“Lab leak,” or the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 (the coronavirus that causes COVID-19) arose and escaped from a virology lab, has been a frequent topic on SBM since very early in the pandemic (January 2020, actually), for obvious reasons. After all, every outbreak or pandemic of a new pathogen over the last several decades had spawned conspiracy theories that the pathogen was a “bioweapon” that had escaped (or been intentionally released from) a laboratory, a list that included HIV/AIDS, Ebola, and H1N1. For instance, there was a major conspiracy theory about HIV/AIDS that involved its creation at Fort Detrick when scientists supposedly spliced together two other viruses, Visna and HTLV-1 and then tested on prison inmates. (Interestingly, this turned out to be a Russian propaganda operation codename Operation INFEKTION designed to blame the AIDS pandemic on the US biological warfare program.) So it was completely predictable that similar conspiracy theories would emerge about COVID-19. Despite the paucity of scientific evidence in support of lab leak in the virology community, it has emerged as the most popular explanation for COVID-19 on social media and even in the mainstream press, particularly in, but nowhere near limited to, right wing sources. In the context of that history, I was very interested to come across a commentary in the Journal of Virology by James Alwine and 40 other authors entitled The harms of promoting the lab leak hypothesis for SARS-CoV-2 origins without evidence. In the lay press, there was also an article in STAT news by John P. Moore, one of the co-authors of the Journal of Virology commentary, entitled The coronavirus lab leak hypothesis is damaging science.
Both articles make a compelling argument that the scientific hypothesis turned conspiracy theory known as lab leak is causing harm to science. I wanted to take a look at the arguments made, which are compelling, but point out that lab leak is far from alone in terms of conspiracy theories that harm science, public health, and society in general. First, however, let’s take a step back.
Lab leak: A somewhat plausible scientific hypothesis turned conspiracy theory
As was completely predictable, it didn’t take long after the emergence of a major outbreak of pneumonia in late 2019/early 2020 due to a novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China for conspiracy theories to arise claiming that the novel pathogen had “leaked” from a lab, a claim that ultimately came to be known as the “lab leak.” The first version that I encountered claimed, based on the recently published nucleotide sequence of the coronavirus that later came to be named COVID-19, that the new pathogen had been the result of a failed attempt to develop a vaccine against SARS—which had threatened to become a pandemic in 2002—that had somehow “leaked” out of a lab. (Unsurprisingly, antivax conspiracy theorist James Lyons-Weiler made this claim on Del Bigtree‘s podcast in February 2020.) It didn’t take long for the conspiracy theory to—shall we say?—evolve to claims that COVID-19 was a bioweapon gone wrong (and escaped) or, as it became much clearer to the more “reasonable” conspiracy theorists that there were no compelling features in the nucleotide sequence of COVID-19 to indicate genetic engineering or “gain-of-function” research having produced the new virus, that a natural coronavirus collected from bats for study had somehow “leaked” from the lab. (I note that it’s very convenient that the coronavirus just happened to be one that could infect humans relatively efficiently and cause life-threatening disease in a minority.)
Conspiracy theories aside, however, I’ve been consistent in emphasizing that a lab leak origin for COVID-19 was possible. My position has simply been, since early on, that there has been no convincing scientific evidence for lab leak. Instead, the evidence promoted by lab leak adherents consists mainly of speculative handwaving based on the location of the Wuhan Institute of Virology in the same city where the first outbreak was identified, misidentification of features of the virus (e.g., the furin cleavage site) as evidence of “engineering,” and extreme distrust of the Chinese government. In contrast, emerging evidence since very early in the pandemic has consistently favored a natural zoonotic origin for the virus; i.e., that, like many previous pathogens, SARS-CoV-2, the coronavirus that causes COVID-19, jumped from an animal reservoir to humans. Indeed, I had recognized by 2021 that, regardless of whether or not lab leak was possible as an explanation for the origin of SARS-CoV-2, evidence was far more in favor of zoonosis than lab leak, while the versions of lab leak that had taken hold among ideologues and politicians had rapidly become more of a conspiracy theory than a valid scientific hypothesis. Fast forward to a couple of months ago when I last discussed lab leak in the context of the New York Times inexplicably having decided to lend its platform and prestige to Alina Chan, whom I’ve dubbed the queen of lab leak conspiracy theories, publishing an op-ed by her on the same day that Anthony Fauci was scheduled to testify in front of the GOP-led House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic (HSSCP). While no new substantive evidence—nada, zero, zip!—has emerged for lab leak since 2021, evidence for zoonosis has only accumulated, as I have summarized a number of times. While one cannot yet entirely rule out lab leak as the origin for SARS-CoV-2, I tend to make that argument in the same way that I discuss alternative medicine quackery. At this point, the onus is on lab leak conspiracy theorists to produce actual positive scientific evidence for lab leak as the origin of SARS-CoV-2, rather than their usual spreading of fear, uncertainty, and doubt about current scientific evidence surrounding SARS-CoV-2 and its origins.
