Introduction

The Pandemic of the century has created layers of confusion and shock for many people around the globe. Covid-19 originally manifested in China and it spread across the globe, causing an alarming health crisis to those with immune deficiencies and the elderly. Even those in good health have suffered financially and mentally, and along with this came a spiral of conspiracies on the honest truth of Covid’s origin. A Chinese Virologist, Dr. Li Meng-Yan, made headlines with her claims, and was featured in a Youtube video on Crux disclosing her findings on the Covid-19 Virus. She makes an assortment of claims centering blame at China’s Government for manufacturing the virus. She claims this version of Coronavirus was engineered in a lab located in Wuhan China. However, Dr. Yan’s claims are misleading because of her affiliations, lack of scientific knowledge, and non-evidence based opinionated claims. 

The Expert Dr. Li Meng-Yan (0:17)

Dr. Li Meng-Yan, as convincing as she seems, lacks credibility for her claims. Her initial fame started with a research paper that she and four authors published, and there was no peer review done by other scientists which is “a necessary part of the scientific publishing process in which scientists review one another’s work, vetting research for accuracy and evaluating methods and evidence” (Mitt Press). It went viral anyway without the critique of other experts, and when the paper was finally reviewed, Dr. Lauring stated there were “serious flaws and errors in the methods and data [which] render the study conclusions misinformative” He has experience with retroviral pathogenesis at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and now runs a laboratory for viral evolution research.  Dr. Robert Gallo, a well known scientist and researcher, was one of these reviewers for Yan’s paper. He is the director and co-founder of the Institute of Human Virology and is famous for co-discovering HIV as the cause of AIDS in 1984. Both of these scientists who work in the field of viruses are skeptical of Yan’s work as well as her overall credibility. 

Organization: “Rule of Law Society and Rule of Law Foundation”

Dr. Yan and the authors of her viral research paper affiliate with The Rule of Law Society and Rule of Law Foundation. There are a lot of pieces in this organization that make the authors look discreditable for their scientific arguments. The general purpose is to accommodate the Chinese people with humanitarian benefits such as “to expose corruption, obstruction, illegality, brutality, false imprisonment, excessive sentencing, harassment, and inhumanity pervasive in the political, legal, business and financial systems of China.” according to the Associated Press. In this case where the debate is bluntly scientific, it seems unethical that they are not a scientific foundation. Of course, it’s important to have advocates for the citizens of a country, but being a reference for a scientific claim is discreditable when they have a background far from this field. They also could be biased for being in favor of exposing the Chinese government rather than the science of the virus itself, potentially making their point politically motivated instead of scientifically. The Vox addresses that “the group behind the report is intimately linked to a prominent Trump ally and known China hawk: Steve Bannon”. Knowing that Bannon has a biased relation with a political figure, this further proves the debate is linked in a political way because he directly supports exposing the communist government. It would make for a better claim if the person a part of the foundation (and a topic sensitive to politics) does not have their career based on biases. In a scientific debate, the argument shouldn’t involve politics because people have a variety of opinions, whereas science shows the honest side. This foundation isn’t credible to use as a reference for a science drawn debate from those reasons. 

“The genome sequence is like a human fingerprint. Based on this, you can identify these things” (1:41)

Dr. Yan’s claim that the “genome sequence is like a fingerprint” means the virus’s genetic makeup shows signs of human manipulation. This is false from the evidence of a study conducted by associate professor Dr. Kristian Anderson who specializes in microbiology and immunology at Scripps Research. He along with other scientists studied the spike protein sequence for Covid’s outer shell. Live Science  mentions the spikes there act as hooks called “the receptor binding domain” and specifically target the ACE2 blood regulation receptor on human cells. The study concluded that “It is so effective at attaching to human cells that the researchers said the spike proteins were the result of natural selection and not genetic engineering.” according to Live Science as well. This was shown in a computer simulation where scientists tried to create mutations to manipulate Covid to thrive but had failed to come up with better mutations for the virus. The idea behind this, is that Covid-19 was a result of natural selection and mother nature’s work. 

“The China military institute discovered and owned some bad coronaviruses named ZC45 and ZXC21 based on that afterlab modification became the virus” (3:45)

Another claim of Yan’s in regards to the viral anatomy came from a separate video on Loose Women where Yan explains that the Chinese Government owns specific variants of Coronavirus called ZXC21 and ZC45, and that it was manipulated to be Covid-19. Nucleotides are what make up the genetic material (DNA) of any organisms, and Covid-19 “is over 3,000 nucleotides different from SARS-2. This is a long way off” according to Dr. Gallo. It is also mentioned in Dr. Lauring’s review that both ZC45 and ZXC21 “differ from SARS-CoV-2 at approximately 10% of the positions in the genome.” and scientists would have used a virus more similar to manipulate. Yan’s paper also mentioned that she used the “multistep enzyme restriction cloning strategy” but according to Dr. Lauring, this method is obsolete compared to using “gene synthesis” which is easier and preferred in the science field. Yan discredits common science knowledge in her work and Dr. Lauring even says, “dismiss available data and literature without trying to work within it.” which not only can make other scientists skeptical of her work but also her as a virologist. The two viruses don’t have a close enough connection to be purely manufactured off of and her cited work is discreditable. 

“Dr. Li Meng-Yan claims that the virus was made in a virology institute…and not the wet markets” (0:32)

Yan also claims that the origin of Covid-19 did not evolve in a wet market but a lab instead. Scientists had concluded this virus evolved from natural selection because it is in a family relationship to three different viruses. LA Times states of which was “drawn from Chinese patients who became sick late last year with unexplained pneumonia.” Another “came from bats living near Wuhan, China, and which were sometimes brought to an open-air market for sale” which was said to be one of closest to Covid-19 and the last “was from pangolins, mongoose-like animals from Malaysia that were known to have been illegally imported into China”. In order to impact humans however, the article from LA Times also mentions there needed to be “key genetic shifts to infect humans” and the alterations needed are in the more distinct virus: the one with pangolins. There is no scientific way to calculate if a variant of coronavirus will undergo these special mutations, and nature is simply the reason these changes can be made. Like Dr. Anderson’s study previously mentioned, there is no way scientists could have predicted the changes in the virus to target humans specifically. Insider has a video featuring expert Maceij Boni, an associate professor in Biology from Penn State. He and others mentioned that in order to manufacture a virus from one already existing, one would have to complete “serial passage” or manipulate a backbone. A backbone is the whole structure for the genome and has all the DNA to code for the traits of the virus. However, Insider also stated that “to manufacture from scratch the backbone of a virus that can also cause disease is almost impossible.” This is similar to what Dr. Anderson found out in his study about viral mutations when he mentions that there is no way for scientists to find the right mutations for Covid’s purpose. So this means with understanding viral anatomy to an expert level and using research, scientists can conclude this truly did come from the wet markets through natural selection. 

“She is determined to share her findings with the world and publish them soon” (3:29)

The last claim to mention is Dr. Yan convinces she will “publish proof the virus was made in a lab” which shows obvious red flags when analyzing her credibility. Dr. Lauring mentions “the manuscript does not demonstrate sufficient scientific evidence to support its claims. Claims are at times baseless and are not supported by the data and methods used. Decision-makers should consider the author’s claims in this study misleading.”  Without scientific proof it’s nearly impossible to have a stand on virology, microbiology, and immunology since it’s all science based. Her big claims then fall under pseudoscience and conspiracy theories because she is trying to convince people of something that cannot be backed up yet. Dr. Lauring also states in his review that, “It is unethical to promote what are essentially conspiracy theories that are not founded by fact”. Promoting conspiracies is inappropriate for Yan to advertise to the public, especially when people are vulnerable to information in regards to this topic and she doesn’t even have the proof to back up claims. When the news got out without expert critique, it had “been viewed more than 1 million times” according to the Washington Post, so many people have been influenced by science without facts. Dr. Yan is convincing them the time will come for the proof, which is very misleading. Insider’s article also mentions a survey showing that “almost 30% of Americans believe that this virus came from a lab.” which means stories like these can create a lot of impact and is potentially responsible for her paper going viral. The video from Loose Women says Dr. Yan also “was allegedly forced to flee to the U.S for her own safety” and speaks out in an interview from a secret location. While reviewing her work, Dr. Gallo asked the question, “Is it because it is election time?” in regards to her timing of the research publication. She worries about the threats to her and her family but still published her research around the time of the election. It begs the question of why one would expose themself with their controversial ideas, but then not post the evidence for people to believe it. Both Lauring and Gallo suspect this was politically motivated, and Dr. Lauring mentions that Yan states in her paper that the other evidence from scientists on the origins of coronavirus are “not worthy of consideration” without explaining herself. Dr. Lauring also believes this is an “opinion piece” because “the authors tie various threads together into a story.” The lack of proof in Yan’s claims make scientists skeptical of her work and believe it is “disprovable” says Dr. Lauring. One would need factual evidence to support a claim, especially a scientific one. 

Conclusion

Covid-19 was not engineered in a lab by the Chinese Government because although it’s difficult to know the government’s honest intentions, science can investigate where this deadly virus came from. It’s also smart to check the background of the person claiming Covid’s origin, since sometimes they aren’t equipped to have all the answers. Research by other scientists have shown that this is nothing more than a conspiracy with the lack of evidence, politically biased targeting of the government, and discreditable science. Covid-19 came from natural selection by evolving from other viruses as mother nature does. It’s important to critically evaluate what you watch on the media because it can stir more drama than there really is. All of the confusion has led to a lot of hate targeted on Asian Americans as a result of these conspiracies. It is important to critically analyze sensitive information because it truly makes a difference in society.

Featured image taken from selected video