Why the Wuhan lab leak conspiracy theory is wrong, and why it matters

It is not surprising that, when a cataclysmic event like the current SARS-C0V-2 (COVID-19) pandemic occurs, crackpot ideas and conspiracy theories soon follow. Not long after the pandemic was declared claims began circulating that it was caused by 5G wireless signals or that it was a plot to install microchips into the global population. Ideas of such absurdity, persistent though they may be, can be summarily dismissed as the nonsense they are.

One particular claim, however, has not been so easily dismissed. While experts consider it most likely that the virus arose naturally in bats and was then passed on to humans thru another, as yet unidentified, animal host, there is an alternative scenario that continues to draw attention and support: That the virus escaped from a research lab in Wuhan province where the pandemic first started. In some versions of the theory, the virus was the result of “gain of function” experiments that increased the lethality of the virus before its escape into the population. An early backer of this theory was Donald Trump, which was only to be expected given his penchant for unhinged conspiracy theories as well as his antipathy towards China. But the lab leak theory has continued to gain traction even among respectable and well-regarded media outlets and authorities. A number of scientists wrote a letter to Science demanding that this possibility be more strongly considered, and the Biden administration has ordered its intelligence agencies to investigate the possibility that the pandemic could have originated from a lab accident.

So does all this mean there is good evidence to support the lab leak theory of the pandemic’s origin? In a word: No. A number of writers have explained why the putative evidence claimed to support this conspiracy theory simply does not stand up to scrutiny. For instance, Ethan Siegel of Forbes magazine has written the article below (click on image for link):

Biochemist Larry Moran has also written several articles on his blog about this issue:

Lab leak conspiracy theory rears its ugly head again: this time it’s Nicholas Wade of the New York TImes

Real scientists discuss the lab leak conspiracy theory

Let’s analyze the Newsweek lab leak conspiracy theory article

One of Moran’s articles links to this lecture by Australian coronavirus expert Edward Holmes (left). While the entire video is worth watching as an excellent overview of what we know about COVID-19, at 41:45 he specifically addresses the lab leak theory and why it is not a plausible explanation for the virus’s origin.

Additionally, there is this very thorough discussion of the many scientific errors contained in an article frequently cited by proponents of the conspiracy theory:

Debunking Nicholas Wade’s Origin of COVID Conspiracy Theory

I strongly recommend that anyone who considers the lab leak theory to be plausible go through the above material. To briefly summarize the case against the lab leak theory: There are several versions of the theory. In some versions it is claimed that the COVID-19 virus was deliberately engineered from a previously existing virus. Proponents of this version of the theory point to features of the virus they believe indicate an artificial origin:

• The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein possesses a furin cleavage site that is not found in any other SARS-related beta-coronovirus. However, that comprises a cohort of only four known viruses. Among coronaviruses as a whole the furin cleavage site is not uncommon.
• Others have pointed to the presence of the double CGG sequence coding for arginine in the furin cleavage site as a “smoking gun” demonstrating that the virus could not have had a natural origin. Virologist Kristian Anderson has writing an exhaustive explanation for why this claim is false.
• It has also been claimed that a bat virus called RaTG13, which was studied by the WIV, could have been used as a “backbone” to artificially engineer SARS-CoV-2. This is not possible. (It is worth pointing out that the degree of similarity between the two viruses is about 96%. This is comparable to the genetic similarity between humans and chimpanzees. In other words, this particular argument is the equivalent of claiming that the Chinese are running secret labs where chimpanzees are being genetically modified to become humans.)

The idea that the virus was deliberately engineered is, therefore, clearly untenable. However, there is a less extreme version of the lab leak theory, in which the lab was storing SARS-CoV-2 along with other potentially pathogenic viruses, and it was then accidentally released into the community, likely through infecting a careless worker. The problem with this theory, however, is again the complete absence of supporting evidence.

It’s important to note that the possibility of the virus having escaped from the lab is not one that was ignored until it was raised by a plucky band of internet “researchers” and right-wing politicians. In the lecture from Edward Holmes linked above he mentions he “thought about it immediately, as well.” And WIV chief researcher Shi Zhengli has also confirmed that when she was directed to investigate the Wuhan outbreak, one of her first thoughts was “Could (the viruses) have come from our lab?” However, a review of the laboratory records showed that no virus matching SARS-CoV-2 had ever been stored there. And since most of this research was done with other institutions, these records would have existed elsewhere.