Most importantly, lab leak now shares all of the components of conspiracy theory that I discussed in May 2020, just as the full gravity of how horrific the pandemic would become was starting to dawn on the general public:
I won’t belabor this too much, but lab leak stories are contradictory. Was SARS-CoV-2 a “bioweapon”? Was it the result of “gain-of-function” research? Was it the result of a failed attempt to make a SARS vaccine? Was it just a natural coronavirus stored for study that had somehow “leaked”? Depending on which lab leak proponent you ask, it could be any or all of these! Of course, overriding suspicion and nefarious intent are largely self-explanatory, too, with the suspicion being mainly focused on China and its supposedly nefarious intent. (Remember, in a conspiracy theory, the Bad Thing is never due to incompetence, accident, or mischance; it’s always Them intending us harm. The overriding suspicion found in conspiratorial thinking results in the belief that nothing occurs by accident, which often results in re-interpreting randomness.) Of course, being authoritarian, the Chinese government sometimes made it too easy for conspiracy theorists to paint its actions in the worst possible light, but far more of the evidence supposedly supporting lab leak seems to be rooted in suspicion of the Chinese than in actual science. Naturally, any pandemic would produce the sense that “something must be wrong,” but in this case, although conspiracy theorists may occasionally abandon specific ideas when they become untenable, the revisions never change their overall feeling that “something must be wrong” and the “official account” is based on deception.
Most importantly, though, lab leak is immune to evidence. Even as scientific evidence accumulates in favor of zoonosis, with no concomitant accumulation of evidence in favor of lab leak, lab leak adherents fervently cling to their idea as the One True Origin of SARS-CoV-2. It doesn’t matter how lopsided in favor of zoonotic origin the scientific evidence base is. To the conspiracy theorist, that very lopsidedness is evidence that “they” (e.g., virologists, evolutionary biologists specializing in viruses, and other infectious disease scientists who have increasingly concluded that SARs-CoV-2 jumped to humans in a zoonotic event) are ideologically captured and evidence for “lab leak” is being either covered up or ignored.
But how do lab leak conspiracy theories harm science?
The proliferation of a conspiracy theory
Before we discuss how lab leak conspiracy mongering has harmed science, let’s set the stage by citing a passage in the Journal of Virology in which Alwine et al compare the two hypotheses, but, more importantly, contrast the scientific attitude towards evidence with the attitude towards evidence exhibited by lab leak proponents:
There are two broad competing hypotheses for the origins of SARS-CoV-2: (i) the lab leak hypothesis, the most discussed version of which posits that the virus was modified, or even created, in the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV) and, by some mechanism, escaped the laboratory; and (ii) the zoonosis hypothesis, wherein the virus emerged into the human population through a naturally occurring animal-to-human transmission. Viruses often spill over into humans, but these are typically dead-end events that rarely lead to sustained human-to-human transmission and rarely spark a pandemic. Wildlife coronaviruses have long been poised for emergence into humans (1). It is estimated that there are ~66,280 people infected with SARS-CoVs each year due to human-to-bat contact, most of which result in asymptomatic infections with limited or no human-to-human transmission (2). However, in the past 25 years, there have been at least 12 instances of zoonotic transfer of viruses into humans, including three coronaviruses, which resulted in epidemics or pandemics (3).
Dr. Fauci testified that, after examining the scientific data, most scientists have concluded that SARS-CoV-2 most likely emerged in humans as a zoonosis. The evidence supports the scenario that two distinct ancestral lineages of SARS-CoV-2 jumped from animals into humans, and that the Huanan Seafood Market in Hubei Provence, China, where wild animals were routinely present and slaughtered, was the epicenter of the pandemic (4–9). Importantly, Dr. Fauci acknowledged that he remains open to evidence supporting a lab leak if it were to become available. Indeed, all scientists must be open to this possibility. Factoring in new data that are sound and validated, even if a prevailing hypothesis were contradicted, is an essential aspect of scientific training. A critical guiding principle of science is that knowledge is continually revised and updated based on quality new evidence.
Again, let’s go back to one of the characteristics of conspiracy theories, that they are immune to evidence. In contrast, science is not. If someone were to produce highly compelling scientific evidence in favor of lab leak as the origin for SARS-CoV-2, scientists would consider it, debate it, try to replicate and expand upon it, and then, if the evidence passed all those tests, lab leak would supplant zoonosis as the dominant hypothesis. As I like to point out, the process would likely be messy and contentious and might take longer than one might wish, but science does eventually correct itself in response to evidence. I can honestly say that I have not seen a single piece of evidence or a single argument for lab leak that is not a rehash or modified version of evidence or arguments that I first saw in 2020. Yet, none of that stopped the New York Times from not only green lighting an op-ed by conspiracy theorist Alina Chan entitled Why the pandemic probably started in a lab, in 5 key points. In actuality, the NYT did more than just publish this op-ed; it promoted it, lent considerable resources to producing eye-popping graphics for it, and published it on the same day that Fauci testified. (Complicit media, indeed!) Alwine et al note that Chan’s “presented the same points she has offered over the past four years” that are “based on conjecture, correlation, and anecdote” and misrepresent and underplay “the existing scientific data supporting a zoonotic origin of SARS-CoV-2.”
As Alwine et al note:
Many questions about the origins of SARS-CoV-2 remain unanswered and may never be fully resolved. We cannot currently disprove the lab leak hypothesis. Nevertheless, the lines of evidence needed to validate one hypothesis over another are not epistemically comparable (16). Validating the zoonotic origin is a scientific question that relies on history, epidemiology, and genomic analysis, that when taken together, support a natural spillover as the probable origin. This evidence is driven by scientific data that must be gathered and interpreted by experts. Much of the evidence that could have been obtained from animals at the Huanan Market was forever lost due to the clearance and cleansing of the market before any animals could be tested. Nonetheless, the available scientific evidence supports a zoonotic origin. Validating the lab leak hypothesis requires intelligence evidence that the WIV possessed or carried out work on a SARS-CoV-2 precursor virus prior to the pandemic. Neither the scientific community nor multiple western intelligence agencies have found such evidence.
