill.
Admittedly, I made this leap before @neva9257 did. But once he got over the horror… 😂 See, my theory is that maybe it wasn’t as clear to folks as it needed to be, that Kylo Ren killed Luke’s students. Massacred them a la Grandpa Anakin’s Tiny Tots murder.
For whatever reason, folks couldn’t grasp how all that loss would feel. The anger, frustration, & pain. So fine, give everyone someone to love, so they can understand Luke’s pain. Give people Grogu, & leave the strong implication that Kylo Ren murdered their beloved Baby Yoda.
It’s almost like @neva9257, Levine, and I wrote about this at the start of 2020. 🤔🤔🤔
“Subjects (& communities) of scientific & therapeutic research have some claim to benefits that arise from knowledge generated through their involvement”
It’s really obnoxious that, once again, a topic that has been endlessly discussed in ethics, biosecurity, international relations, and other “oddball” fields is suddenly in the public eye as OH NO MAJOR PROBLEM. To just wholesale copy what Jason said,
So here we are again. Outrage that countries who contributed extensively to vaccine development won’t be receding the vaccines, a “vaccine apartheid.” Except that WHO has known this was a problem for years. Experts have known, for years. It’s so very frustrating.
So piggybacking on @SaskiaPopescu's excellent thread here, which EERILY mirrors an email I sent Thursday - and she and I did NOT talk about the topic recently - I wanna show you all a GREAT paper trying to revise the definition of aerosol transmission.
I have no idea why Thursday was the first time I've come across this paper, since the airborne vs aerosol transmission debate has been a headache-and-silver-hair generating issue in my life since 2014, as neatly summed up by this blog post: virologydownunder.com/flight-of-the-…
BUT Jones and Brosseau published this REALLY ELEGANT paper in 2015, trying to develop the concept of aerosol transmission to "resolve limitations in conventional definitions of airborne and droplet transmission.” Which hello yes, WE NEED. journals.lww.com/joem/Abstract/…
"Unlike most other social disparities, immunity advantages are unlikely to create a permanent underclass. "
*looks at history*
Am I the only person in bioethics who reads history? JFC, this is a bad take. jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/…
HISTORY. IT EXISTS FOR REASONS.
And not a single article I've read in this JAMA viewpoint series has bothered to reference HOW WE KNOW PEOPLE ACT with immunity certificates because HISTORY.
I'm also just gonna say it outloud, since so many people are saying it with me privately:
It takes a REAL white dude level of privilege to say that "well, minorities are getting COVID19 more, so they'd benefit the most from immunity certificates" with a straight face.
I'm really unimpressed with this paper. It relies on non-peer reviewed data, it appears to misinterpret what it means for a virus to be airborne, and appears to ignore a literal statement of not being able to replicate the virus from air samples. #COVID19 nap.edu/read/25769/cha…
Look, I accept that it does not matter HOW many times @SaskiaPopescu or me or anyone else who knows the literature tells you that masks aren't effective in the way people want them to be. I know people are going to insist they Google better, or that a nutrition expert knows more
And I 100% know that there's an awful lot of a combination of "but we have to do something" and misogyny at the idea of female experts driving those arguments about whether masks for healthy people are a /useful/ thing or not. #COVID19
This is the first time I've actually listened to him in years. You guys owe me for this, and I DO have a kofi 😝
BTW, no, experts do NOT think that the travel bans or quarantines were a good idea, necessary, aggressive, or anything like that re #COVID19. NOR have the US actions been "the most aggressive in the world." Please see, cordon sanitaire, 110 million people. FFS.
Also remember: no one working for the federal health systems are allowed to speak on #COVID19 without first having the message approved by Pence. So no one from CDC is going to be able to say "yeah no, mate, not true." nytimes.com/2020/02/27/us/…