The Lab Leak Theory: Evidence That Raises Questions

Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 2.0)

Addressing The Term "Conspiracy Theory"

In the book The Rules of Contagion by Adam Kucharski, he compares the spread of ideas to the spread of disease, modeling it with an S-curve (similar to how disease spread is modeled). "For something to spread, susceptible and infectious people need to come into contact, either directly or indirectly. Whether we're looking at innovations or infections, the number of opportunities for transmission will depend on how often contacts occur. If we want to understand contagion, we therefore need to work out how we interact with one another. However, it's a task that turns out to be remarkably difficult." (Kucharski, 2020. p. 86). Although it may be odd to compare ideas to disease, (and referring to people who believe ideas as "infected"), this quote is meant to show that the ideas that are spread and who they're spread to is greatly attributed to community. In a digital world, theories spread faster than they can be proven or disproven, which can be especially dangerous when dealing with health crises. To get the most accurate information, all theories should be explored before being condemned.

Early in the emergence of COVID, the lab leak theory was heavily disputed. It wasn't until several months later that it started being taken seriously as a theory. Although the lab leak theory hasn't been proven, labeling it as a "conspiracy theory" may have harmed the early research of COVID-19 as a whole. Some scientists condemn the use of the term "conspiracy theory" for the lab leak theory because that implies the lab leak was orchestrated on purpose, whereas they interpret the leak as an accident. Regardless, people have a tendency to not believe a theory when it's labelled as a "conspiracy theory", despite the fact that any theory can be proven or disproven with the proper research and evidence.

As shown in the timeline post, this theory was made popular by political figures. Figures such as senator Tom Cotton (Arkansas), previous president Donald Trump, and more have publicly shown their agreement with this theory. This contributes negatively to the perceived validity of the theory because it was interpreted as a political idea as opposed to a valid origin theory.

Who Supports This Theory?

First, Chao Shao, a researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology claimed in an interview in 2023 that the coronavirus was engineered as a weapon. He then goes on to talk about how he believes him and his other coworkers were sent to various locations to spread the virus and observe how it reacts in humans. Despite this interview coming from someone inside the lab, I didn't see it referenced much in my research.

Second, the U.S. government has tried to get involved in proving a theory but has been met with some barriers. The U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Accountability recently shared documents that "strongly support" the lab leak theory. These documents are highly redacted and the committee Chairman is advocating for the U.S. government to declassify them. FBI Chief Christopher Wray has stated on numerous occasions that he and his agency believe a lab leak is "most likely", but the agency has failed to come up with enough proof to completely rule out natural origins.

Lastly, World Health Organization did a study into the lab leak in an attempt to prove once and for all that it's a false theory but shared inconclusive results. Dominic Dwyer (microbiologist for the World Health Organization) stated that the team asked for the raw patient data from the first cases from December 2019 and only received a summary. From the summary they received; it was revealed that of the original 174 known COVID cases from late 2019, only half of said cases had any exposure to the wet market that many scientists agree is where COVID originated.

Although there is evidence for both of the two main theories, the lab leak theory should not be discounted without further research - research that could only be possible with the collaboration of the Chinese government. COVID-19 is relatively new to world history and the wounds surrounding the pandemic are still fresh. Until we can further assess all information regarding the two theories, we should avoid making snap decisions on the origin of COVID-19.