Onisillos

@onisillos.bsky.social

Editor-in-Chief of a very good microbial journal. (Illustration by David S. Goodsell, RCSB Protein Data Bank. doi: 10.2210/rcsb_pdb/goodsell-gallery-028)

"Perhaps most importantly, this outbreak must remain in the global conversation. In a world filled with competing humanitarian crises, attention is a finite resource … But epidemics do not disappear simply because the headlines move on." bktitanji.substack.com/p/weve-seen-...

We've Seen This Ebola Story Before, We Cannot Afford to Repeat It

How delayed detection, conflict, funding gaps, and fading global attention allowed the largest Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo's history to outpace the response

bktitanji.substack.com

None of this is to say that accidents can't happen (although an accident leading to an pandemic of this scale would need so many stars to align), it's just that this isn't what happened in this case.

…a lab would need to overcome to establish an outbreak (let alone the difficulty of successfully modifying a virus in the way necessary), and the epidemiological evidence centring the outbreak on the market.

Conveniently, I've written a couple of editorials on this topic. But they might not fully answer your question. In short, it breaks down to a natural origin being far more probable (this is an understatement), there being many hurdles that a zoonotic virus "escaping" from… bsky.app/profile/onis...

Onisillos@onisillos.bsky.social · 6d ago

Given the overwhelming demand (🤥), here are the editorials I've written on covid origins: www.thelancet.com/journals/lan... and www.thelancet.com/journals/lan...

SARS-CoV-2 is a natural virus that found its way into humans through mundane contact with infected wildlife that went on to cause the most consequential pandemic for over a century. While it is scholarly to entertain alternative hypotheses, particularly when evidence is scarce, these alternative hypotheses have been implausible for a long time and have only become more-so with increasing scrutiny. Those who eagerly peddle suggestions of laboratory involvement have consistently failed to present credible arguments to support their positions.
Take the time to reflect on the paragraph above and how many words were expended to make the simple point that COVID-19 had a natural origin. This is because there are many people, most notably in the USA, with disproportionate influence who are poised to seize on less explicit statements to undermine a simple, and pretty straightforward, truth. These are the same people who are willing to malign individuals—a topical example being former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Anthony Fauci—who dedicated themselves to understanding and lessening the impact of the pandemic.
The sheer hubris needed to underpin alternative hypotheses was an early signal of their tenuousness, when we are intensely aware that the natural processes needed to bring about this sort of pandemic are constantly churning and testing the boundaries between animal and human populations. The most remarkable thing about the whole COVID-19 origin saga is the confected controversy over something that should not be controversial at all. The thing that should be controversial is how little of the energy expended over this discussion has been directed towards actual beneficial outcomes.
To be frank, the fanciful ideas put forward by self-described free thinkers are more in keeping with popular movies than the realities of working with pathogens. It is admirable to pursue curiosity wherever it might lead and to reject the constraints of…

The value of social media is not parroting others’ agendas. You can get that with news outlets, TV, radio, workplaces etc. The true value is allowing us to show up as our true selves & express our genuine takes. If we’re prevented by fear of toxicity or desire to win approval then it’s not worth it.

It requires expertise to be able to say, “I do not know the answer to that question, and that is becauae thus far scholarly consensus is that we do not have the knowledge needed at this time to answer that question.” Sometimes “I don’t know” is a far more rigorous answer than people might think.