[os2warpman]

Who, SPECIFICALLY PLEASE, at the CDC "branded the lab-leak hypothesis a conspiracy theory and quickly dismissed it"?

Not the press, not some rando on twitter, not some anonymous and probably made up "source", not "people are saying"-- which actual CDC employee or appointee did this?

I keep asking, and people keep making up bullshit.

[LegionMammal978]

Fauci was relatively quick to dismiss the idea of the virus being human-modified, in a press briefing on April 17, 2020 [0]:

> Q Mr. President, I wanted to ask Dr. Fauci: Could you address these suggestions or concerns that this virus was somehow manmade, possibly came out of a laboratory in China?

> THE PRESIDENT: Want to go?

> Q You studied this virus. What are the prospects of that?

> DR. FAUCI: There was a study recently that we can make available to you, where a group of highly qualified evolutionary virologists looked at the sequences there and the sequences in bats as they evolve. And the mutations that it took to get to the point where it is now is totally consistent with a jump of a species from an animal to a human.

(The study he refers to is "The Proximal Origin of SARS-CoV-2" [1], published March 17.) It seems that much was made of this particular remark. It doesn't rule out the idea of an unmodified virus leaked from the lab, but the widespread theories have always been aimed at the gain-of-function research occuring there.

[0] https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/re...

[1] https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9

[SpicyLemonZest]

The original commenter got flagged for his response, so I'd like to ask you more politely. Dr. Fauci did not in fact work for the CDC, and as you acknowledge this statement does not even say that the lab leak hypothesis is untrue. Are you trying to argue in favor of the original commenter's assertion that "they branded the lab-leak hypothesis a conspiracy theory", or just trying to explain what comments people are interpreting in bad faith to support that assertion?

[LegionMammal978]

My apologies, I was actually under the belief that Fauci was affiliated with the CDC at the time, given how often they appeared together in headlines (e.g., [0]; most of those are clumping them together in critisism, but I also saw them clumped together in praise). I'll keep that in mind.

In any case, the assertion made me curious about what was actually said by government officials and affiliates regarding lab-leak theories, and drilling down into some of the blog posts led to that particular statement and the paper associated with it.

People do often specifically mean a human-modified virus when they talk about "the lab-leak hypothesis", especially given the GoF research conducted there, so I'd say it's true that Fauci wanted to cast water on that particular version of the hypothesis. (If there's anything that annoys me, it's when people equivocate over what is and isn't a lab leak. But if you must know, I personally find the stronger forms uncompelling.)

Of course, many have put far stronger language into the mouths of politicians and officials (most of whom in 2020 were quite careful with their words), and the tales can easily grow in the retelling, but it doesn't mean it's not worthwhile to focus on the kernel of truth about what actually occurred. "It wasn't the CDC, it was Fauci/others, and they were only talking about a manmade virus, against which the evidence is still strong" would have been much clearer than "it's all BS".

[0] https://duckduckgo.com/?q=cdc+fauci&df=2019-08-31..2020-09-0...

[j_w]

How is this quickly dismissing the idea that it was a lab leak as a conspiracy? The research showed (and still shows) that it's extremely plausible for the virus to have gone from animal -> human. I think currently there is a "missing" jump where the animal which was involved in transmission still isn't know but to say that Fauci citing the current research is "dismissal of lab leak as a conspiracy theory" is a bit absurd.

[LegionMammal978]

I don't think you'd easily catch him put it in precisely the terms of a "conspiracy theory". He wouldn't have had such a long career if he weren't careful with his words on air.

But he did consider that research to adequately "address" the concerns of a "manmade" virus, and I don't think it would be uncharitable to interpret that as a dismissal of those concerns. After all, he always could have ended his statement with a noncommittal "but this is just one study, and we need more evidence to really know for sure".

And a lot of people do specifically mean a virus that was genetically modified or otherwise selected for human transmissibility when they talk about a "lab leak", so at least he was trying to talk down that version of a lab leak theory.

(Personally, I do think a lot of the theories of an genetically-modified virus are overblown, both then and now, I just wanted to give some perspective for what he actually said.)

[os2warpman]

[flagged]

[dang]

Please don't attack other users like this, no matter how wrong anyone is or you feel they are. It's not what this site is for, and destroys what it is for.

This is in the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

[os2warpman]

[flagged]

[dang]

That's a good point about the word harangue! I've replaced it with a different verb above.

Could you please stop breaking the site guidelines, and also please stop creating accounts to do that with? You're welcome here as long as you respect the same rules that apply to all commenters.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

[nradov]

NIH officials involved in writing a paper in 2020 about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 actively suppressed consideration of a lab leak hypothesis and exaggerated the evidence for a natural origin. Some of their communications have been released and others involved have testified to that under oath.

https://theintercept.com/2023/01/19/covid-origin-nih-emails/

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/03/08/trumps-cdc-director...

[SpicyLemonZest]

But your second link contradicts this story entirely! It's about a claim from the CDC director that other officials in other agencies froze him out because he wanted to consider the lab leak hypothesis.

[nradov]

Sorry I should have been more clear. From a US federal government perspective, the fault for the sloppy science in the 2020 paper lies with the NIH and not the CDC. Will edit my comment above.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9