A former New York Times journalist, Donald McNeil Jr, has accused a group of prominent scientists of misleading him regarding the Covid lab-leak theory during the early stages of the pandemic. McNeil became skeptical of the theory that the virus was engineered in a Wuhan lab after top epidemiological virologists insisted it was not possible. He claims that their efforts to throw him off track influenced the newspaper's coverage of the theory and contributed to it being dropped for a year. However, leaked messages between the experts revealed that they initially believed the lab leak theory was plausible but did not disclose it for political reasons.
In his book “The Wisdom of Plagues,” which reflects on his 25 years of covering pandemics, McNeil stated that the scientists “clearly misled” him and that he was a “victim of deception.” He expressed disappointment in both himself and the scientists for easily accepting their misleading information. McNeil emphasized the importance of seeking a second opinion, questioning whom one would trust to dispute a claim made by someone as reputable as Albert Einstein.
It is worth noting that Donald McNeil Jr resigned from the New York Times in 2021 after being reprimanded for repeating a racial slur used by a student in a discussion about school suspension. This incident does not impact the validity of his claims regarding the scientists' misleading behavior but provides context for his departure from the newspaper.
The private messages released by the US Oversight Committee last year shed light on conversations between several scientists who authored a key paper published in Nature Medicine in March 2020. The paper, titled “The Proximal Origin of Sars-CoV-2,” argued that the pandemic resulted from a natural spillover event and played a role in suppressing debate about the virus's origins. Among the authors were Prof Andrew Rambaut from the University of Edinburgh and Prof Kristian Andersen from the Scripps Research Institute.
The leaked messages revealed that the scientists acknowledged the possibility of a laboratory leak but were concerned about upsetting China. They discussed how to respond to inquiries from McNeil about the origins of the virus. McNeil had emailed both Prof Rambaut and Prof Andersen in February 2020 regarding a tip-off about a potential lab-made virus in Wuhan. The scientists dismissed the rumors as false and intentionally withheld information from McNeil. They later published their paper, “Proximal Origins,” without disclosing their previous acknowledgement of the lab leak possibility.
McNeil claims that the scientists' responses influenced his interpretation of the issue and affected how the newspaper covered it. He believes that the ongoing debate between proponents and opponents of the lab leak theory has reached a stalemate, with both sides resorting to deception and mudslinging. McNeil argues that science journalists are caught in the middle, as even editors who are not aligned with either side demand the most likely explanation to assign political analyses.
In response to McNeil's accusations, Prof Andersen denies misleading him and asserts that his answers were accurate and specific. He expressed frustration that the leaked messages have been misused by conspiracy theorists to target individual scientists. Prof Rambaut also defended their cautious approach, stating that there was no evidence of accidental release and cautioning against baseless accusations.
McNeil admits to being surprised when he read the Slack messages that were released in July. He believes it was a mistake for the scientists to withhold their suspicions from him, as he is a careful reporter who could have provided the necessary context. He concludes that misleading reporters is generally a bad idea because, in democracies, the truth eventually comes out.
The revelations of scientists misleading journalists and the subsequent controversy surrounding the lab leak theory highlight the challenges faced by science journalists in reporting on complex topics during a global crisis. It underscores the importance of transparency, open dialogue, and robust fact-checking to ensure accurate and trustworthy information reaches the public. The investigation into the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic continues, and it remains to be seen whether the truth will eventually emerge.
