6 ms·

[But a leading scientist told Sir Jeremy that “further debate would do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular”. Dr Collins, t

[But a leading scientist told Sir Jeremy that “further debate would do unnecessary harm to science in general and science in China in particular”. Dr Collins, the former director of the US National Institutes of Health, warned it could damage “international harmony”.] The entire foundation of science is based upon empirical observation and asking hypothetical questions. It is discouraging that scientists can make statements like this and get away with it.

ceejayoz 5y ago
Scientists do not have the luxury of pretending politics and bad actors don’t exist.
- Jimmc414 5y ago
  Politics and bad actors have always existed. Scientists should counter them with facts and honesty not censorship.
  - xqcgrek2 5y ago
    That's not how the world or mathematics (game theory) works
    - Jimmc414 5y ago
      Can you think of a scenario where science has ever benefited from censorship? Correct me if I am wrong, but respectfully that is the argument you are making, right?
      - sooheon 5y ago
        Not that science benefits from censorship, but that game theory sometimes necessitates it. Imagine a scientist with significant political cachet. This allows them to receive more funding, do more science. They cannot optimize their behavior only for truth-seeking, because that fails to maximize their political capital. If they optimize for the former, they will be replaced by someone who is better at the latter. Any scientist that relies on external funding must balance science with politics to continue to do science, sometimes this involves censorship.
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    > Scientists should counter them with facts and honesty not censorship. Scientists must be careful in how they communicate, and organizations like the CDC and FDA need to staff expert scientific communicators who can explain complicated things to lay people. Bill Nye types. "Vaccines contain dihydrogen monoxide, a chemical that killed over 200,000 people within hours in 2004" is a scientifically factual statement, but not a well communicated one.
- johncena33 5y ago
  The reality is not so rosy. Many virologists know that if lab leak is true their careers will be over. So I am very skeptical of how much obfuscations and disinformation spread by virologists is for the good of humanity and how much of it is just to protect their self interest.
xqcgrek2 5y ago
This is how science works in the post-WW2 era. Most prominent scientists (in any field) seldom do science when they attain their stature -- they manage people (students and postdocs), and many become politicians for their institution or lab to attain more funding.
- Jimmc414 5y ago
  I'm curious, what effect do you see WW2 having on science itself? That is not intended to be argumentative, I'd like to hear your opinion.
  - nradov 5y ago
    By that point most of the low-hanging scientific "fruit" had already been picked. Due to increasing complexity and the high workload of running experiments, solo scientists could no longer make much progress. So they had to act as administrators and project managers, leading larger teams of assistants and graduate students.
  - xqcgrek2 5y ago
    Government funding of science and a proposal/grant system. Senior people spend a lot of time writing proposals, and need underlings to do the leg work. They also have to be politically savvy so their peers don't reject their proposals.
    - btrettel 5y ago
      To expand on this, before World War II, there was far less federal funding for science, and I don't think university faculty had the need to bring in external funding that they do now. I don't know the history of requirements that faculty bring in funding, however. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK45556/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK45556/
dane-pgp 5y ago
> warned it could damage “international harmony”. I've never understood the argument that people would want to suppress the (accidental) lab-leak hypothesis out of a desire to protect the image of China. If the lab-leak hypothesis is incorrect, that doesn't change the fact that the virus originated in that country, it just means that the virus emerged from a wet market. I'm not Chinese, but I'd imagine that a country's image is more harmed by accusations of having backwards cultural and food habits (and insufficient government regulation of dangerous markets) rather than potentially just one lone scientist making a mistake while working on advanced genetic research, which is a risk at any such lab in the world.
- boomboomsubban 5y ago
  >I'm not Chinese, but I'd imagine that a country's image is more harmed by accusations of having backwards cultural and food habits (and insufficient government regulation of dangerous markets) Yeah, there could never be a virus transmitted between Westerners and their food. Some kind of "swine flu" is a ridiculous notion.
- Jimmc414 5y ago
  I agree. Should Galileo have suppressed his observations to protect the Catholic Church? If he had, would it have been in the name of science or something else?
  - analog31 5y ago
    An amusing factoid is that the Vatican astronomers bought one or more telescopes from Galileo and confirmed his observational data.
- theplumber 5y ago
  >> I'm not Chinese, but I'd imagine that a country's image is more harmed by accusations of having backwards cultural and food habits You forget the politics. CCP can never be wrong or do wrong. That would risk their rule. I'm pretty sure they would rather see the country burning than admitting guilt and incompetence. You can see that kind of selfish behaviour at most of the leaders(I would dare to say even in recent US history) but in an authoritan system this is made worse/more dramatic b/c there is no alternative(i.e opposition to replace leaders in a peaceful way)
wahern 5y ago
A charitable interpretation would read the statement as "further speculative debate". Indeed, several of the lab leak arguments mentioned in that very article were subsequently disproven months later, and their unqualified and categorical assertions were arguably no less unprofessional (indeed, perhaps more unprofessional) than other scientists simply exclaiming, "Ssshhhhhh". We can't know the precise motivations behind those who suggested Sir Jermey pipe down, but indeed that's the problem with such speculative discourse. When speaking with a public voice--which can arguably include private communications to political leadership--there's nothing per se untoward, IMHO, with demanding that professionals speak carefully. It's a fine line, but I don't see anything damning in these e-mail disclosures even though I'll readily admit that many people, including professionals (scientists, journalists, etc), prematurely dismissed the possibility of a Wuhan lab leak.
