Always scrutinize scientific statements, especially those that aggressively dismiss alternative hypotheses, by checking for conflicts of interest among the authors and distinguishing between peer-reviewed research and opinion pieces. The Lancet statement on COVID-19 origins, orchestrated by someone with direct financial ties to the research in question, serves as a critical example of why this is important.
Advocate for and support comprehensive, conflict-free forensic investigations for major public health events. The lack of a thorough, unbiased investigation into COVID-19’s origins, despite ‘smoke coming out of a lot of windows,’ highlights the necessity of pursuing all hypotheses equally until real evidence is found.
Be vigilant about government statements and funding pathways related to controversial scientific research, particularly when transparency is lacking or indirect funding mechanisms are used. The U.S. government’s indirect funding of the Wuhan Institute of Virology via EcoHealth Alliance, coupled with unreleased progress reports, demonstrates the need for public oversight.
Recognize the inherent controversy and significant risks associated with gain-of-function research, which aims to make pathogens more infectious to study them. This type of research, described as ’looking for a gas leak with a lighted match,’ carries the potential to unleash deadly pathogens that cannot be controlled.
Be aware of the historical precedent for lab leaks of dangerous pathogens, as they are not uncommon. Multiple SARS lab escapes and the 1977 Russian flu incident illustrate that viruses can and do escape from research facilities, making a lab origin a plausible scenario for new outbreaks.
Critically question explanations for outbreaks that contradict ecological and epidemiological patterns. The mystery surrounding COVID-19’s origin in Wuhan during winter, without a clear animal source in a market that didn’t sell bats, should prompt deeper investigation rather than immediate dismissal of alternative theories.
When evaluating complex events, adopt the investigative journalism principle: ’never assume conspiracy when incompetence is an option.’ This mindset helps in focusing on more probable explanations like human error or procedural shortcuts, which can have significant consequences.
Periodically re-evaluate the cost-benefit of high-risk scientific research, such as aggressive viral mapping and manipulation. If millions are spent on research meant to prevent outbreaks, but a major pandemic still occurs, the efficacy and justification for continuing such research should be critically assessed.
Recognize that authoritarian governments may obstruct investigations and destroy evidence related to public health events. China’s refusal to allow expert teams, destruction of records, and blocking access to key sites severely hindered the ability to determine COVID-19’s origin.
Maintain skepticism towards information suppression or labeling of certain discussions as ‘conspiracy theories’ on social media or in the press. Initial dismissals of the lab leak hypothesis, later reversed by some platforms and media outlets, demonstrate how initial narratives can be influenced and later challenged.
Understand that asymptomatic transmission can significantly obscure the true origin and timeline of an outbreak. The possibility of an earlier, undetected spread of SARS-CoV-2 due to asymptomatic cases makes pinpointing an exact initial date and location more challenging.