With the publication of the Science letter, the Overton window for discussion of "lab leak" hypothesis has shifted dramatically. We now have mainstream scientific opinions that largely range between "lab leak can be dismissed" and "both zoonosis and lab leak are viable". 1/8
-
Show this thread
-
Trevor Bedford Retweeted Trevor Bedford
I am in the both are plausible camp. The data (as it exists) is consistent with zoonosis, but it's also consistent with lab leak. Parsing the relative probabilities of the two depends on multiple lines of evidence and is necessarily assumption ridden. 2/8https://twitter.com/trvrb/status/1333885880054910976 …
Trevor Bedford added,
Trevor BedfordVerified account @trvrbReplying to @AlexBerensonDavid Relman summarizes this issue well here: https://www.pnas.org/content/117/47/29246/tab-article-info …. Short answer is that I don't (and never did) consider lab accident hypothesis a "conspiracy theory" and believe it should be addressed scientifically.10 replies 52 retweets 332 likesShow this thread -
However, I think that there is a philosophical divide among scientists in how to assess hypotheses that perhaps explains some of the gap in opinion. Ie, is zoonosis the "null" hypothesis that we need significant evidence to reject or are we comparing two competing hypotheses? 3/8
10 replies 33 retweets 290 likesShow this thread -
Zoonoses occur constantly. We've had >26 Ebola outbreaks, 100s of MERS spillover events, abundant one-off human infections by avian influenza, etc... This is the prior many scientists are working from and suggests that zoonosis should be the null hypothesis. 4/8
8 replies 45 retweets 302 likesShow this thread -
On the other hand, of the recent influenza pandemics (H2N2 in 1957, H3N2 in 1968, H1N1 in 1977, H1N1 in 2009), one of the four (1977 H1N1) is conclusively a reintroduction into the human population via some lab intermediary. Lab accidents do happen. 5/8
23 replies 49 retweets 345 likesShow this thread -
If one takes this as naive prior of 1/4, one comes to a very different conclusion and would treat both zoonosis and lab leak as competing hypotheses for the (sparse) data. 6/8
8 replies 20 retweets 187 likesShow this thread -
I'm not sure how best to frame a prior in terms of origins of SARS-CoV-2, but I do agree that we'd benefit from a dispassionate evidence-based discourse on this issue. I also think that barring a major new datapoint, it's unlikely we'll come to definitive conclusions. 7/8
18 replies 29 retweets 370 likesShow this thread
I think it's also important to remember that scientists have a strong interest in one of these outcomes being true over the other. That doesn't mean that they will come to biased conclusions, but recognizing that interest is important in staying dispassionate as data comes in
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.