Chapter 11
On March 4, 2023, while doing unrelated research, Dr. Florence Débarre randomly came across a new set of FASTQ files (a text file of nucleotide base sequences) on the GISAID database. Curious, she started investigating. Less than two weeks later, another viral information cascade would ignite the lab leak media universe ablaze again. This time, instead of the usual manufactured pseudo-events and trope-laden stories, a highly relevant scientific discovery supercharged its velocity and exploded in virality. A panic set in within the lab leak community; they were losing control over their viral narrative.
They were all unwilling or unable to accept the new critical data, which once again strongly pointed toward a zoonotic origin of the virus. Everybody was seeking to create or buy into a counternarrative that would stick.
Luckily for them, as we know by now, the infosphere tends to always deliver.
Within weeks, it was Jesse Bloom who finally became the kingmaker of public discourse and provided a resolution to the battle of conflicting counternarratives by offering a pseudoscientific rationalization that would allow believers to hold on to their preferred narrative. But does his criticism hold any merit?
Good scientists follow the evidence wherever it leads. That is what brings them together around a body of evidence, no matter where they started. This is the beauty and power of science and a weight-of-evidence-based worldview.
However, what I observe again and again online is another unspoken coercive phenomenon, sometimes known as audience capture. To remain a successful influencer, or a scientists with strong media presence, it seems you are required to follow the viral narratives wherever they lead. Depending on how the co-created story evolves, it can lead to some pretty undesirable places, both professionally and morally.
References:
On Florence Debarre
Note: When I reached out to Prof. Florence Débarre for an interview for the book, she politely declined citing she wanted to avoid more public exposure and remain private. I would have loved to share with readers her remarkable story, her scientific thinking and her detailed contributions as a last author on the new market paper. Also to highlight her intellectual leadership among other amazing female scientists like Zhengli Shi, Alice Hughes, Angela Rasmussen that show how cutting-edge science is not just male dominated anymore. Unfortunately, given the severity of the threats and stalking she received from conspiracy theorists, any more information than what is already publicly available poses a risk to her safety and well-being. We are all poorer for it; and a clear example of how the anti-science movement asymmetrically harms female researchers even more than their male peers. All I want to say here is that I was deeply impressed by who Michael Worobey would once call “the most knowledgeable origin researcher in France” and grateful for the informal interactions I had with her; including many critical comments and challenges towards me and my conduct that came from her.
The Atlantic’s raccoon dog story by Katherine Wu:
Wu, K. J. (2023, March 16). The strongest evidence yet that an animal started the pandemic. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2023/03/covid-origins-research-raccoon-dogs-wuhan-market-lab-leak/673390/
March 12 WHO SAGO statement:
SAGO statement on newly released SARS-CoV-2 metagenomics data from China CDC on GISAID (who.int)
GSAID sequence drama statement:
We contacted an author of the Gao et al. preprint on 9 March 2023 to inquire about the data, and were told that we could conduct an independent analysis. On 10 March we advised the same author that we had discovered the presence of animal genetic material in the samples. On 11 March 2023, we discovered that the data had been made unavailable (at the request of the submitter according to a statement on GISAID). On the same day we contacted both the corresponding author of the preprint as well as the author who had contributed the raw data to GISAID and asked if they would like to collaborate with us on analyses of these data. On 13 March 2023, those of us who had either downloaded the data, or associated metadata, or contacted the corresponding author of the preprint, received emails from the GISAID Secretariat admonishing us to comply with the GISAID terms of use2 , or in some cases falsely accusing us of having breached the GISAID terms of use. We are well aware of these terms of use, have not breached them, and have no intention of breaching them. We informed WHO of our preliminary findings on 11 March 2023. On 12 March 2023, some of us met with WHO and some members of SAGO (the WHO-convened Scientific Advisory Group for the Origins of Novel pathogens) to discuss our observations. On 14 March 2023, the WHO convened a meeting with SAGO where some of us and representatives from CCDC presented our respective results. We cannot comment on the CCDC team’s findings, as those are theirs to share, but some findings from our analyses have already been shared in the media and in public statements by the WHO3 . This meeting constituted one of several efforts to establish a collaborative relationship with our colleagues at CCDC to share data and findings as rapidly as possible. We acknowledge that these circumstances are unusual. We are proponents of open data sharing, and ensuring that data from our analyses are broadly accessible in public repositories is our standard practice. Although our colleagues at the CCDC have stated their intention to share these raw sequence data to support the publication currently undergoing review, they remain inaccessible through GISAID at the time of writing.