Mandatum 5y ago
Collins hasn't done anything except management and policy for the last 30 years. The closest he's gotten to science is writing books I'd put in the autobiography or philosophy section and tag it "theistic evolution".
- helloworld 5y ago
  At least as of 2011: "Collins remains actively involved in research, studying the molecular genetics of diseases including cancer and adult-onset diabetes. His group also is developing animal models of genetic disorders to test potential therapeutic approaches." [0] [0] Kresge N, Simoni RD, Hill RL. The Molecular Genetics of Cystic Fibrosis: The Work of Francis Collins. J Biol Chem. 2011 Aug 12;286(32):e8–9. doi: 10.1074/jbc.O111.000248. PMCID: PMC3151108
  - jeremyjh 5y ago
    Yes, that is the management part of his job. He runs a research group and probably has to spend much of his time looking for funding for that group while lightly supervising the actual science it is doing.
    - dash2 5y ago
      That’s what most senior scientists do. It doesn’t condone violating the norms of science, though.
johncena33 5y ago
> warned it could damage “international harmony”. "international harmony" is just a front for hiding self-interest. Many elites, including the said virologists and bureaucrats, have significant financial or other ties with China. That's why any discussion of China and pandemics is very quickly buried with bullying and force [1]. [1]: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FI3V-gdWQAkWyJS?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FI3V-gdWQAkWyJS?format=jpg&name=...
blockwriter 5y ago
This is the behavior of a priesthood.
grover35 5y ago
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  The CCP is already furthering oppression more than anyone else. They have absolutely decimated the indigenous way of Chinese life because they are anti culture and anti religion, except where it aligns with their party ideology. Harming their credibility actually helps the “actual” indigenous Chinese people and way of life.
- pault 5y ago
  I can’t tell if this is satire or not…
- slowmotiony 5y ago
  Oh give me a fucking break. Ever been to China? The country is ruled by Han supremacists and is openly racist to its own citizens who aren't Han. To defend the CCP using the argument of "Deep racism since the West existed" is just absurd party propaganda.
  - dang 5y ago
    Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar, regardless of how right you are or feel you are. It just leads to hell. Also really tedious and repetitive threads, and we want the opposite. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
ifkngluvscience 5y ago
"Science" is a big-money industry with motivated sponsors, government influence, and strict gatekeeping. When the quote says "further debate would do unnecessary harm to science," it's talking about this, the big S Science industry. The scientific method is a way to verify truths by testing hypotheses. The Science industry will kick you out if you uncover inconvenient truths or even test the wrong hypotheses.
awb 5y ago
> The entire foundation of science is based upon empirical observation and asking hypothetical questions True, but it’s possible to ask questions that sway public opinion. Look at all the “studies” tobacco companies paid for. Or the racist scientific theories that attempted to justify slavery. If you’re asking questions about a lab leak out of genuine scientific interest, that’s perfectly legitimate. But if you’re asking out of a desire to win political points, stir up tensions, etc., that’s destructive. There are plenty of actors on both sides, using the same tool of scientific inquiry for good and for ill.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  Your examples don't match the point you were making. The bent studies from tobacco companies were falsifying answers, not just asking questions, and the racist theories were operating on a hazy pseudoscientific level that can't even be called "falsification," but were also, by another means, giving false answers. There may have been a time in history when asking questions alone has been used maliciously, but it's neither of those.
  - awb 5y ago
    They’re the end result of asking biased questions then manipulating answers to fit those biased questions. My point is that if you ask biased questions it won’t be long until someone provides biased answers. You need to ask unbiased questions to get unbiased answers.
    - whatshisface 5y ago
      "Does tobacco smoking cause cancer," isn't a biased question... What's biased is answering it with a "no."
      - awb 5y ago
        Right but when asked by biased people, with biased intent, it solicits biased answers. It looks innocent on the surface but it’s anything but.
throwaway4good 5y ago
Check out Peter Daszak twitter profile for an example for the abuse you will get if you speak out against the lab leak hypothesis: https://twitter.com/PeterDaszak https://twitter.com/PeterDaszak Quite understandable if you would not want to participate in that.
- JudasGoat 5y ago
  Somewhat telling that you need a "throwaway" to point that out...
  - throwaway4good 5y ago
    JudasGoat was already taken ...
  - throwaway4good 5y ago
    But seriously. It is easy to be labelled "CCP-shill" or "useful idiot" if you question the lab leak theory. And what is even crazier is that the lab leak-proponents are convinced that they are being censored. Even though they are completely dominating here (and elsewhere) in the hn comments, commenting on a pro-lab leak theory article from a major UK newspaper.
    - mandmandam 5y ago
      Facebook, Twitter and Instagram deleted millions of posts for simply discussing the mere possibility of a lab leak. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/27/facebook-lifts-ban-on-posts-claiming-covid-19-was-man-made https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/27/facebook-... That's not conspiracy, that's fact; and it's weird no one called you out on it.

