Chapter 10
Throughout the pandemic, constantly updating conspiracy theories and origin speculations have sabotaged scientific inquiry. Virologist Stuart Neil, “the zoonati they could always talk to” observed the gradual and one-sided accumulation of evidence for a natural origin of Covid-19, but also how little each new piece of evidence changed minds. “This is always my dividing line… Scientists go with data. And these guys never go with the data if the data is not going in their direction. If it doesn’t keep their little pet theory on the table. Then clearly, there is fraud going on. Let’s get their emails. Let’s cherry-pick. Let’s blah blah.
We tackle on of the most misunderstood elements in the origin controversy, the Furin cleavage site, and learn how virality is the result not of single factors or elements, but the interplay between the right host, the right environmental context and the right timing. A principle that seems to apply not only to biological agents, but also to digital narratives.
This is when the work of the merchants of doubt begins. Disinformation researcher Carl Miller talks about information as a “new battlespace” and “a tool of war”. In the battle space of information, facts, truth and accuracy, in short information content, is irrelevant, if not counterproductive. What matters is the strategic utility of information to further a social, economic, or political purpose. The fight over information supremacy is the defining feature of the attention economy, and learning the tricks of the trade to make information cascades, pseudo-events and narratives go viral is the bread and butter of media manipulators and information-velocity hackers.
Using an array of disinformation tactics, this loose alliance of self-styled origin influencers, contrarian scientists, opportunistic journalists, anti-establishment gurus and cynical politicians coordinate to derail public conversation. And they have succeeded spectacularly to catapult ever-new lab leak myths into virality and onto the world stage.
References:
Extensive scientific literature on the molecular virology of the FCS can be found in the bibliography, but here is a science communication version going into the details:
Markolin P., “Treacherous ancestry. A phylogeographic hunt for the ghosts of SARS-CoV-2”, April 12, 2024. Free direct access link: https://www.protagonist-science.com/p/treacherous-ancestry
An apt analogy from a Twitter user about the spike protein
Bek Zek (@bexzex). (2024, September 21). X (Formerly Twitter). https://x.com/BexZex/status/1837441491859656830 Note: An excellent analogy to explain the FCS mechanism within the trimeric spike protein, which I was happy to utilize to explain some of its intricate biology
On Jeffrey Sachs economic policies in Russia:
Stuckler, D., & Basu, S. (2013). The Body Economic: Why Austerity Kills. Basic Books. https://books.google.ch/books?id=gMcWBQAAQBAJ
Jeffrey Sachs disbanded the independent Lancet commission on the origin in an attempt to influence the outcome
Cohen, J. (2021). What tore apart The Lancet ’s COVID-19 origin probe? Science, 374(6566), 387–388. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.acx9393 (Note: The power broker would get his way, eventually publishing a very colored report)
Jeffrey Sachs getting featured with his conspiracy theory in the intercept, presented as fact
Lerner, S. (2022, May 19). Jeffrey Sachs presents evidence of possible lab origin of COVId-19. The Intercept. https://web.archive.org/web/20220520003116/https://theintercept.com/2022/05/19/covid-lab-leak-evidence-jeffrey-sachs/
On how conspiracy theorists have sabotages the search for the origins of SARS-CoV-2
Lewandowsky, S., Jacobs, P., & Neil, S. (2022, March Edition). The Lab-Leak hypothesis made it harder for scientists to seek the truth. Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-lab-leak-hypothesis-made-it-harder-for-scientists-to-seek-the-truth/
Wired interview with Renee DiResta
Gilbert, D. (2024, July 4). How influencers and algorithms are creating bespoke realities for everyone. WIRED. https://www.wired.com/story/influencers-algorithms-bespoke-reality/ (“Renée: What I find most alarming is that people have the ability to just create reality by making something trend, to reinforce over and over and over again these conspiracy theories. You do have this increasingly divergent set of realities where there's a deep conviction built up over many, many years of reinforcing the same tropes and stories. You can't just correct that with a fact check.”)
Lehman Brothers bank run: An information cascade
Run on the Bank and the Dangers of Information Cascade in the Markets : Networks Course blog for INFO 2040/CS 2850/Econ 2040/SOC 2090. (2014b, November 17). https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2014/11/17/run-on-the-bank-and-the-dangers-of-information-cascade-in-the-markets/
Some background notes on the Economist article:
“Controversial new research suggests SARS-CoV-2 bears signs of genetic engineering” [original headline] (“The original headline was changed literally when I saw how google was presenting the story. It was my error.”, Natasha Loder would later acknowledge an earnest mistake. The article’s headline was subsequently changed quickly, albeit the viral take-off had already happened.) Now it reads:
The Economist. (2022, October 27). Scientists dispute a suggestion that SARS-CoV-2 was engineered. The Economist. https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2022/10/27/scientists-dispute-a-suggestion-that-sars-cov-2-was-engineered (However, Natasha Loder was more dismissive to challenges from me and others that her Economist article should not have happened. “The preprint was out and had picked up many thousands of tweets. It was going to get covered and my main crime was thinking I could do a better job than the DailyMail.”, she later justified her role in its creation and amplification. She argued that at least, she made sure to have experts from both sides commenting. In my opinion, she missed the larger picture. If journalists present manipulative fiction next to fact as if they are equally meritorious, they outsource the assessment of their validity of those statements to their readers. Readers who are average citizens that do not have the time, training or inclination to put in the work to do so. False equivalency reporting that outsources judgment calls to readers gives free reign to superficially compelling and emotionally intuitive manipulations to win over complicated facts and nuances.)