Commentators react to the Atlantic Story:
Richard Ebright and the usual commentators:
Kerr, A. (2023, March 20). Fauci “Stooges” now claim raccoon dogs caused COVID. Virologists say they’re wrong. Washington Free Beacon. https://freebeacon.com/coronavirus/fauci-stooges-now-claim-raccoon-dogs-caused-covid-virologists-say-theyre-wrong/ “Pseudoscientific nonsense. From stooges who have been peddling pseudoscientific nonsense for three years” - Ebright
Alina Chan:
Saagar Enjeti received over half a million views for his comment:
https://x.com/esaagar/status/1636541024662085645 “The new natural origin propaganda from The Atlantic is literally laughable. Their source is literally a scientist who helped coverup Lab Leak in the first place. The so-called "infected" dog sample was collected *after* COVID already leaked from the Wuhan lab months earlier”
A collection of 16 contradictory comments:
https://miro.medium.com/v2/resize:fit:4800/format:webp/1*ezAgcfLsBPR1DW5Ti2abkw.png (Source: Markolin, P., PhD. (2023, March 21). The rise of information pathogens. Protagonist Science. https://www.protagonist-science.com/p/the-rise-of-information-pathogens)
George Gao publish his study, begrudgingly acknowledging raccoon dogs being present
Liu, W. J., Liu, P., Lei, W., Jia, Z., He, X., Shi, W., Tan, Y., Zou, S., Wong, G., Wang, J., Wang, F., Wang, G., Qin, K., Gao, R., Zhang, J., Li, M., Xiao, W., Guo, Y., Xu, Z., . . . Wu, G. (2023). Surveillance of SARS-COV-2 at the Huanan Seafood Market. Nature, 631(8020), 402–408. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-023-06043-2
Surveillance of SARS-CoV-2 at the Huanan Seafood Market | Nature
The NYT op-ed that heavily used Jesse Bloom to attack and discredit the work of the metagenomic paper authors
Wallace-Wells D., May 3, 2023. New York Times.
Opinion | Why Does Bad Science on Covid’s Origin Get Hyped? - The New York Times
Sources related to Wildlife trade and regulations
Michael Standaert:
and Michael Standaert auf X: „How many farms had domesticated wildlife on them by the start of 2020? I've never been able to find the full numbers, but these did seep out early that year in reports about the quarantines before the culling finished by mid-year.“ / X) Source: 云南启动史上最严野生动物管控：全面加强管控，禁止交易活动_澎湃号·政务_澎湃新闻-The Paper
“Local officials trumpeted the wildlife trade as a way to close the rural-urban divide and to meet ambitious national targets to alleviate poverty.”
— Emily Fang, reporting for NPR
WhiteChina’s wildlife trade policy – where are we now and what might come next? - EIA. https://eia-international.org/blog/chinas-wildlife-trade-policy-where-are-we-now-and-what-might-come-next/
Beautiful infographic about the Chinese Wildlife industry by the South Chinese Morning Post
https://multimedia.scmp.com/infographics/news/china/article/3064927/wildlife-ban/index.html
10 Billion USD for wildlife trafficking
SE Asia’s COVID legacy is less wildlife trade, but more hunting, study finds (mongabay.com)
Ultimately, Alex Crits-Cristoph et al. publish their study with remarkable findings:
Genetic tracing of market wildlife and viruses at the epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic: Cell
More recently, Prof. Angela Rasmussen finds genetic fingerprints of Huanan market animals being sick:
Nature Publishing Group. (2024). Sick animals suggest COVID pandemic started in Wuhan market. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-03968-0
Mercer Quote:
Mercer, H. (2020) Not born yesterday. (n.d.). Princeton University Press. https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691178707/not-born-yesterday (Quote: “Polarization does not stem from people being ready to accept bad justifications for views they already hold but from being exposed to too many good (enough) justifications for these views, leading them to develop stronger or more confident views.”)