[pezzana]

> Searching my inbox, I found an email from April 16, 2020 where I told someone who’d me asked that the lab-leak hypothesis seemed entirely plausible to me, that in fact I couldn’t understand why it wasn’t being investigated more, but that I was hesitant to blog about these matters. As I wrote seven months ago, I now see my lack of courage as having been a personal failing. Obviously, I’m just a quantum computing theorist, not a biologist, so I don’t have to have any opinion at all about the origin of COVID-19 … but I did, and I didn’t share it only because of the likelihood that I’d be called an idiot on social media. Having now read Chan and Ridley, though, I think I’d take being called an idiot for this book review more as a positive signal about my courage than as a negative signal about my reasoning skills!

The groupthink around the lab leak hypothesis, and especially that letter signed by scientists in the early days of the pandemic, has done a lot of damage. The problem is that is isn't just this topic. About a dozen other topics have become minefields of politics and mind control masquerading as science. We only see the idiocy of this approach in the case of the lab leak because the consensus has crumbled.

Hopefully, this won't be the last wall to fall under its own weight.

[dnautics]

"that letter signed by scientists" does not do justice to the fact that the organizer of that letter had a severe conflict of interest that he failed to disclose. Like why the hell would a scientist not disclose that??! Having been a scientist myself it boggles the mind.

[zachlatta]

Can someone link the mentioned letter? Having trouble finding it.

[willhinsa]

Here is the letter[0], and the researcher in question with a huge conflict of interest is Peter Daszak[1].

[0] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

[1] https://www.bmj.com/content/375/bmj.n2414

[thedrbrian]

It’s not just Daszak either, 26 of the 27 signatories had links. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/09/10/revealed-scienti...

[nkurz]

I think it's "Statement in support of the scientists, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting COVID-19" in the Lancet from Feb 19 2020:

The rapid, open, and transparent sharing of data on this outbreak is now being threatened by rumours and misinformation around its origins. We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin. ... We declare no competing interests.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

They later published an "Addendum: competing interests and the origins of SARS-CoV-2" in June 2021:

Peter Daszak has expanded on his disclosure statements for three pieces relating to COVID-19 that he co-authored or contributed to in The Lancet—the February, 2020, Correspondence, as well as a Commission Statement and a Comment for the Lancet COVID-19 Commission.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...

[emmelaich]

Especially when Daszak himself had warned that the research was risky, in 2015 and Nov 2019.

https://twitter.com/__ice9/status/1344832354100125699

[sundarurfriend]

And there's as yet no academic/systemic consequence for them not declaring this blatant conflict of interest. That sends a big bold message to future scientists considering whether or not to declare them honestly.

[bryanrasmussen]

reading the description of the conflict and paraphrasing Upton Sinclair I would say it is hard for someone to admit a conflict, if their continuing access to funding is dependent on keeping it hidden.

[dnautics]

I reread aaronsons blogpost more carefully and I take back my "??!". Daszak is very possibly avoiding the trauma of having had the experience of trying to save lives and ending up resulting in -15m lives saved. That's a unique experience in human existence that goes even beyond the Sinclair quote. I can't honestly say I wouldn't do the same thing, and I've historically done the right thing -- issued corrections two of the n < 10 papers I have to my name.

[bryanrasmussen]

ok, perhaps I'm in a bad mood this morning, which makes me generally prone to cynicism.

[ekianjo]

thats called corruption. Scientists can be corrupted as well.

[dekhn]

I get the feeling a lot of very successful scientists got to where they are by cutting moral corners where other scientists wouldn't.

[rapsey]

> Like why the hell would a scientist not disclose that?

Because they are trying to avoid getting lynched?

[petre]

Daszak is already getting lynched, at least mediatically. Do a search in his name on ddg, see what the top result is. I'd say it's a crackpot website but in fact it seems it was all written by a covid19 victim. I'd probably move to an Antarctic research station until people forget, as opposed to confortably living in a country where every crackpot and their neighbour has access to firearms.

[thom]

Perhaps the Antarctic wouldn’t currently be very welcoming:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-59848160

[animal_spirits]

I got into a slightly heated argument with my mother when she claimed that "China had manufactured the virus in a lab" - I didn't even consider the possibility of virus manufacture for study and a possible leak happening, I just assumed she was being fed propaganda that this was the beginning of some kind of bio-war being started by China. So that is my failing, and after reading more about the lab-leak hypothesis I learned to hold my tongue and be curious about such left-field claims instead of judgemental

[temporalparts]

One of my favorite fallacies is the fallacy fallacy. Just because one used fallacious reasoning, doesn't mean they're wrong. e.g. I can give a bad reason for why 16/64 = 1/4, just cross out the 6's, but just because the reason is bad doesn't mean the result is wrong.

[unyttigfjelltol]

In this case the fallacy was (US perspective)-- just because the Orange-Haired Man said it, doesn't make it wrong.

Admitting this fallacy would be too much to expect from political partisans. The guy is not a very stable genius, but he's not always 100% wrong either.

[mdp2021]

Yes, this case has generated an amount of "Hitler was a vegetarian" cases.

More "shockingly", some perceived in certain circles that an amount of "odd actors" acted to throw gasoline on every spark, enticing savage gut reactions. Another blow to civilization, opinion benders encouraging towards the dismissal of clean evaluation, mining the pillar that after "He said we walk using feet!!!" the response should be "Actually, ", not "Boo!".

[dragonwriter]

> the Orange-Haired Man

Carrot Top?

[adolph]

Jeff McKissack, a mail carrier in Houston, Texas, transformed a small suburban lot near his wood frame house into The Orange Show in honor of his favorite fruit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orange_Show

[xdennis]

Not sure why downvoted. Trump is the orange-face man, not hair.

[orzig]

I super appreciate your willingness to share a small moment of intellectual humility - they are too rare and I hope that it will inspire at least one other person to approach at least one other issue with a similar spirit.

I know that my thinking and behavior has benefited from the small subset of people who have been willing to do so publicly in the past.

[johnnylambada]

I hope you looped your mother into your new insights!

[thelittleone]

Indeed. one of my favorite learnings in life is the power of admitting when I'm wrong (which is often enough). Quite an empowering decision and also relationahip building.

However there are times when people find it so unusual that they see it as weakness and instead of admitting their own wrong, try to capitalise on an opprtunity (perceived weakness).

One exception though is playing chess online, where my ego is yet to be mastered.

[strictfp]

I use self-deprecating humor a lot. And some people, usually the ones who don't pick up on the irony, also use it as an opportunity to attack. It's quite sad when you think about it :)

[animal_spirits]

We can find strength from being vulnerable

[have_faith]

The problem with this is that it could very well be the case that she was being fed propaganda or just repeating something written on facebook by a randomer before more details were known. The fact that it could turn out to be true makes it very difficult to know how to take future similar statements because they probably have a higher likelihood of being wrong if they come from similar sources.

[vmception]

The intertwined nature of country, financial and personnel relationships is not easy for people to understand.

I was just at a gathering the other day where a woman couldn't comprehend that the lab in Wuhan is a joint venture with US public resources, US private sector resources, Chinese resources, and personnel from both countries and others, which includes Dr. Fauci.

She had, until that point, mostly been enamored by Dr. Fauci and mostly been quite angry at Wuhan as a general disavowal of the CCP.

There is nothing to conclude from any of that observation alone, aside from noticing gaps in US federal oversight. Many people will just spiral into some other rabbit hole since nuance isn't their strongsuit. We still have to react to the pandemic whether that bolsters a lab leak hypothesis, or leads to a smoking gun, or not.

[xwolfi]

If only the American president at the time had been more responsible and less inflammatory it would have resulted in a lot less reflexive aggression - asian people beaten in the street included.

The CCP is not very responsible if they know and hide it or if they don't and refuse to look, but to their defense, it's also because it will be used and reused to their detriment (possibly deserved) if proven. Having a sound diplomatic strategy would have maybe helped convince them otherwise, but it was apparently more interesting to ALSO play down the virus in the U.S. for whatever reason and make absolutely clear that China would pay a dear price for it. So hard to blame China :s

[specialist]

Yes and:

I'm done with "hot takes".

Yes, we need rapid responses during a crisis.

Also yes, there will be both good and bad consequences to every action, or inaction.

But ffs give the dust time to settle before doing the after action analysis.

--

I mostly blame the popular medias for boosting and accelerating the human tendency for fear, outrage, blame. Knowing this about ourselves, that crap has to be toned down.

Writing this now, I guess I'm just repeating the "thinking, fast and slow" critique.