ceejayoz 5y ago

Scientists do not have the luxury of pretending politics and bad actors don’t exist.

Jimmc414 5y ago
Politics and bad actors have always existed. Scientists should counter them with facts and honesty not censorship.
- xqcgrek2 5y ago
  That's not how the world or mathematics (game theory) works
  - Jimmc414 5y ago
    Can you think of a scenario where science has ever benefited from censorship? Correct me if I am wrong, but respectfully that is the argument you are making, right?
    - sooheon 5y ago
      Not that science benefits from censorship, but that game theory sometimes necessitates it. Imagine a scientist with significant political cachet. This allows them to receive more funding, do more science. They cannot optimize their behavior only for truth-seeking, because that fails to maximize their political capital. If they optimize for the former, they will be replaced by someone who is better at the latter. Any scientist that relies on external funding must balance science with politics to continue to do science, sometimes this involves censorship.
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  > Scientists should counter them with facts and honesty not censorship. Scientists must be careful in how they communicate, and organizations like the CDC and FDA need to staff expert scientific communicators who can explain complicated things to lay people. Bill Nye types. "Vaccines contain dihydrogen monoxide, a chemical that killed over 200,000 people within hours in 2004" is a scientifically factual statement, but not a well communicated one.
johncena33 5y ago
The reality is not so rosy. Many virologists know that if lab leak is true their careers will be over. So I am very skeptical of how much obfuscations and disinformation spread by virologists is for the good of humanity and how much of it is just to protect their self interest.

xqcgrek2 5y ago

This is how science works in the post-WW2 era. Most prominent scientists (in any field) seldom do science when they attain their stature -- they manage people (students and postdocs), and many become politicians for their institution or lab to attain more funding.

