The Mercury News

Biden inquiry into COVID-19 origins may not lead to truth

- By Doyle McManus Doyle McManus is a Los Angeles Times columnist. © 2021 Los Angeles Times. Distribute­d by Tribune Content Agency.

Last week, President Joe Biden set an example that all of us — Democrat and Republican alike — should embrace.

It wasn’t so much what he did — ordering U.S. intelligen­ce agencies to take a new look at the origins of COVID-19, including whether the coronaviru­s that causes the disease escaped accidental­ly from a laboratory in China — as it was the mindset that prompted his action.

For more than a year, debate about the origins of the virus has been deeply political, with former President Donald Trump and many of his followers embracing the lab-leak hypothesis, while many of his detractors scoffed at the idea.

Biden took a refreshing­ly different approach: He’s keeping his mind open to both possibilit­ies and asking for more informatio­n to get closer to the truth.

When COVID-19 appeared in the central Chinese city of Wuhan in late 2019, most scientists’ first guess was that it came via an animal-to-human transfer, because that has been a frequent route for viruses to spread.

Chinese officials said the source of the pandemic appeared to be a “wet market” that sold live animals. Wuhan is home to a government-run research center that specialize­s in studying coronaviru­s, but officials there said the strain found in humans didn’t match anything they were working on.

Some scientists said the possibilit­y of a lab leak shouldn’t be ruled out, and China hawks led by Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said the theory deserved more attention.

Trump initially ignored the issue and even praised China’s government for its “transparen­cy.” But in the spring of 2020, as the pandemic spread uncontroll­ed across the United States, he began to blame Beijing for what he called the “China plague.”

He told reporters that he had seen secret intelligen­ce suggesting the virus came from a lab. “I think they made a horrible mistake and they didn’t want to admit it,” he said.

Trump’s political motive was transparen­t. He was under fire for his administra­tion’s chaotic response to the pandemic and he needed someone to blame. “It’s China’s fault,” he said.

And after years of outlandish falsehoods from the president, it was difficult for Trump’s critics to believe him, especially in the absence of any publicly available evidence.

What was often lost, though, was that there was little direct evidence to support either the lab-leak or the wet market hypothesis. The virus’s origin remained stubbornly undetermin­ed — a frustratin­g fact for those who yearned for a clear, uncluttere­d narrative.

Over time, paradoxica­lly, that absence of new evidence shifted the scientific debate. Researcher­s spent months trying to determine what species had spread the coronaviru­s to humans, and came up empty-handed; maybe the lab-leak theory wasn’t so unlikely after all.

Meanwhile, China’s government remained uncooperat­ive toward outside inquiries. An internatio­nal team sent by the United Nations’ World Health Organizati­on got only limited access to the Wuhan Institute and its databases. The WHO chief said the results of the visit were inconclusi­ve: “All hypotheses remain open and require further study.” That prompted several groups of scientists, including some who had been skeptics about a lab leak, to write open letters urging a new look at all the possibilit­ies.

In Washington, the U.S. intelligen­ce community had already told Biden — and Congress — that it was divided: Two agencies still leaned toward animal-tohuman transmissi­on, one favored the lab-leak idea, but none were certain.

So the president asked them to look again and report back in 90 days.

That didn’t add up to a major change in policy — only an admission that after more than a year, we don’t know much more than when the pandemic began. Francis Collins, the director of the National Institutes of Health, repeated his unchanged diagnosis last week: “It is most likely that this virus arose naturally, but we cannot exclude the possibilit­y of some kind of lab accident.”

This new inquiry may just end in more uncertaint­y. And even if a scientist or spy finds conclusive proof of how the virus came to be, that won’t change the course of the pandemic, or what government­s are doing to combat it.

On hearing of the new inquiry, Trump, unsurprisi­ngly, saw a very different lesson, but characteri­stically, it was both self-referentia­l and wrong:

“Now everybody is agreeing that I was right.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States