Those who insist on believing in the lab leak theory must then resort to claiming that there is a massive coverup involving not only the Chinese government and scientists at WIV, but likely other organizations such as the WHO, whose investigations have so far uncovered nothing untoward or suspicious. Such a coverup would, of course, entail a conspiracy. Which makes the lab leak theory, by definition, a conspiracy theory.

Much of the supposed evidence for this alleged conspiracy consists of non sequiturs. For instance, much has been made of the fact that in September, 2019, the WIV deleted an on-line database of virus sequences investigated at the lab. (WIV says this was because the database was being attacked by hackers.) Since this was three months before the first cases of COVID-19 were reported, I fail to see how this points to involvement of the lab in the outbreak. Another point often raised by conspiracy theorists is that the WIV was researching a cave in Yunnan province linked to a 2012 outbreak of a SARS-like illness involving six mine workers, three of whom died. A viral cause for the illness was initially suspected and possible evidence for this was strongly pursued as part of the effort to identify the origin of the 2002 SARS outbreak. Although a number of new viruses were identified, it was determined that the illness was most likely fungal in origin. It makes no sense that the WIV would cover up the discovery of a new virus capable of causing disease in humans, as conspiracy theorists allege, since identifying such viruses was the entire goal of their research.

Despite the lack of evidence, the conspiracy theory persists, as such things tend to do. Part of the problem is that it is never possible to completely disprove such theories, especially to their most fervent believers. Every piece of evidence against such a conspiracy becomes construed as only further evidence of how clever and duplicitous are the perpetrators of the conspiracy, and how widespread is the conspiracy. The potential damage of such conspiracy theories should not be underestimated. A commentator on my Facebook page forwarded to me the following article written by a biologist named Bret Weinstein who is a supporter of the conspiracy theory:

Why we should welcome the lab leak hypothesis

Largely relying on the debunked claims I have summarized above, Weinstein argues that the threat of future pandemics has been greatly exaggerated.

If we are mostly safe from devastating zoonotic spillover pandemics, why were we told otherwise? The answer is simple: because the scientific method has been hijacked by a competition over who can tell the most beguiling stories. Scientists have become salesmen, pitching serious problems that they and their research just so happen to be perfectly positioned to solve. The fittest in this game are not the most accurate, but the most stirring. And what could be more stirring than a story in which bat caves are ticking pandemic time-bombs from which only the boldest and brightest gene experts can save us?

I know that last question is meant rhetorically, but a number of answers nonetheless come immediately to mind. How about a story in which corrupt scientists collude with a sinister government to conduct clandestine viral experiments, only to have something go terribly wrong, unleashing unthinkable horror and destruction upon an unsuspecting world?

Sound familiar?

Weinstein, however, wants to reassure us:

(W)e should hope that Covid-19 was caused by human error. As terrible as the implications of that are — millions dead, incalculable suffering and loss; all caused by scientific misjudgement — at least it tells us how to make ourselves safer going forward: we should stop doing the thing that creates that danger.

Isn’t that great news? All we have to do to prevent future viral pandemics is stop doing research on viral pandemics! It’s so simple!

Weinstein’s logic is simply abysmal . The odds of deadly viral pandemics are what they are, and even if COVID-19 was caused by a lab leak, those odds are not affected. They remain what they are, regardless. Only, if no one is doing research on how to predict, prevent and respond to pandemics, we’ll be sitting ducks when the next one comes along, as it inevitably will.

My fear is that Weinstein is not alone in his confusion, and the attitude he demonstrates will prevail among those responsible for funding and regulating scientific research. To an extent, this may already be happening. Peter Daszak, a scientist who has collaborated with the WIV, had NIH funding withdrawn, then reinstated but with conditions he sees as unreasonably onerous. The research affected is immediately and directly related to the COVID-19 pandemic, and he is convinced the actions stem from unfounded distrust of his Chinese collaborators. The war against the pandemic is encountering more than enough obstacles from anti-vaxxers and other such kooks as it is. We don’t need further impediments from conspiracy theories pushed by people who should know better.