The Lab Leak Theory Should Have Been Obvious
How Trump Derangement Syndrome Made Matters Worse
If you’re like me, the recent revelation that a lab leak is the most likely origin of the Covid-19 outbreak is not the least bit surprising. It was always the more likely scenario. Especially since the only alternative explanation never seemed particularly plausible. Possible? Yes, but only if one takes a couple of far-fetched assumptions into account and ignores the more probable explanation. Occam’s Razor strikes again.
On February 27th, CNN reported that the Department of Energy released a report regarding the possible origins of Covid-19. An article by CNN states:
The US Department of Energy has assessed that the Covid-19 pandemic most likely came from a laboratory leak in China, according to a newly updated classified intelligence report.
Two sources said that the Department of Energy assessed in the intelligence report that it had “low confidence” the Covid-19 virus accidentally escaped from a lab in Wuhan.
Intelligence agencies can make assessments with either low, medium or high confidence. A low confidence assessment generally means that the information obtained is not reliable enough or is too fragmented to make a more definitive analytic judgment or that there is not enough information available to draw a more robust conclusion.
It’s worth pointing out that the Department of Energy’s “low confidence” assessment is still better than the alternative; that the virus originated from an animal sold at a local Wuhan “wet” market. Why? Because despite the fact that most of the evidence for the Lab Leak Theory is fragmented, and somewhat scarce, it’s still much better than absolutely no evidence at all. It also just makes more sense.
I’m not going to rehash all the information that has come out over the past two years that have linked the lab in Wuhan - the one studying the actual SARS cov-2 virus - with the outbreak…in Wuhan. Suffice it to say, it’s been well covered in several journalistic publications such as The Intercept, Breaking Points, and The Wall Street Journal. And all long before the Department of Energy came to its conclusion. Looking back now, it seems intuitive. What was the more likely situation; that the novel coronavirus was released into the general public after a pangolin - bitten by bats a thousand miles away - was caught, transported to a market in Wuhan, chopped up, and sold OR that it came from the lab doing “gain of function research” (GOF) on that very virus down the street?
The details aren’t especially important now. We’ll probably never know precisely really happened. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) certainly isn’t going to tell us anything that might cause them to lose face. Dr. Anthony Fauci and his colleague, Peter Daszak don’t seem especially keen on talking about what happened, despite the fact that they were both instrumental in procuring funding for the Wuhan lab. In fact, when Daszak was asked if his team of investigators at the WHO had taken the word of the Chinese government without any further investigation, he simply stated “yes, what were we supposed to do?”. There was a chance to get at the truth. But the corporate media and influential government officials botched that opportunity, and that may very well have been by design.
In March of 2020, President Trump labeled Covid-19 “the Chinese Virus”. It was stupid and probably racist, but not entirely unfounded. It had originated there, but in his typical ham-handed way he seemed to blame the entire Chinese people. He also claimed that it had come from a lab in Wuhan with the implication that the outbreak was not accidental. That, along with the fact that he was Donald Trump, was a bridge too far for liberal elites and the corporate media. Unfortunately, their reaction has been a blow to the truth, and might have just left the door open for another pandemic.
It’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome, and for at least the past three years it seems to have run wild. TDS was initially coined by Trump supporters to label what they saw as irrational attitudes and behavior toward the former President, particularly by Democrats and liberals. It is one of the ways the more enlightened and pleasant, ahem, members of the right wing like to “own the libs”. Its self-serving and politically motivated, but in this instance, it’s hard to argue with the results.
From the beginning, media pundits and news outlets decried any suggestion that Covid-19 was leaked from a lab and claimed the idea was racist. Anyone who suggested otherwise was labeled a right-wing, nationalist, xenophobic Trump-lover and summarily canceled. The Washington Post, New York Times, and most cable new networks - as they so often do - allowed opinion to masquerade as the truth in what could easily be characterized as a reaction to Trump, himself. Eventually, even the National Review called for the “unbearably racist” lab leak theory to be put to rest in favor of a more unlikely explanation.
Instead of exploring the facts as they were and searching for the truth, these storied journalistic entities decided to pack it in and just take statements made by the CCP, State Department, and Anthony Fauci as gospel. They caved to their editorial boards and what amounted to a “corporate media elite” hysteria that demanded the acknowledgement that everything Trump said is a lie. To be fair, an impressive amount of it was if you ask the Washington Post fact checkers. But it’s not the Fourth Estates job to eschew journalistic integrity for opinion. They’re job should create an adversarial relationship with power. Taking the word of governments, massive public institutions, and stakeholders with financial interests at face value is an abdication of that responsibility. Assuming Trump - the then leader of the most powerful nation in the world - was simply full of shit, was unconscionable. Allowing bias against a public figure to frame the debate gives far too much power to that individual. These organizations know that. They’ve been forced to eat a bit of crow now. So much for “Democracy Dies in Darkness”.
Perhaps the most devastating effects of corporate media’s failure on this issue won’t be felt for some time. By ignoring the lab leak theory, we’ve allowed the facts to slip through the cracks. Fauci claimed that GOF was not being performed on NIH funded research at the Wuhan lab. That was found to be untrue. In defending the NIH’s funding before a Congressional committee, he created a new definition without distinction. It wasn’t GOF, just something that looks remarkably like GOF. But because we can’t know for sure if the lab leak caused the Covid-19 outbreak, research like this will probably continue. And our lack of understanding of that situation leaves the door open for other outbreaks to turn into other - possibly more deadly - pandemics.
As is the case with corporate media, the sentiment quickly disseminated to rank and file Democrats, Never Trumpers, and liberals in general. It added fuel to the fire that not only Trump but his followers were racist. A claim that millions on the “left” had made since the 2016 Presidential Election. This, in turn, helped build resistance to the pandemic lockdowns from Trump supporters, and allowed anti-vaxxers an in to attack the Covid-19 vaccines. Trump was wrong about a lot of things. I appears, as of now, the Lab Leak Theory not one of them.
A broken clock is right twice a day Author - Unknown
This old saying seems pertinent in this case. Not for what is means but for what it implies. With people, we can never know for sure when that time of day is. If we assume otherwise, it’s easy to dismiss almost anything they say or do. But when we let such bias cloud our thoughts, we end up losing our power and integrity. We amplify the worst aspects of that person and diminish our own standing. In the lab leak case, a very powerful individual, the President of the United States, made a statement. A large and extremely important segment of our society, the media, chose by and large to assume the opposite. The result has been an increase in division and tribalism, a rise in the distrust of institutions, and quite possibly a blow to the safety of our citizens.