Sound familiar? The same lack of epistemic comparability applies to the evidence base for many of the medical claims that we routinely discuss on SBM, including antivax, acupuncture, alternative medicine quackery, and homeopathy. As I like to say with respect to lab leak, just because it is possible and cannot be absolutely disproven at present does not imply that it is a hypothesis whose likelihood of being correct is equivalent to zoonosis.
How lab leak harms science
Unfortunately, as is frequently the case, among those with preexisting beliefs predisposed to accept a conspiratorial narrative, science generally loses in the public narrative. We have seen this phenomenon play out for evolution, climate science, vaccines, alternative medicine, and other scientific topics. In the case of lab leak, Alwine et al note:
Despite the absence of evidence for the escape of the virus from a lab, the lab leak hypothesis receives persistent attention in the media, often without acknowledgment of the more solid evidence supporting zoonotic emergence (17). This discourse has inappropriately led a large portion of the general public to believe that a pandemic virus arose from a Chinese lab. These unfounded assertions are dangerous. As discussed in detail below, they place unfounded blame and responsibility on individual scientists, which drives threats and attacks on virologists. It also stokes the flames of an anti-science, conspiracy-driven agenda, which targets science and scientists even beyond those investigating the origins of SARS-CoV-2. The inevitable outcome is an undermining of the broader missions of science and public health and the misdirecting of resources and effort. The consequence is to leave the world more vulnerable to future pandemics, as well as current infectious disease threats (17).
One of the authors, Angela Rasmussen, has described on X, the hellsite formerly known as Twitter, just how lab leak has fueled threats to her and other virologists:
Again, does this sound familiar? Long before COVID-19, Dr. Paul Offit described in his book Autism’s False Prophets how he and his family had suffered threats from antivaxxers that had led his University and hospital to increase security and screen his mail. This was in 2008. More recently in the era of the pandemic, Dr. Peter Hotez has been relentlessly harassed for his speaking out against antivaccine misinformant. In another branch of science entirely, climate scientists like Michael Mann have been harassed by climate science deniers in similar manners. Heck, even I, a mere blogger with nowhere near the voice of someone like Drs. Offit, Hotez, or Rasmussen, have been harassed on and off since 2005, including a campaign of defamation by Mike Adams and a spurious libel suit by a quack. I, too, have even received the odd death threat, although nothing on the order of what Drs. Offit, Hotez, and Rasmussen have received. Then, of course, there are always the random social media posts fervently hoping that I will be included in the group of “guilty” scientists and physicians that antivaxxers fantasize about dragging before tribunals and hanging.
Then, of course, if we are too outspoken, negative, or sarcastic, the very same people fueling hate against scientists compare us to Hamas:
All of this is a result of how conspiratorial thinking by definition requires villains. Who are the villains in the lab leak narrative? Scientists, of course, specifically the scientists who supposedly either created SARS-CoV-2 through reckless “gain-of-function” research (they didn’t) or carelessly let stored natural coronaviruses escape. In effect, this casting scientists as the villains in lab leak primes the public to distrust the very scientists working on preventing the next pandemic thusly:
Scientists who studied coronaviruses or led the response to the pandemic have been accused of engineering SARS-CoV-2 or allowing it to escape from a lab due to inadequate biosafety. Some have been unfairly accused of being part of an international cover-up or accused of taking bribes from NIH. Yet more scientists have been attacked for using objectively gathered data to conclude that zoonosis is the most likely origin of the pandemic or for simply engaging in communication of the evidence with the media and the general public. The unsubstantiated claims of the lab leak theory have provoked harassment, intimidation, threats and violence towards scientists, which are often vile in the online space. An article in Science reported that, of 510 researchers who had published on SARS-CoV-2 or COVID-19, 38% acknowledged harassment ranging from personal insults to threats of violence, “doxing,” and personal contact (18). A second survey, which included 1,281 scientists in a wide range of fields, found that 51% experienced at least one form of harassment, sometimes repeatedly for years.
As Dr. Moore notes in STAT:
My concern, and that of many other virologists, is that the evidence-light lab leak hypothesis is damaging the virology research community at a time when it has an essential role to play in the face of pandemic threats. The attacks on Fauci are far from unique. Coronavirus virologists have been falsely accused of engineering SARS-CoV-2, allowing it to escape from a lab due to inadequate safety protocols, being participants in an international cover-up, and taking grants as bribes from NIAID for favoring the zoonosis hypothesis. There is mounting harassment, intimidation, threats and violence towards scientists that are particularly vile in the online space.
I’ve written about how conspiracy theorists portray NIH grants not as funding that is awarded on a competitive basis using scientific merit and supporting evidence as the main criteria to determine who gets funded, but rather as largesse doled out by a Godfather-like NIH to reward loyalty, in which scientists approach the NIH much like this:
As Alwine et al (and Moore) note, lab leak conspiracy theories, like other science-denying conspiracy theories, serve another purpose. They demoralize scientists to the point of wanting to quit in order to escape the harassment and just general hassle; alternatively, some seriously consider shifting the focus of their work to less politically charged topics, with the following dangerous results:
We now see a long-term risk of having fewer experts engaged in work that may help thwart future pandemics, and of fewer scientists willing to communicate the findings of sophisticated, fast-moving research topics that are important for global health. Research that could prepare us for future pandemics has been deferred, diverted, or abandoned (3). Most worrisome for future preparedness, the next generation of scientists has well-founded fears about entering fields related to emerging viruses and pandemic science (19–21).
