On the #OriginsOfCovid I told @denisechow@NBCNews "I know a lot of people want to have a smoking gun. It's more like breadcrumbs everywhere, and they're not always leading in one direction. It's like the whole floor is covered in breadcrumbs." nbcnews.com/science/scienc…
I've recently been tagged in many threads with people arguing which is more likely: a natural or a lab origin of Covid-19.
This wasn't possible last year.
People (including scientists) arguing that a lab leak could be likely or even more likely were attacked as unscientific.
I think it's not very useful to speculate whether natural or lab origins are more likely. But. I think it's a good sign that the public and scientists are now able to talk about it without fearing excessive censure from their friends and colleagues.
Scientists don't meet up at work and debate about what is more likely and then call it a day.
Even if there's a small chance your hypothesis might be wrong, you still have to test it. As peer reviewer three might say.
Even if there's only a 1% chance that Covid-19 emerged because of a lab leak, we still have to properly investigate it.
That's why I don't understand the scientists saying that investigating a lab leak would be a "distraction" or "waste of time."
Some scientists have said that the uncertainty is killing us (or being commercialized).
You're in the wrong field.
Scientists have to be able to live with uncertainty, communicate uncertainty, receive communications of uncertainty for extended periods of time.
Instead of writing an endless stream of articles arguing about what is more likely, let's please get to an investigation.
There are tons of breadcrumbs & puzzle pieces scattered around the globe right now.
And no real investigation of #OriginsOfCovid 1.5 years post-outbreak.
Do we want to be back here in X years when another outbreak erupts in a city with a laboratory collecting and manipulating the same type of viruses, and despite searching there’s no evidence for natural spillover?
Is “a lab-based pandemic never happened before” the best we got?
To all the people arguing about likelihoods, please accept that the person you’re arguing with won’t change their minds.
Let’s just investigate. Continue to collect information and push for the release of information.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@NatureNV I know it's very troubling that the one place a SARS-like pandemic-level pathogen emerges is the one place in China where there is a giant repository of SARS-like viruses collected from across China.
But it's irresponsible to play it down by saying "but China has coronaviruses!"
@NatureNV To study these SARS-like viruses with potential to spill into humans, the Wuhan lab had to send dozens of its personnel into remote caves and villages in South China to specifically mine for these viruses and bring 10,000s of animal and human samples ~1000 miles back to Wuhan.
For people who need a crash course in how the animal (zoonotic) origin of the first SARS virus was found, please read this short review written by Linfa Wang, Shi Zhengli, Peter Daszak and colleagues in 2006:
Note that they had not yet found the ancestral bat reservoir a long way away in Yunnan province (only published in 2017).
But it was clear SARS1-like viruses were circulating widely in the animal trading community (animals & humans) in Guangdong province where SARS broke out.
For SARS2, it’s the reverse.
When it broke out in Wuhan, we already knew where it’s ancestral reservoir was very likely to be. A virus genome matching 96% was already under study in a Wuhan lab. Collected from a mine after miners had sickened with a SARS-like pneumonia.
Also, to correct Stephen, Wuhan is not a place where SARS2-like viruses are known to circulate in bats or spillover into people.
The Wuhan institute of virology existed prior to 2003 SARS. A lab there pivoted to SARS research after the 2003 epidemic, and spent close to 2 decades ferrying 10,000s of potential SARS samples (animal and human) from more than 1000 miles away up into the Wuhan lab.
I want to impress that there is a lot to lose for scientists (esp virologists) to say they think Covid-19 could’ve emerged in connection to research activities.
All at once you’re dealing with your colleagues, institute, reviewers of papers & grants, & the Chinese government.
You’re literally acting against your self interest in every way possible except the interest of not having a future pandemic caused by a research-related accident.
I’ve spoken very highly of sleuths and data analysts who’ve worked on tracing the #OriginsOfCovid
But I also need to emphasize that the consequences for scientists are much worse. You could become a pariah overnight, accused of fanning the flames of conspiracy and AAPI hate.
Because so many experts are deleting their tweets now, people have had no choice but to look at archived pages to see what they said just over a year ago: