[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