I, too, fear that the science-denying conspiracy theories that have become so dominant will discourage young people interested in science from pursuing a scientific career. After all, an academic scientific career is damned hard enough as it is. The difficulty getting through graduate school, developing a research project, and then competing for limited funding to keep one’s research chugging along productively is draining enough. If you add to that the concern that your work will bring you under attack or force you to respond to attacks by conspiratorial politicians, social media influencers, and press and even face threats of physical violence, you can see how a career in science becomes a lot less attractive.
It’s not just the threat to scientists, though. The dominance of lab leak narratives in science can also result in policies that hinder science. For instance, the deceiving narratives regarding biosafety can paradoxically lead to less effective biosafety, as Alwine et al note:
While biosafety standards are critically important for research, the anxiety evoked by the lab leak hypothesis has resulted in some proposals for policies that, if adopted, would unnecessarily restrict research required for developing vaccines and antivirals in the US (20, 22). The US has one of the strongest and safest infrastructures for research globally. The policies aimed at virology research in the US will not protect against work with viruses of known pandemic potential occurring at inadequate biosafety containment (below biosafety level 3) in other countries, which poses the risk of lab exposures.
Indeed. The “concern” about biosafety exhibited by lab leak proponents goes beyond concern based on evidence and science to inform evidence-based strategies to improve biosafety and plows straight into the realm of paranoia. As Dr. Moore adds:
All virologists embrace the need for laboratory safety. None of them ignore the implications of the lab leak hypothesis — that there could be a future escape of a dangerous virus from a research laboratory. However, lab leak anxiety underpins proposals for policies that would unnecessarily restrict research on vaccines and antiviral agents in the U.S. The overarching concern here is that the lab leak narrative fuels mistrust in science and public health infrastructures. The increasingly virulent and widespread anti-science agenda damages individual scientists and their institutions, and hinders planning to counter future epidemics and pandemics.
Also, going back to Alwine et al:
Moreover, a looming threat for future pandemics is the illegal wildlife trade coupled with wet markets abroad. The US State Department and the United Nations (UN) estimate that the wildlife trade is the third largest illegal trafficking activity behind drugs and weapons, generating up to $20 billion annually. Animals slaughtered and sold in wet markets are a clear threat for zoonotic virus transmission to humans. Globally, policymakers have done little to curtail or effectively regulate the illegal wildlife trade and wet market practices. As well as the clear risk of future spillover events, these economic practices also undermine health security, destabilize habitats and communities, and fuel the spread of infectious diseases more generally. Further, high density commercial farming of animals (e.g., chickens, pigs, cattle) in the US and abroad also poses a major pandemic threat, as evidenced by the avian H5N1 influenza virus that is now spreading through dairy cows and other mammals with some transmission to humans. These wider dynamics underpin why our societal understanding about the origin of SARS-CoV-2 matters.
From an SBM perspective, I can’t help but note that much of the illegal trade in wildlife mentioned above involves trade in wildlife whose parts are used to produce quack treatments, particularly those rooted in traditional Chinese medicine. As I like to say, it’s all interrelated. In this case, the popularity of non-evidence-based quackery, including its integration into “complementary and alternative medicine” (CAM) and “integrative medicine” contributes to the demand for quack treatments that drive demand for the illegal wildlife trade.
Finally:
Science is humanity’s best insurance against threats from nature, but it is a fragile enterprise that must be nourished and protected (23). What is now happening to virology is a stark demonstration of what is happening to all of science. It will come to affect every aspect of science in a negative and possibly a dangerous way, as has already happened with climate science. It is the responsibility of scientists, research institutions, and scientific organizations to push back against the anti-virology attacks, because what we are seeing now may be the tip of the proverbial iceberg.
It is the tip of the proverbial iceberg. I like to argue that all science denial is a form of conspiracy theory. In this, barring compelling new evidence that has not been produced in four years and will likely never be produced, lab leak is no different from climate science denial, creationism, antivax, and the medical beliefs that result in quackery. All weaken the scientific enterprise and fuel distrust of science far beyond healthy skepticism based on a reality-based assessment of how science and medicine have performed historically. All have been strengthened immeasurably by the conspiracy theories that have arisen during the pandemic. It is long past time that we pushed back, as futile as the task might appear right now.
65 replies on ““Lab leak” is now very much like antivax in its harms to public health”
I have told Orac time and time again to read someone like Jaime Metzl, a National Security Council member during Clinton’s presidency and far from being a wingnut. Instead, Orac continues on one of his tribalist bents and jags (Horgan was right about him and others years ago) and won’t let go.
How do you know I haven’t read him? (Hint: If he wasn’t a wingnut before, based on his more recent writings I think he is one now.) As for John Horgan, the dude lost the plot a long time ago.
If there’s one thing that conspiracy theories like lab leak have taught me—and, make no mistake, lab leak in its current form is a conspiracy theory—it’s that movement skeptics are just as susceptible to conspiracy theories as anyone…if it’s the right conspiracy theory. Lab leak fits the bill. So does the “gender critical” moral panic in response to the gender-affirming care of trans adolescents, which has sucked in a number of prominent skeptics. If you want to know why I’ve become fairly disillusioned with movement skepticism, there you go, a couple of good reasons.
