There is still no officially admitted consensus about the origins of the COVID-19 virus that led to a global shutdown emerged. Four years after the first outbreak in Wuhan, China, no definitive animal source has been identified. Initially, the idea that COVID-19 could have originated from a laboratory was dismissed as a conspiracy theory, but this perspective is gaining traction, including among various U.S. government agencies and political figures, to the point it is now more and more considered the credible origin. This shift raises critical questions about why scientists were so quick to dismiss a plausible explanation for the pandemic’s origins. Did they have information that they chose not to disclose?
The Evidence for a Lab Leak
Matt Ridley, a science writer and co-author of “Viral: The Search for the Origin of COVID-19,” discusses the compelling evidence supporting the lab-leak theory and how attempts were made to suppress it. One of the most significant pieces of evidence is the Defuse project proposal, which surfaced publicly in September 2021. This proposal, created by the EcoHealth Alliance in collaboration with the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), outlined plans for experiments involving bat-derived sarbecoviruses. Notably, one experiment aimed to insert a specific genetic sequence into a virus — a sequence that later appeared in SARS-CoV-2. Ridley emphasizes that scientists displayed a clear plan to insert this sequence at the S1/S2 junction of the spike gene of a SARS-CoV virus at precisely the time and location of the start of the pandemic. This detail is crucial because it suggests that researchers were not only studying these viruses but also manipulating them in ways that could lead to unintended consequences. Additionally, it was intended to be conducted at biosafety level two (BSL-2), which is significantly and dangerously less secure than what would typically be required for such experiments. This raises alarms about the safety protocols followed during such high-risk research.
Another argument for a labb-leak is the geographic anomaly. The pandemic started in Wuhan, which is far from the natural reservoar of the virus. As well, the nine closest relatives to SARS-CoV-2 were all, at the beginning of the pandemic, stored in the freezes of that same Wuhan labb. That labb that were doing the most extensive research of SARS-type of viruses in the world.
Scientific Integrity and Public Discourse
The pattern of prominent scientists publicly denying the plausibility of a lab leak while privately acknowledging its likelihood is particularly troubling and the scientific dishonesty raises questions about the integrity of science overall. Ridley points out that this discrepancy became evident when U.S. Congress subpoenaed records from authors of the influential paper “The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2,” which dismissed the lab-leak theory. The authors were commissioned by Anthony Fauci and others to write what was at first intended to be a balanced article but ultimately, after the authors had been preassured, concluded that a lab leak was unlikely. However, internal communications revealed that many authors believed otherwise, with one referring to it as “friggin’ likely”. Ridley points out that that these scientists privately communicated about their concerns regarding the virus’s origins while publicly asserting it was not manipulated in a lab, is scientific misconduct and calls into question not only their scientific integrity but also whether political motivations influenced their public statements. He also argues that it is such actions that undermine trust in scientific institutions and calls for accountability.
Economic and political Influences on Scientific Discourse
Political factors may also play a role in suppressing discussions about the lab-leak theory. Ridley also notes that Western academia has become increasingly reliant on Chinese funding and collaborations. Many western universities are for example highly dependant on chinese guest-students and scientific magazines make huge money from chinese publication fees. This dependency is leading to a self-censorship among western scientists and institutions regarding criticism of China and some scientists have expressed concern that revealing the truth about COVID-19’s origins could indeed damage international relations. The reluctance to confront this very problematic issue is alarming, especially given the pandemic’s devastating toll — approximately 28 million lives lost globally.
The Need for Open Debate
Despite growing public interest in exploring the lab-leak theory, many scientific institutions avoid discussing it altogether. Ridley recounts his experiences attempting to organize debates on this topic, only to be met with resistance from prestigious scientific organizations. This silence is deafening and indicative of an unwillingness to engage with uncomfortable truths. In a recent debate he participated in, public opinion shifted significantly in favor of the lab-leak theory after he presented his arguments, highlighting a disconnect between scientific consensus and public belief.
Conclusion
The ongoing investigation into COVID-19’s origins is crucial not only for understanding this pandemic but also for preventing future outbreaks. As evidence mounts supporting the possibility of a lab leak, it is imperative that scientists and institutions prioritize transparency and accountability over political considerations. The stakes are too high to ignore potential misconduct or to shy away from uncomfortable discussions about how such a catastrophic event could have occurred. If COVID-19 really came from a labb-leak it would be the worst scientific accident in history with far bigger implications and far-reaching consequenses than any industrial catastrophy.
Another disturbing aspect is Event 201, a pandemic simulation that took place 2019 and was hosted by Bill Gates together with Avril Haines, the Deputy Director of the CIA. In a recent interview Robert Kennedy Jr. asked: “What is the CIA doing at a public health forum? They don’t do public health. They do coup d’états.” His comment suggests there may have been other motives behind the simulation other than just preperations for a potential pandemic. The very tight connections between philantopy, national security and public health is something that deserves a lot closer scrutiny.
Overall, the need for a total ban of all gain-of-function research, the need for much stricter safetyprotocols of laboratories that deals with dangerous patogens, the absolute need for transparency and honesty within the scientific society and a discussion of how to balance global health, national safety with research is absolutely necessary. The scientific society and our politicians have a very long road to walk to even begin to restore any trust.
Listen to Matt Ridley being interviewed by Spiked or read their articles on their webpage here or here:
