Adam Barnes
The HillThu, 17 Jun 2021 16:55 UTC
A Canadian scientist and Harvard postdoctoral associate said
she and fellow colleagues feared vocalizing support for the Wuhan lab leak hypothesis out of fear that it would be viewed as akin to holding potentially inflammatory views espoused by former President Trump.Alina Chan is one of 18 experts who signed a letter in May calling for a thorough investigation into the origins of the coronavirus. But prior to the letter,
Chan told NBC, experts were cautious to lean too close to the former president.
"At the time, it was scarier to be associated with Trump and to become a tool for racists, so people didn't want to publicly call for an investigation into lab origins," she said.
The
lab leak theory, which hypothesizes that the novel coronavirus accidentally leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, has gained traction in recent weeks. Circumstantial evidence,
including a Wall Street Journal report that three researchers at the Wuhan lab fell ill in November 2019, challenge the conventional theory that the virus jumped species naturally. This has led President Biden and other world leaders to
call for further investigations.
Chan cautioned, however, that despite emerging calls for fresh investigations, there is not a singular piece of evidence that definitely proves the lab leak theory.
"I know a lot of people want to have a smoking gun," Chan told NBC. "It's more like breadcrumbs everywhere, and they're not always leading in one direction. It's like the whole floor is covered in breadcrumbs."
But the Harvard and MIT credentialed expert believes last month's letter opened the door for fellow scientists to step away from fears of guilt by association, adding that the letter might offer credibility to alternative theories.
"I think it had a big effect," Chan told NBC. "I think it literally helped all the people who wanted to investigate this by saying: This is not bogus. Top scientists think this is plausible."
Comment: If it's true that these scientists decided to self-censure in order to not be associated with Bad Orange Man and "white supremacy", then it shows just how much power Leftist Woke narratives have over people in all areas of society and in effect undermines the position held by many that we must "trust the science". How can we "trust the science" when actual scientists are scared to and therefor don't speak the truth?
All other considerations and implications aside, the door has been opened for respectable scientists and lay people to question the origins of the virus, but unfortunately the narrative has already been set up to corral people in to blaming China when
China at the start of the pandemic narrative had a good idea as to
who really created the virus.
Comment: If it's true that these scientists decided to self-censure in order to not be associated with Bad Orange Man and "white supremacy", then it shows just how much power Leftist Woke narratives have over people in all areas of society and in effect undermines the position held by many that we must "trust the science". How can we "trust the science" when actual scientists are scared to and therefor don't speak the truth?
All other considerations and implications aside, the door has been opened for respectable scientists and lay people to question the origins of the virus, but unfortunately the narrative has already been set up to corral people in to blaming China when China at the start of the pandemic narrative had a good idea as to who really created the virus.