First: you spelled his first name wrong.
Second: he is a lawyer with a PhD in history, so not exactly qualified on viral transmission.
Third: listen to some real microbiologists… https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/?s=lab+leak
Sars-Cov-2 is unlike other, natural coronaviruses. Not only it infected almost everyone once, but it keeps reinfecting people once or twice a year.
Especially the COVID-vaccinated people.
My heart is breaking and I am full of compassion for those bamboozled people, who keep getting reinfected due to their immune systems being fully busted by the virus, the vaccine, and endless reinfections. (and who are taught to hide from sunlight)
We are in the ninth (or whatever) wave of Covid right now. People used to be healthy during sumer months. Not any more. My certain vaccinated loved ones just had Covid a month ago and it was NOT fun. One of them was sick three times already after the Covid infection. (one paxlovid rebound and two fever and coughing bouts, antibiotics etc)
Whether “science” created this virus or not is a question that needs to be answered not only by “scientists”, but by criminal investigations, opening up archives, questioning under oath, etc.
If it turn out that “science” poisoned billions, there should be serious consequences that these “scientists” might not like. Millions of victims need to be vindicated.
Actually, that’s totally not true. SARS-COV-2 is very much like other natural coronaviruses. As the signatories of the John Snow Memorandum warned us in 2020 after the Great Barrington Declaration was issued, advocating a “natural herd immunity” approach to the pandemic, it is the nature of the immunity after infection by coronaviruses to be short-lived and for coronaviruses to evolve to evade preexisting immunity. In other words, reinfection is common with coronaviruses. That was the very reason that they saw that “natural herd immunity” was almost certainly not possible. After all, one precondition of “natural herd immunity” is lifelong (or at least very long lasting) postinfection immunity.
The only ones bamboozled here are antivaxxers like you and COVID-19 conspiracy theorists…like you.
It’s worth pointing out that it is Igor and other science deniers who are doing their own bamboozling of others by spreading crap like he has in his post.
Igor: “My heart is breaking and I am full of compassion”
He’s full of something all right, but it’s not compassion, never mind facts or logic.
Antivax ghouls do this a lot – pretending to have concern for the vaccinated, when they’re actually cackling with glee over deaths and injuries they’ve conjured up in their demented minds.
“My heart is breaking and I am full of compassion”
Some crocodile is crying its eyes out now.
I’m fully vaccinated & have yet to get COVID…at all (despite even people in my home and close contact having it).
“… but it keeps reinfecting people once or twice a year.”
As does norovirus, rotavirus, dengue, tetanus, diphtheria and other pathogens. It is not unique.
This is what coronaviruses do. Some common colds are caused by coronaviruses and you can catch the same strain of coronavirus often. There is a difference though, SARS-CoV-2 can cause severe illness or death because it infects the lungs. The coronaviruses causing common cold typically infect the nose and throat and are much more benign. It is typical of immunity to coronaviruses to be relatively short lived.
A little proper research and you would not have to come here parading your ignorance.
My mother had polio and suffered her whole life. I never got polio. What was the difference?
(Hint: It was evidence based.)
you must be confusing me for someone else, as I never opined on the polio vaccine
You will.
The polio and the COVID vaccines work on the same basic principles.
There are dozens of COVID vaccines out there, and some work on the same principles as the polio vaccines.
I’ve only had it once so far. Not seeing many people complaining of repeat infections.
Maybe these people Igor talks of are infected by people who don’t take it seriously. Wondering germ factories convinced that covid doesn’t exist and, if it did, can be defeated by prayer, IVM and drinking bleach.
I haven’t had Covid, neither has my SO. We were both careful, getting vaccinated promptly and following PH rules but not obsessively.
AND he has been in casinos and at pro sports events. I’ve been in airplanes and sushi bars.
I had it in June 2022 when Mrs P brought it home from school and insisted on sharing it with me. I have not jet be reinfected despite being back at my usual travel and meeting schedule.
I do take some extra precautions, but am not masking in public, although, I usually have one available if I feel there is the need.
Igor, given how many people you know who were vaccinated and died horribly, how do you even have any unvaccinated loved ones left?
With anyone who has relatives, friends and acquaintances dropping dead all around them, the key to survival is staying the hell away from such a person.
We badly need definitive research on causes and prevention of Anti-Vaxer Proximity Syndrome, but for now, strict segregation is the best tool we’ve got.
I know two such people. None are my relatives. One is a relative of my friend and another, the ex-husband of my wife’s friend.
Do you know influenza virus ? It continues to infect people. This is how RNA viruses are. They mutate fast.
Perhaps you have some evidence that vaccinated people get COVID more easily ?
Thank you for this. I am outraged by what I’ve learned from you and it’s totally changed my outlook. I will no longer support the man whose administration developed, promoted and boasted about these vile inventions, and who stood with their demonic inventor in countless press conferences.
Harris/Walz 2024!
Why does Igor speculate about hot button issues?
Because it gets attention and subscribers. He is able to cosplay as an expert when he is decidedly NOT one and challenge those like Orac and ( my homeboy) Prof VR who have done real work for decades.
