As usual, misleading and terrible Intercept reporting on COVID-19 and CoV

Lately the Intercept has been the media source most actively reporting on COVID-19 origin.  In a sense there are fewer problems with the factual contents in its articles than many people' claims and what the Intercept explained, argued, or implied in the articles.

Here is an analogy first.  To explain how the world works, both evolution and God provide capable answers.  While evolution is an area of active research, no biologists test the presence of God. 

Hence the bewilderment that too many people fail to see the parallel in the COVID-19 natural origin vs lab made/leak theories, for the lab theory is as faith-based, evidence-free as the God theory.

Intercept recently published several reports on EcoHealth Alliance (EA) grant proposals and progress reports, the latest about MERS-CoV (https://theintercept.com/2021/10/21/virus-mers-wuhan-experiments/).  When Intercept asked for the documents, COVID-19 origin must have been the ultimate target.  These reports cite both proponents of the natural origin and lab theories and concede no proof of lab origin, but the bias of the Intercept is clear: the quotes of lab theory supporters are usually longer, more complete and extensive, supplemented by strong words from the Intercept authors.  While the reports show CoV research, in terms of COVID-19 origin, they are red herring: as if set up to prove someone makes a bomb, all they show is he has a firecracker (maybe not even that).  Besides the many blogs (e.g., 7/23/21 blog) and articles that refute the lab theory (e.g., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.08.017), below are additional criticisms specifically against the Intercept articles from the science angle.  

The articles focus on GOF studies.  GOF and the other side of the same coin, LOF, are neither uncommon nor secretive.  In fact, it would be hard pressed to find a modern biochemistry, molecular biology, or genetics lab that has never done GOF/LOF.  So the defining and relevant question must be: Did EA/WIV produce COVID-19 by GOF?  Intercept admits finding no evidence.  

If the grants reveal nothing about COVID-19, is there anything peculiar about EA work itself on SARS-related CoV or MERS-CoV?  Here lies another fatal flaw by the Intercept: the lack of scientific perspective or control.  In the 21^st century, prior to COVID-19, HIV had killed more people than SARS and MERS, so had Ebola, so had flus, including various bird flus, so had many other infectious diseases.  If you apply the same logic and energy to look around the world at the published, unpublished, and proposed research on those viruses and bacteria, you will find many more similar, “dangerous”, “risky” lines of work.  Intercept implies EA is unusual, which in fact is not.  What a garden-variety idea of making specific mutations in the S protein!  Had COVID-19 had not happened, you would have never noticed EA.  Remember: CoVs are far from the most dangerous pathogens in the world. 

Regarding research on SARS-related CoVs or MERS-CoV, aside from academic freedom, there are legitimate scientific purposes, instead of the wrong impression or fear instilled into laypeople by Intercept’s alarming titles and writings.  Take MERS as an example: MERS has a high fatality rate, but it doesn’t transmit easily among humans.  Research, involving GOF and LOF, could reveal the reasons behind these MERS properties, allow us to predict the pathogenic potentials of new CoVs, and develop vaccines/drugs to prevent/treat diseases.  Critically, with what EA did, there was no mistaken or hiding where the final CoVs came from.  In other words, EA can’t possibly make SARS-CoV-2 in the same way without anybody knowing how it is made.

The lab origin theory proposes WIV made or leak COVID-19, whose distinction is truly disingenuous.   As for the lab leak angle, whatever “risky” CoVs Intercept thinks EA/WIV made, there is no indication they infect humans (most CoVs don’t), and we have seen no SARS or MERS escaping.  Intercept’s focus on GOF obviously implies lab made, but even Intercept admits no evidence.  The closest EA worked on, SARS-related CoVs, are 80% identical genetically to SARS-CoV-2.  To make an extreme comparison, mice and humans are about 80% identical: think we can GOF a mouse into a person?   The Intercept could change all the titles to “Documents didn’t find EA/WIV made COVID-19”, and it still fits all the facts in those reports exactly. 

Therefore, all GOF was nothing special and had nothing to do with SARS-CoV-2 anyway.  But Intercept has to make a connection to COVID-19, so it depends entirely on the words and belief of certain scientists that support the lab theory.  Unfortunately, few if any of them have had any bench experience (recent or ever) working on animal viruses, which means they has little if any idea about the actual virus research, its scopes and limits, which is reflected and verified by their assertions.  Alina Chan has a poor grasp on COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2, and evolution (doi: 10.1101/2020.05.01.073262, rebuttal in https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2021.08.017).    Jesse Bloom backtracked furiously from his best work towards the lab theory (https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2021/06/claim-chinese-team-hid-early-sars-cov-2-sequences-stymie-origin-hunt-sparks-furor).  Richard Ebright tweets nonsense blasting the lack of evidence for natural origin (not true), yet is perfectly at peace with the fact-free lab theory. 

Coming full circle with evolution vs God.  While evidence for evolution is overwhelming, there will always be gaps in our knowledge.  But these gaps don’t refute evolution any more than support God.  On the COVID-19 natural origin theory, it is backed by thousands of years’ human history and experience with pathogens, current analyses and understanding of COVID-19 and its virus, and accumulating knowledge of natural CoVs.  All the lab theory has is Wuhan has CoV researchers, such that it is believed they made the virus as much as God made the world.  

PS: The US intel just released a more detailed assessment of the COVID-19 origin question (https://www.yahoo.com/news/report-intelligence-community-divided-on-whether-covid-19-originated-naturally-or-due-to-lab-leak-201433169.html).  To anyone familiar with COVID-19 history, it is actually a tremendous climb-down from the previous hype and accusations against China.  Still, it maintains that both the natural and lab theories are plausible.  Well sure: to explain how the world works, both evolution and God are plausible.  For the God theory, nobody has seen a monkey evolving into a human, there is a very famous book expounding God, and billions of people believe, at least nominally, in God.  Thus we should view both evolution and God the same.  And if we don’t know exactly how COVID-19 started, both natural and lab origins are equal, just to make the mass confused and keep an advantage over China.