"We’ve largely given up on fighting back against this theory. The other side, meanwhile, has done victory laps, insisting it exposes the inherent unreliability of us informational gatekeepers. They’re not altogether wrong."
Yeah, but did the other other side not actively coordinate behind closed doors to suppress the lab leak theory, as w…
"We’ve largely given up on fighting back against this theory. The other side, meanwhile, has done victory laps, insisting it exposes the inherent unreliability of us informational gatekeepers. They’re not altogether wrong."
Yeah, but did the other other side not actively coordinate behind closed doors to suppress the lab leak theory, as well as their involvement in various gain of function studies that they funded in China and the WIV? There were seemingly bad faith actors on both sides pushing for and against the lab leak theory, and of course in the end neither did their side much favors and combined only helped to further sow distrust.
Pretty sure I read elsewhere that Daszak lead or at least participated in a private chat group or something to that effect where he and others were coordinating talking points to portray anyone looking into the lab leak theory as a vicious racist. It was extremely greasy.
For my part, I'm pretty much 50/50 on which one it is.
I could probably go ahead and write a whole other thing specifically on the lab leak stuff (I've been meaning to...) but the crux of my argument would be: Trying to suppress a belief doesn't mean that belief is de facto true.
I've followed all that EcoHealth/Daszak stuff pretty closely (and have spoken to some of the players involved) and I'm pretty confident that, whatever theory is true, they weren't trying to cover anything up, they were trying to defend against these bad faith actors who came for them very quickly, without any real evidence.
And in the process, yes, they wound up doing a bunch of things that tamped down on open debate, and tried to shut down questioning of the official narrative. That absolutely drove distrust. But I think they were doing it in hopes that it would guard against those efforts — and I think it backfired.
If we accept the zoonotic origins theory (which I do, and would put the odds more like 95/5 in favor of it) then Daszak, for whatever misdeeds he did after COVID emerged, helped drive some of the only serious coronavirus research happening in the world in the years prior to 2019. We can point to the research he was contributing to at the WIV for why we got testing done so quickly, why the Moderna vaccine was ready to go so quickly, and why we had a head start on understanding the virus' behavior. (This, largely because they recognized MERS had pandemic potential, but that it was just sliiiightly maladapted.)
Yes, thanks, just read it. I think you're giving way too much benefit of the doubt to Daszak and I very much disagree with your conclusion that we shouldn't be casting "aspersions" on virologists. Not when some of those virologists participated in a coordinated campaign to suppress the lab leak theory in an effort to cover their own asses, shoddy paperwork and in some cases their own ignorance about what exactly was going on at the WIV. Some of it's defenders apparently weren't even aware that they were using live bats at the lab.
Oh just to be clear, criticize away. I would just say that it's wrong to criticize them as though the lab leak theory has been proven true, because it certainly hasn't. I think that's what some bad faith actors are doing.
Please do write something about the lab leak theory now. Mostly, people need to be comfortable with imprecision and not knowing the truth. That’s just not a comfortable place for most people to be in.
"The subcommittee also sharply criticized Daszak’s involvement in a 2020 letter published in a leading British medical journal, The Lancet. The letter, signed by 27 top scientists, received heavy coverage and served to tamp down speculation about a “lab leak.” In it, Daszak and the others wrote, “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.” Though an organizer of the letter, Daszak, for some time considered not signing it, according to the Democratic report, so that it wouldn’t “link back to our collaboration.” Initially he didn’t disclose his work on bat coronavirus research in China, and after being requested to do so, he didn’t mention his work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology."
Dude acted shady as hell, because he was covering his own ass.
"We’ve largely given up on fighting back against this theory. The other side, meanwhile, has done victory laps, insisting it exposes the inherent unreliability of us informational gatekeepers. They’re not altogether wrong."
Yeah, but did the other other side not actively coordinate behind closed doors to suppress the lab leak theory, as well as their involvement in various gain of function studies that they funded in China and the WIV? There were seemingly bad faith actors on both sides pushing for and against the lab leak theory, and of course in the end neither did their side much favors and combined only helped to further sow distrust.
See here: https://www.science.org/content/article/federal-officials-suspend-funding-ecohealth-alliance-nonprofit-entangled-covid-19
Pretty sure I read elsewhere that Daszak lead or at least participated in a private chat group or something to that effect where he and others were coordinating talking points to portray anyone looking into the lab leak theory as a vicious racist. It was extremely greasy.
For my part, I'm pretty much 50/50 on which one it is.
I could probably go ahead and write a whole other thing specifically on the lab leak stuff (I've been meaning to...) but the crux of my argument would be: Trying to suppress a belief doesn't mean that belief is de facto true.
I've followed all that EcoHealth/Daszak stuff pretty closely (and have spoken to some of the players involved) and I'm pretty confident that, whatever theory is true, they weren't trying to cover anything up, they were trying to defend against these bad faith actors who came for them very quickly, without any real evidence.
And in the process, yes, they wound up doing a bunch of things that tamped down on open debate, and tried to shut down questioning of the official narrative. That absolutely drove distrust. But I think they were doing it in hopes that it would guard against those efforts — and I think it backfired.
If we accept the zoonotic origins theory (which I do, and would put the odds more like 95/5 in favor of it) then Daszak, for whatever misdeeds he did after COVID emerged, helped drive some of the only serious coronavirus research happening in the world in the years prior to 2019. We can point to the research he was contributing to at the WIV for why we got testing done so quickly, why the Moderna vaccine was ready to go so quickly, and why we had a head start on understanding the virus' behavior. (This, largely because they recognized MERS had pandemic potential, but that it was just sliiiightly maladapted.)
Anyway, I could rant about this for ages. I actually just penned a recent column for the Star on this: https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/what-were-still-getting-wrong-about-the-origins-of-covid-19/article_2300bb66-24e1-11ef-aa69-b3b079f7ab71.html
Yes, thanks, just read it. I think you're giving way too much benefit of the doubt to Daszak and I very much disagree with your conclusion that we shouldn't be casting "aspersions" on virologists. Not when some of those virologists participated in a coordinated campaign to suppress the lab leak theory in an effort to cover their own asses, shoddy paperwork and in some cases their own ignorance about what exactly was going on at the WIV. Some of it's defenders apparently weren't even aware that they were using live bats at the lab.
https://x.com/zeynep/status/1790803102070718606
https://x.com/KatherineEban/status/1790801572047282446
Oh just to be clear, criticize away. I would just say that it's wrong to criticize them as though the lab leak theory has been proven true, because it certainly hasn't. I think that's what some bad faith actors are doing.
Please do write something about the lab leak theory now. Mostly, people need to be comfortable with imprecision and not knowing the truth. That’s just not a comfortable place for most people to be in.
Ah, here it is: https://thebulletin.org/2024/05/republicans-and-democrats-investigating-the-origins-of-covid-19-find-a-common-target-peter-daszak/
"The subcommittee also sharply criticized Daszak’s involvement in a 2020 letter published in a leading British medical journal, The Lancet. The letter, signed by 27 top scientists, received heavy coverage and served to tamp down speculation about a “lab leak.” In it, Daszak and the others wrote, “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin.” Though an organizer of the letter, Daszak, for some time considered not signing it, according to the Democratic report, so that it wouldn’t “link back to our collaboration.” Initially he didn’t disclose his work on bat coronavirus research in China, and after being requested to do so, he didn’t mention his work with the Wuhan Institute of Virology."
Dude acted shady as hell, because he was covering his own ass.