ANYONE can do this. I’ve often noted that I might create a novel theory in which tectonic plates are irrelevant as a factor in earthquakes however unlike run of the mill CT makers, I actually formally studied geology so my theory might make a little sense. But sense is not important for CTs when we have nefarious intent ( see cat-like icon in Orac’s post) You see, ‘fabricating’ tectonic plates is how insurers jack up rates in scenic places and charge customers more. ( of course the connection between “scenic places* and fault lines is totally ignored because IT’S A CT!).
Most of the people I regularly survey have little to no background in the subjects they explicate in minute ( imagined) detail: they can tell you how someone transplanted a specific hiv sequence into a Corona virus or how corrupt scientists were paid mountains of filthy lucre for lying about dangerous vaccines’ deleterious effects. So can sci fi novelists and dystopian film script writers.These are methods to engage followers by first scaring them and then offering emotional payback by either giving them permission to brag I told you so/ I knew FIRST or find relief by showing ways to circumvent tragedy – which usually involve paying for a seminar or bogus treatment plan. Saving egos or bodies and souls ( see PRN, NN)..
Psychologists like Douglas and Hornsey have explored what type of personalities accept CTs and what functions belief serves.
Recently, I’ve noticed that alt med/ anti-vax CTs and right leaning political mis-information sound the same. ( see icons above)..
I wonder why..
In my experience, all forms of pseudoscience use the same methods, the same logical fallacies, and the rightwing embraces them all.
What’s revealing is that these alt med advocates now, without exception, support right wing candidates/ ideas. Just today NN and PRN both viciously insulted VP Harris as stupid and woke.
Well, she got a meaningful degree and accepted into law school: these dudes didn’t. AND she was elected to state-wide and national positions.
It’s been clear for a long time that the right sees strong intelligent women as a massive threat and people of color as not really equal to them, so she is doubly or triply deserving of scorn if you have their mindset.
Case in point immediately below. Igor does not disappoint.
I have been following the Trump campaign meltdown through the pages of our national newspaper (where most of the columnists are friendly to Trump). Most of the columnists seem to have accepted that Trump is doomed, although one columnists posits that is a good thing, because Vance will move the GOP to focus on the culture wars instead of mundane stuff.* Below the lines it is a whole different world.
*This is something I don’t get at all. When I talk to people down the pub** the highest priority issues are not drag queens or which bathrooms trans people should be allowed to use, if any. They care about real things.
**We have an expression here in the antipodes about political announcements. “Does it pass the pub test”. That is it fair and authentic.
@ Chris Preston:
Reporters often ask viewers ‘Would you like to have a beer with this candidate ?’. Trump doesn’t drink.
I hear/ read right wing talking points through alt med/ anti-vax advocates or via more realistic news sources who criticise them:
it’s astonishing that frequent topics are accepted at all by their followers and bear no semblance to reality such as the “massive growth of crime in cities” when legitimate sources note how crime has vastly diminished both recently and over the past several decades. Misinformation like this is easy to check: there are graphs that concisely illustrate the changes.
Of course, many of the same people who accept this type of ‘news’ unquestionably also buy into anti-vax and pseudoscience.
@Igor Chudov As Chris and others has said Kamala Harris passed California bar exam.Certainly shows intellectual capability.
I am waiting her debate with Trump (someone is avoiding it). Former DA has heard lies bfore.
Denice, I was also wondering about how competent Kamala is.
Perhaps you can help me figure that out?
Would you suggest a youtube video of Kamala participating in some unscripted discussion, receiving unexpected questions, and giving thoughtful, extended impromptu answers?
It should NOT be a scripted event with a friendly reporter, but something less predictable (for her).
Thanks
Note how Igor poisons the well by suggesting that any Harris interaction with a reporter must be rigged because, contrary to reality, all reporters are supposedly sympathetic to her.
Here’s an easy one for you: link to a recent video of Trump speaking at a campaign appearance (full unedited speech, in which he is free from having to face any inconvenient questions from reporters), in which he doesn’t slur his speech, lie repeatedly, launch unhinged personal attacks on his opponents or go off onto bizarre tangents about sharks and Hannibal Lecter?
Dangerous Bacon, I am very aware of Donald Trump’s cognitive limitations. But I was asking a question about Kamala. I wanted to see some evidence or her being able to answer unscripted questions.
To further buttress my suggestion that press asks scripted questions, I refer you to the past Joe Biden press interviews and events designed to hide his dementia.
Thus, I asked for a video where she obviously asks questions she was not specifically expecting, and gives extended and thoughtful answers.
I already asked for that on my Twitter and received no helpful suggestions, so I thought I would try my luck here.
Typical idiocy I encountered many times as an aerospace engineer (really a mechanical engineer with applied math cred). Apparently women are supposed to be stupid.
And yet I spent much of my career explaining what I did for a living to male engineers. Guys who did not know how to pronounce “Euler” nor understand eigenvalues and eigenvectors.
I am also smart enough to not remind my husband that I had four classes in fluid dynamics when it comes to loading the dishwasher. While he as an electrical engineer had none.
Just like you have no experience in being an attorney, district attorney, nor being a state attorney general. Especially since you have never taken a bar exam. By the way, the bar exam in California is one of the most difficult in the USA. The reason is that you do not necessarily need a typical law degree: https://www.calbar.ca.gov/Admissions/Requirements/Education
@Chris, I also studied gas and fluid dynamics, Navier-Stokes equations etc.
I did not bring that up due to my modesty.
“Modesty”?
“Modesty”?
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Seriously, dude, you are the very definition of the arrogance of ignorance.
