“Deeply unscientific” is the characteristic of research colleagues who have censored the theory that the coronavirus has leaked from a Chinese laboratory.
Net on case
Where does the coronavirus come from?
Is it originally from a bat, or is it a leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV)?
This question has been circulating in research circles for a year and a half, since the first cases arose just before the New Year in 2019.
But startlingly, the theory has been rejected as a conspiracy theory by a number of scientists and politicians, especially after it was marketed so clearly by former President Donald Trump in the United States as “the China virus”.
Now the well-known medicine professor and virus expert Stig S. Frøland takes the magazine to heart: – The dogmatic rejection of the unwanted “lab leak” theory – without documentation for this or for the alleged consensus theory – convinced at least some parts of the research world. This is surprising, since the form of argumentation was deeply unscientific, Frøland writes in the reader post in Klassekampen.
The interesting thing about Frøland’s post is his demonstration that one theory was rejected by both researchers, politicians and the media without there being any clear evidence that the bat theory is correct. Just keeping the door open was perceived as fake news and, for example, censored by Facebook.
The turning point was a public letter in the renowned medical journal Lancet, in which a number of prominent researchers strongly opposed the theory that the virus could be a leak from a laboratory, ie that the pandemic could be due to a human error.
– We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories that suggest that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin, the researchers wrote in the open letter.
Now the wind has turned, and the laboratory theory has got more wind in the sails.
Among those now open to examining the theory is perhaps the foremost authority in the United States, Anthony Fauci, who had countless confrontations with Donald Trump. Facebook has also lifted the censorship against those who did not want to reject the laboratory leak theory without further ado.
What is the lesson?
At a time when fake news is deliberately produced to manipulate the public, while conspiracy theories are triumphant on social media, it is difficult to keep your tongue straight in your mouth.
But scientists and scientists have a special responsibility to hunt for the truth, and be open-minded in their assessment of what is documented and a good candidate for truth – and what are just loose, or refuted, theories.
At present, we do not know for sure whether the virus came from a bat via a host animal and was spread through the wet market in Wuhan, or whether it is a leak from the laboratory. And until we know for sure, it is the duty of scientists to abandon politics and let science prevail.
Or to put it with Stig S. Frøland: – Both the research community and the media – institutions that must aim for critical thinking and openness to different perspectives – have failed here, as a result of manipulation and political considerations, he writes in Klassekampen.
What do you mean? Is the suppression of the laboratory leak theory due to the fact that it is simply unlikely and conspiratorial, or is it too easy for researchers to reject the theory when it is not disproved? Write a debate post!
Advertising
New barbecue package for the summer of 2021: – Our absolute favorites in one package
–
:strip_icc():format(jpeg)/kly-media-production/medias/3476126/original/007489700_1623136550-gerhana_matahari.jpg "The Birth of the Prophet Muhammad to the Crucifixion of Jesus, 5 Historical Events During the Solar Eclipse")
