TY - JOUR
T1 - An appeal for an objective, open, and transparent scientific debate about the origin of SARS-CoV-2
AU - van Helden, Jacques
AU - Butler, Colin D.
AU - Achaz, Guillaume
AU - Canard, Bruno
AU - Casane, Didier
AU - Claverie, Jean-Michel
AU - Colombo, Fabien
AU - Courtier, Virginie
AU - Ebright, Richard H.
AU - Graner, François
AU - Leitenberg, Milton
AU - Morand, Serge
AU - Petrovsky, Nikolai
AU - Segreto, Rossana
AU - Decroly, Etienne
AU - Halloy, José
PY - 2021/10/16
Y1 - 2021/10/16
N2 - On July 5, 2021, a Correspondence was published in The Lancet called “Science, not speculation, is essential to determine how SARS-CoV-2 reached humans”.1 The letter recapitulates the arguments of an earlier letter (published in February, 2020) by the same authors,2 which claimed overwhelming support for the hypothesis that the novel coronavirus causing the COVID-19 pandemic originated in wildlife. The authors associated any alternative view with conspiracy theories by stating: “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin”. The statement has imparted a silencing effect on the wider scientific debate, including among science journalists.3 The 2021 letter did not repeat the proposition that scientists open to alternative hypotheses were conspiracy theorists, but did state: “We believe the strongest clue from new, credible, and peer-reviewed evidence in the scientific literature is that the virus evolved in nature, while suggestions of a laboratory leak source of the pandemic remain without scientifically validated evidence that directly supports it in peer-reviewed scientific journals”. In fact, this argument could literally be reversed. As will be shown below, there is no direct support for the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2, and a laboratory-related accident is plausible.
AB - On July 5, 2021, a Correspondence was published in The Lancet called “Science, not speculation, is essential to determine how SARS-CoV-2 reached humans”.1 The letter recapitulates the arguments of an earlier letter (published in February, 2020) by the same authors,2 which claimed overwhelming support for the hypothesis that the novel coronavirus causing the COVID-19 pandemic originated in wildlife. The authors associated any alternative view with conspiracy theories by stating: “We stand together to strongly condemn conspiracy theories suggesting that COVID-19 does not have a natural origin”. The statement has imparted a silencing effect on the wider scientific debate, including among science journalists.3 The 2021 letter did not repeat the proposition that scientists open to alternative hypotheses were conspiracy theorists, but did state: “We believe the strongest clue from new, credible, and peer-reviewed evidence in the scientific literature is that the virus evolved in nature, while suggestions of a laboratory leak source of the pandemic remain without scientifically validated evidence that directly supports it in peer-reviewed scientific journals”. In fact, this argument could literally be reversed. As will be shown below, there is no direct support for the natural origin of SARS-CoV-2, and a laboratory-related accident is plausible.
KW - SARS-CoV-2 origin
KW - COVID-19
KW - humans
KW - transparent scientific debate
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85117135299&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02019-5
DO - 10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02019-5
M3 - Letter
C2 - 34543608
AN - SCOPUS:85117135299
SN - 0140-6736
VL - 398
SP - 1402
EP - 1404
JO - The Lancet
JF - The Lancet
IS - 10309
ER -