Just as with your references to the “dangers” of covid vaccines there is no evidence of his dementia at all. Why are you comfortable with telling such blatant lies?
Flat out calling bullshit here.
To follow up Dr Bacon and Chris:
I don’t think that Igor has the necessary background/ qualifications to evaluate anyone’s ability. People who do– because they study/understand observation, testing and performance, don’t do it unless we are asked by them.And yes, there are variables other than intelligence: I’m sure Elon Musk does spectacularly well on standard tests but I wouldn’t approach him for advice or want to spend time with him.Or buy a Tesla from him.
No, I think Igor is concerned because a woman who is Black and South Asian has a strong chance of being elected president.
Over the past months, I’ve heard her being described as stupid, incompetent, a diversity hire, chosen because of a sexual relationship etc. just like many other women who succeed. There is research ( Carol Gilligan) illustrating this tendency for decades.Right leaning media made a fuss over her event with Black female performers on stage. It killed them. Success by people who don’t look like them.
Trump’s father hired a student to take college boards for him. I wonder why he did that and spent actual money when he was famously cheap. But people never point that out. However, someone once accused me of getting into elite universities because my father paid them off through the notorious Jewish
underground of NY. Which doesn’t exist although there are subways.
So much more but…
Studying fluid dynamics does not prove you can pass the California bar exam.
But thanks, Igor, for showing us your lack of reading comprehension.
Denice, I am still hoping for suggestions from you for a video that shows Kamala’s intellectual capabilities where she gives extended, thoughtful answers to unexpected and difficult questions.
It should be easy, right?
Your answer seems to be “Kamala somehow passed a bar exam in California and you are too stupid anyway to appreciate the evidence.”
But I am still hoping for a video proof of her ability to think.
This. In fact, I think the “strong chance of being elected president” is irrelevant: in Igor’s mind the rest of it would be all that he needs to dismiss her as inferior to him.
“Dangerous Bacon, I am very aware of Donald Trump’s cognitive limitations.”
But you’re not concerned about his evident mental decline, just about Harris’ competence to handle an interview.
That’s our Igor, neither left nor right-wing, only a concerned citizen who’s just asking questions. 😉
I am not particularly “rightwing” and voted for Obama. That changed with Hillary and “The Trans,” and even more so with the Covid pandemic. The “leftwing” changed an is now based on hate of human race, reproduction and babies. Insanity and virtue signaling took over.
There is a lot of fantasy talk about how “leftwing” is based on science and how “rightwing” is based on conspiracy theories.
But it is not true: rightwing is based on science of economics, genetics, behavioural science, physics, and history (which is not science).
Despite all this, I realized a year ago that I also dislike many rightwingers and muted and blocked all hate and transphobic accounts because I just cannot stand their disgusting imagery designed to upset people. If my message sounds conflicted, it is because it is.
The “leftwing” changed an is now based on hate of human race, reproduction and babies. Insanity and virtue signaling took over.
I guess this could be translated to abortion rights. Not very scientific analysis btw.
Economics is far from a science (behold the mythical “Laffer Curve”), despite its use (often misuse) of math and some statistics.
But let’s see: rightwing: evolution is wrong, there is no climate change caused by human behavior, the US is not now and never has been a racist country, abortion is never medically necessary (per the Heritage Foundation and its followers), abortion causes breast cancer, more guns lead to a safer society, the Civil War was due to states’ rights being trampled by Lincoln, and more.
You not only have no grasp of science yourself, you have no grasp of the modern social setting and the war on science, education, and decency the right has been waging since forever, most strongly since Reagan.
Yes, we know how much you hate women: I have no doubt seeing a powerful and outspoken women, despite her centralist to just right-of-center social and political views, sent you over the edge.
It shouldn’t be our problem that you don’t understand any of the things related to these issue but yet you choose to keep disparaging the first and telling lies about the second, with not a whit of evidence behind either your attacks or denials.
For all of your claims about attending U of Chicago and “critical reading” skills the only thing you repeatedly demonstrate is that you have failed education at every level.
Igor: “I am not particularly “rightwing”
Odd then that his Substack continually flogs right-wing memes, and conspiracy theories designed to appeal to Trumpites (like trying to link the assassination attempt to Trump saying antivax stuff and to movement of his company’s stock).
Whatever changes may have occurred in Igor’s political leanings in recent years (and it’s doubtful any significant ones occurred) may be due to neurologic effects of long Covid. More than a few people, including some who were at least partially respected in their fields, have gone completely down a rabbit hole of illogic, venom and denial.*
*we need research into subtle post-Covid pathology that could account for these deleterious mental fogs. Could a mechanism related to toxoplasmosis’ effect on the brain be responsible?
Oh, I read that as “Deleterious Mental Frogs”, who I’m sure I saw supporting Hawkwind in 1995.
They don’t even have to do that. Folks like Igor or gadfly above can simply spit out crap (see Igor’s initial post here as only one example) that doesn’t have any factual support, but it will sound true to a good share of the public. Rebutting it with discussions of relevant research is time consuming, and people are likely to drop away rather than listen to real explanations. It makes it easy for the anti-science folks to get their dishonest message out quickly and doesn’t require that they do any of that tough “learning stuff” work they don’t like.
Thanks for that- Aarno also- I couldn’t quickly respond to his rant.
I venture that while alt med/ anti-vax/ rightie audiences are usually too lazy to really study these subjects in depth, they also become followers because their leaders share similar prejudices, backgrounds and personalty traits with them. Leaders are not really astute marketers, figuring out their audiences because it’s not really a question of empathy but of identity!
