Trust science but not scientists

Debate over the origins of lab-leak theory shows claims made by scientists should be scrutinised just like politicians’ promises.

Until May 2021, I trusted scientists blindly. More specifically, I trusted the consensus viewpoint of the scientists blindly. It took one article questioning the origins of COVID-19 that made me question my assumptions and the scientists. But before I delve into the reasons for my newfound scepticism with scientists, let me set the context. 

Before the COVID-19 pandemic, scientists across the globe have been warning against a pandemic outbreak. Infections with pandemic potential were considered a major risk and improved coordination between countries was recommended to prevent the spread in future (McClosky 2014). The World Health Organization (WHO) in 2018 listed ‘Disease X’ which represented the “knowledge that a serious international epidemic could be caused by a pathogen currently unknown to cause human disease”, and aimed to promote cross-cutting R&D to prepare for this eventuality. Even tech billionaire Bill Gates gave a prescient TED talk where he warned that the world is not ready to face a pandemic. All of them signalled that pandemic is not a question of if but when. I trusted scientists. 

When I heard of an epidemic outbreak in Wuhan that causes pneumonia-like symptoms, I feared the worst: Could this wipe out humanity? How dangerous is this virus? What should we do to protect ourselves? How is it different from previous viruses? I had a million questions and paid close attention to statements made by the scientists. I trusted scientists. 

In the midst of the pandemic, scientists provided detailed information on how transmission occurs and the origins of the pandemic. Viruses jump every day from one species to another. COVID-19, scientists said, is a type of zoonotic transmission. The virus originated from bats and jumped to humans via an intermediary. During Sars-CoV, civets were the intermediary; during MERS, camels were the intermediary; and for COVID-19, perhaps pangolins or other wild animals from the Wuhan wet market might be the intermediary. Since scientists claimed that humans in close proximity to wild animals increase the risk of zoonotic transmission, it seemed obvious that the virus originated from Wuhan wet market. I trusted scientists. 

Around that time, then US President Donald Trump publicly started questioning the origins of the COVID-19 and even suggested that the virus leaked from a lab in Wuhan. Since Donald Trump is a divisive figure, the mainstream media ridiculed his allegations. (To be fair, Donald Trump is known to make outlandish remarks). Any scientists questioning the origins of the COVID-19 were dubbed as conspiracy theorists by the mainstream media. I ignored Trump and the right-wing media’s rhetoric. I trusted scientists.

On February 18th 2020, a statement was released in The Lancet by a group of 27 scientists unequivocally declaring that COVID-19 had natural origins. It stated: We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin…[and] overwhelmingly conclude that this coronavirus originated in wildlife. After reading this statement, I was convinced (not that I needed more convincing) that anybody questioning the origins was peddling conspiracy theories. Importantly, the signatories claimed no conflict of interest. I trusted scientists. 

For more than a year, several scientists questioned the origins of the COVID-19. But they were derided, belittled, or brushed aside as conspiracy theorists by the media, tech industries, and people on one side of the political spectrum (unfortunately, even I was one of them). I trusted (mainstream) scientists.

More than a year later, my world came crashing down in May 2021. I watched a video of Shekhar Gupta summarizing Nicholas Wade’s article on Bulletin for Atomic Scientists raising questions on the natural origins of COVID-19. As I was watching this video, I remember asking whether Nicholas Wade or Bulletin for Atomic Scientists were credible sources. Although I wasn’t convinced regarding the lab-leak theory, doubt was placed in my head. I slowly started questioning scientists.

As I started reading more on COVID-19 lab theory, I went into a rabbit hole and things started becoming murkier (or clearer). Yuri Deigin, a Canadian biotech entrepreneur, wrote a  16,000-word essay in April 2020 providing one of the first detailed arguments that the COVID-19 virus could have escaped from a Chinese lab. In Jun 2020, Bret Weinstein, evolutionary biologist, claimed on Joe Rogen’s podcast that COVID-19 may have leaked from a lab. For some time, several prominent writers and scientists had been raising questions here, here, and here. I realized one side of the argument had been systematically silenced. I started questioning scientists. 

As lab leak theory gained momentum after May 2021, tech companies, mainstream media and new agencies suddenly changed their stance. WSJ reported that researchers at Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) fell sick with COVID-19 like symptoms in November 2019, shortly before the confirmed outbreak. In the last week of May 2021, Facebook stopped removing posts that suggested that COVID-19 was man-made. Media organisations started retroactively editing their article like Washington Post’s headline on Senator Tom Cotton’s article. The open letter by 27 scientists published by The Lancet came under scrutiny since scientists had claimed they had no conflict of interest. However, evidence pointed otherwise. Under fire, The Lancet invited the 27 authors of the letter to re-evaluate their competing interests. Surprise, surprise! The person who orchestrated the open letter in 2020, Peter Daszak, had competing interests which was published as an addendum in Lancet later. I started doubting scientists. 

There is no smoke without fire. This sudden shift in the stance required a few scientists, investigative journalists, and citizen journalists who spent months trying to get to the bottom of the issue. It is important to give credence to both sides of the argument before concluding. However, scientists used the mainstream media and tech platforms to successfully thwart their work by hailing themselves as the ‘guardians of truth’ while branding everyone else as conspiracists. 

As I write this article, I have started re-evaluating my opinion on everything I have heard from the scientists recently (Ankhon Dekhi moment). In the past, scientists were guilty of p-hacking, where researchers cherry-pick positive results; overseen experiments that might be unethical; culpable to funder bias, where they publish reports favourable to their donors; and even conducted experiments that could wipe humanity from earth (gain-of-function research).

This is not a call of arms against scientists. It is a word of caution. Scientists have made great contributions to humanity. But they are also humans. They also succumb to greed just like politicians. Readers should remain vigilant. Trust science but scrutinize scientists.