Here is my debunking of Bruttel et. al. for an accessible version explaining their - in my opinion - motivated manipulation and fraudulent conduct:
Markolin, P., PhD. (2022, October 25). Scientific meme content. Protagonist Science. https://www.protagonist-science.com/p/scientific-meme-content
Ralph Baric’s congressional testimony can be downloaded here:
https://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/Baric-TI-Transcript.pdf
Sources related to Katherine Eban’s and Jeff Cao’s disastrously misleading story for ProPublica:
The original article
Kao, K. E. (2022, October 28). COVID-19 Origins: Investigating a “Complex and grave situation” inside a Wuhan lab. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/article/senate-report-covid-19-origin-wuhan-lab
The political coordination with the GOP senate interim report:
The Washington Post (2022, October 27) reports about GOP senate interim report: Senate GOP report argues that a lab leak is most likely origin of covid. https://www.washingtonpost.com/science/2022/10/27/covid-lab-leak-theory-origin/
Reaction from Jane Qiu, writing a long Twitter thread that points out the many flaws in the ProPublica article.
Jane Qiu [@janeqiuchina]. (2022, November 6). X (Formerly Twitter). https://x.com/janeqiuchina/status/1589118737579659264 “They say journalism is what makes democracy work. We should all ask ourselves: Have we helped to make democracy work?Or have we helped perpetuate stereotypes and existing narratives, exacerbate mistrust and polarization, and make the world a more dangerous place?”
Propublica editor’s evasive notice to Katherine Eban’s story to avoid a full retraction:
Engelberg, S. (2022, November 30). Editor’s note: A review of criticisms of a ProPublica-Vanity Fair story on a COVID origins report. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/article/editors-note-a-review-of-criticisms-of-a-propublica-vanity-fair-story-on-a-covid-origins-report
The journalist James Fallows tried to follow up but faced stonewalling by Propublica Editors on the story.
Fallows, J. (2022, December 9). More questions for ProPublica. Breaking the News. https://fallows.substack.com/p/more-questions-for-propublica
In early 2022, Propublica has received 5 million from the cryptobillionaire fraudster Sam Bankman Fried to do biosecurity reporting.
ProPublica. (2022, November 22). ProPublica Returns grant funded by Bankman-Fried Family. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/atpropublica/bankman-fried-family-donates-5-million-to-propublica
Sam Bankman Fried and the effective altruism movement dispersed “journalism grants”
Washington Post, (2022, December 20) Media companies start returning money linked to Sam Bankman-Fried - The Washington Post
In 2022, USRTK received 200.000$ from the “Centre of Effective Altruism” Donors, IRS filings & governing documents (usrtk.org)
Background story to how the DEEP-VZN program was quietly cancelled
Markolin, P., PhD. (2023, September 10). US virus hunting grant quietly canceled after influence campaign. Protagonist Science. https://www.protagonist-science.com/p/us-virus-hunting-grant-quietly-canceled
The Wall Street Journal about the assessment change at the DoE
The Wall Street Journal, (2023 Feb 26). Another Turn in the Covid Lab-Leak Story. https://www.wsj.com/articles/another-turn-in-the-wuhan-leak-story-journal-energy-department-lab-gain-of-function-nih-ae9baed4?msockid=3754cc168b506ab41588d8be8ab76bbd
CNN alleging that DoE assessment based not on WIV, but CCDC lab proximity to market
CNN, (2023 Feb 28). Assessment Covid-19 leaked from Chinese lab is a minority view within US intel community, sources say. https://edition.cnn.com/2023/02/27/politics/intel-community-covid-origins
Alina Chan feels validated despite pushing a mutually contradictory origin conspiracy myth for years:
Alina Chan [@ayjchan]. (2023, March 6). X (Formerly Twitter). https://x.com/Ayjchan/status/1632766418264666112 “I feel validated that scientific experts at DoE & FBI assessed a lab #OriginOfCovid to be more likely with low to moderate confidence. Not because they lean toward the exact same lab leak scenario as me but because they weren't suckered by the double spillover market hypothesis.”
ODNI report declassified by DNI Haines on June 23, 2023
Report-on-Potential-Links-Between-the-Wuhan-Institute-of-Virology-and-the-Origins-of-COVID-19-20230623.pdf (dni.gov) “(U) IC ASSESSMENTS ON COVID-19 ORIGINS
(U) In March, the IC updated its analysis on core intelligence questions related to COVID-19 origins, to include whether the first human infection with SARS-CoV-2—the virus that causes COVID-19—was the result of natural exposure to an infected animal or a laboratory- associated incident. Variations in IC analytic views on the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic largely stem from differences in how agencies weigh intelligence reporting and scientific publications and intelligence and scientific gaps. All agencies continue to assess that both a natural and laboratory-associated origin remain plausible hypotheses to explain the first human infection.
• The National Intelligence Council and four other IC agencies assess that the initial human infection with SARS-CoV-2 most likely was caused by natural exposure to an infected animal that carried SARS-CoV-2 or a close progenitor, a virus that probably would be more than 99 percent similar to SARS-CoV-2.
• The Department of Energy and the Federal Bureau of Investigation assess that a laboratory-associated incident was the most likely cause of the first human infection with SARS-CoV-2, although for different reasons.
• The Central Intelligence Agency and another agency remain unable to determine the precise origin of the COVID-19 pandemic, as both hypotheses rely on significant assumptions or face challenges with conflicting reporting.
• Almost all IC agencies assess that SARS-CoV-2 was not genetically engineered. Most agencies assess that SARS-CoV-2 was not laboratory-adapted; some are unable to make a determination. All IC agencies assess that SARS-CoV-2 was not developed as a biological weapon.”
Coverage of the ODNI report:
The Economist. (2023, June 26). An acrimonious debate about covid’s origins will rumble on. The Economist. https://www.economist.com/science-and-technology/2023/06/26/an-acrimonious-debate-about-covids-origins-will-rumble-on