Often, I hear about hard working, working class roots, family oriented, religious, farmers, blue collar jobs and trade schools- not professionals and city dwelling elitists. Of course, there’s a racial component as well – the ideal is a white, traditional, conservative, native born, religious family although they may not say that out loud. In the old days, there was no crime, no autism and no trans.
All three of which are actually just convenient lies they tell themselves, of course. No crime (because we blamed other people for anything that went wrong and anything that ‘good people’ did wasn’t treated as crime), no autism (because we locked ‘weird’ people into homes and never talked about them), and no trans (because anybody who dared to argue with their
ChurchGod-given role would get harassed and/or beaten until they either left or submitted).One of the bigger issues to deal with is the way that some people seem to feel that there are no good or bad actions, only good or bad people, and since they consider themselves good people, any implication that they may have committed a bad action results in a loudly defensive reaction.
Vaxxed3 is coming out next month (subtitled ridiculously “Authorized to Kill”). As such, the two main anti-vaxxers behind it–Brian Hooker and Polly Tommey) have been doing a bunch of interviews on the anti-vax talk circuit this week. Prominent in their lies promoting Vaxxed3 is “lab leak” nonsense such as the powers that be already having a vial of the gain-of-function bird-flu strain they’ll soon be releasing on us to cause the next pandemic of illness (per Hooker who must have forgottenthe party line that COVID-19 was “just a cold”). Hooker also now claiming at least 16 million people worldwide have died from COVID-19 vaccine (with no citation/support of that number) while Tommey just kept going off on how this or that person “got the jab and died”. Hooker then, after all her claims of death stated that so many people had so many accounts of vaccine injury and death (as told to Tommey on the Vax-Unvax bus) that the sum of those stories equalled science. LOL this garbage from they guy who is the “Chief of Science” of Children’s Health Defense.
Oh, goody. If there’s a way to watch it for free I might just have to subject myself to it again, after having dealt with the first VAXXED movie 8 years ago.
The sacrifices you make for us.
Currently only way to see it is online ticket purchase for a nearby movie theater (if they can see enough tickets to “tip” the theater into playing it). Where I am the ticket is $15.50. If it doesn’t ticket well they’ll likely lower their price point
Current estimates for the number of military battle deaths in WWII is about the same (15 million is the point estimate), so she claims a death total equal to that of WWII without anyone noticing it? Where do these people think the bodies went? What about the millions of grieving families? How are their supporters stupid enough to buy this crap?
Igor: Harris and Pence had vice presidential debate in 2020. It was not scripted, for sure. Try to find it.
Thank you.
I just woke up and found my internet restored.
I found this debate and will watch a few parts of it. I just watched the first extended answer starting at 17:57 and it is not encouraging (she completely missed the question and just spouted a few generalities) but I will watch a few more. To be fair, I must mention that Donald Trump does the same.
Buy the way: The “bar exam” is a very low bar for someone who wants to lead our country. I know some people who passed the bar exam and I would not trust them with the highest office of my country.
So you do not even understand what a “bar exam” is. Especially that the California bar exam is notorious for being the most difficult in the USA.
So those who are tasked with creating laws in the USA are not qualified if they are trained lawyers?
You are a full on joke.
Oh, Chris…
Some people just don’t get it.
As any AI can tell you, being a lawyer involves skills that can be measured by tests like the LSAT such as verbal and quantitative but their real world work includes managing vast amounts of detailed data, intricate laws, arcane historical material, understanding others’
complex motivations and actions, constructing a rational argument, negotiation,persuading people by presenting reasonable, easily accessible material to a diverse audience.Research skills are essential of course: weeding through volumes of previous legal rulings to focus upon the most salient issues.
Those I survey keep telling me how brilliant they are- true experts– yet I frequently find them making simple, stupid mistakes like mispronouncing general terms, using grammar/ idioms clumsily as well as missing OBVIOUS general information. I have presented many of these examples at RI over the years for laughs. If a “PhD” mispronounces names/ locales in most European languages consistently I doubt they have the degrees they claim. If an anti-vaxxer talks about the dramatic rise of ASDs, I know they don’t understand changes in diagnosis and institutionalisation since 1970. If a “health expert “can’t pronounce CNS physiological components or an “accomplished” political/ social critic talks about “what’s important to you and I” or calls main stream media “candy cotton”. Well….
.
By the way, JD Vance does not seem to have passed the California bar exam. Though his wife has passed it and is a licensed lawyer: https://apps.calbar.ca.gov/attorney/LicenseeSearch/QuickSearch?FreeText=usha+vance&SoundsLike=false
Funny how you appear far less judgmental of and concerned about Donald Trump’s rambling and downright bonkers answers to questions than you are about Kamala Harris supposedly not answering a question quite up to whatever level that you think she should have answered it at. You appear far more forgiving of Donald Trump’s rambling, conspiracy theory-laden lies than of minor flubs by Kamala Harris. Your double standard is quite obvious.
Politicians make laws, so having a bar exam is quite useful.
Dodging the question is typical political in these debates.
I like this one:
Aarno, we all know that no matter how well she does Igor will lie about her performance. She is a woman, and not a white woman, so in his mind she is far inferior to him and it’s impossible for her to do well.
Igor’s Kamala Harris postings are classic concern trolling.
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Concern_troll