The genesis of COVID: a creation of science?

By Cavis Chan

“In questions of science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of a single individual.” - Galileo Galilei

The SARS-CoV-2 began its reign of terror in December 2019, with its first reported case in Wuhan, China. There have been 48.3 million reported cases, a lamentable death toll of 1.23 million people, afflicting the lives of millions on a global scale. To this date the origin of the virus is unknown.

As curious beings, we all conjecture to relieve the uncertainty, but there is one conspiracy that I particularly disdain. I suppose the shock of the pandemic has resulted in a shared delusion amongst many, as there have been a colossal amount of claims that the virus was created in a laboratory. It’s shocking to see what the feeble mind has the audacity to conjecture - attacking science, an illustrious discipline built based on empirical evidence and rigorous reasoning - with claims supported not by evidence nor logic, but merely personal illusions. I firmly dissent from such patently frivolous fallacies, for not only do they have no scientific nor empirical basis but hold detrimental implications to society.

A rather vocal advocate of the lab theory, a foreign policy expert, Jamie Metzl, stated in his op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal: “A deadly bat coronavirus coincidentally occurred near the only level 4 virology institute in all of China—which happened to be studying the closest known relative of that exact virus—strains credulity.”

Though this seems to be a compelling argument, it is anything but to the knowledgeable mind. The “closest known relative” he referred to is the RaTG13 coronavirus. It bears a 96% similarity to Sars-CoV-2 across 29,000 bases of its genome. However, when it came to the cell-binding receptor, the most crucial part of every virus, the similarity dropped to only 85%. For reference, I would like to point out that humans share roughly 80% of our genome with that of cows and roughly 60% to that of fruit flies and bananas, but I’m sure it would take a fool to believe we are the “closest known relative” to cows, fruit flies, or bananas.

When asked about his opinion on the virus being created in a laboratory, Curtis Lai, a year 11 RCHK student, is skeptical: “I think there is reason to believe the virus underwent some human interference; the virus originally infected bats, I don’t think it's very likely for it to suddenly become a human virus due to natural causes.”

Yet cross-species viral transmission is something that is not only plausible but prevalent. Studies from as early as 2003 conducted by Chinese and American research teams have already empirically supported this fact. Their research was conducted on SARS-related coronaviruses that were circulating in bats. Their testing concluded that most of the viruses naturally also infected human cell receptors, specifically the ACE 2, SARS, and SARS Cov-2 receptors, even though they are bat viruses. Natural cross-species adaptation from its original host to humans does exist, thus debunking the conspiracy that genetic engineering is necessary.

These false claims are easily debunked by the knowledgeable mind. However, as absurd, farcical, and ludicrous as these fallacies are we must also recognize its detrimental implications to society and the interest of scientific and technological advancement.

People with no authority to comment on a subject - such as Jamie the foreign policy expert commenting on science - being given a platform to do so, increases the likelihood of misinformation. This can be especially detrimental when it comes to science, as the careers of scientists depend on funding. When people are misinformed to believe that science is creating viruses that are taking the lives of millions, funding will severely diminish. This financial obstacle can hinder scientific and technological advancements, and deprive society of inventions that could have improved and possibly saved the lives of billions.

Alongside this, such misinformed claims also hold detrimental political implications. Cherie Lai, a parent of RCHK asserts: “Many of these people are falsely accusing specific laboratories in specific countries; this can severely damage the political image of the countries.”

What these claims have revealed is beyond the question of whether the virus originated in a lab, but are indictments of our modern-day society. It has exposed our flawed way of forming opinions and arguments and shown us how damaging it can be to society. Change must be instigated, which entails the recanting of and refraining from voicing unjustified fallacies. However, it’s important to keep in mind not to neglect claims that are supported by clear evidence.