Jimmc414 5y ago
I'm curious, what effect do you see WW2 having on science itself? That is not intended to be argumentative, I'd like to hear your opinion.
- nradov 5y ago
  By that point most of the low-hanging scientific "fruit" had already been picked. Due to increasing complexity and the high workload of running experiments, solo scientists could no longer make much progress. So they had to act as administrators and project managers, leading larger teams of assistants and graduate students.
- xqcgrek2 5y ago
  Government funding of science and a proposal/grant system. Senior people spend a lot of time writing proposals, and need underlings to do the leg work. They also have to be politically savvy so their peers don't reject their proposals.
  - btrettel 5y ago
    To expand on this, before World War II, there was far less federal funding for science, and I don't think university faculty had the need to bring in external funding that they do now. I don't know the history of requirements that faculty bring in funding, however. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK45556/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK45556/

dane-pgp 5y ago

> warned it could damage “international harmony”. I've never understood the argument that people would want to suppress the (accidental) lab-leak hypothesis out of a desire to protect the image of China. If the lab-leak hypothesis is incorrect, that doesn't change the fact that the virus originated in that country, it just means that the virus emerged from a wet market. I'm not Chinese, but I'd imagine that a country's image is more harmed by accusations of having backwards cultural and food habits (and insufficient government regulation of dangerous markets) rather than potentially just one lone scientist making a mistake while working on advanced genetic research, which is a risk at any such lab in the world.

boomboomsubban 5y ago
>I'm not Chinese, but I'd imagine that a country's image is more harmed by accusations of having backwards cultural and food habits (and insufficient government regulation of dangerous markets) Yeah, there could never be a virus transmitted between Westerners and their food. Some kind of "swine flu" is a ridiculous notion.
Jimmc414 5y ago
I agree. Should Galileo have suppressed his observations to protect the Catholic Church? If he had, would it have been in the name of science or something else?
- analog31 5y ago
  An amusing factoid is that the Vatican astronomers bought one or more telescopes from Galileo and confirmed his observational data.
theplumber 5y ago
>> I'm not Chinese, but I'd imagine that a country's image is more harmed by accusations of having backwards cultural and food habits You forget the politics. CCP can never be wrong or do wrong. That would risk their rule. I'm pretty sure they would rather see the country burning than admitting guilt and incompetence. You can see that kind of selfish behaviour at most of the leaders(I would dare to say even in recent US history) but in an authoritan system this is made worse/more dramatic b/c there is no alternative(i.e opposition to replace leaders in a peaceful way)

wahern 5y ago

A charitable interpretation would read the statement as "further speculative debate". Indeed, several of the lab leak arguments mentioned in that very article were subsequently disproven months later, and their unqualified and categorical assertions were arguably no less unprofessional (indeed, perhaps more unprofessional) than other scientists simply exclaiming, "Ssshhhhhh". We can't know the precise motivations behind those who suggested Sir Jermey pipe down, but indeed that's the problem with such speculative discourse. When speaking with a public voice--which can arguably include private communications to political leadership--there's nothing per se untoward, IMHO, with demanding that professionals speak carefully. It's a fine line, but I don't see anything damning in these e-mail disclosures even though I'll readily admit that many people, including professionals (scientists, journalists, etc), prematurely dismissed the possibility of a Wuhan lab leak.

Mandatum 5y ago

Collins hasn't done anything except management and policy for the last 30 years. The closest he's gotten to science is writing books I'd put in the autobiography or philosophy section and tag it "theistic evolution".

helloworld 5y ago
At least as of 2011: "Collins remains actively involved in research, studying the molecular genetics of diseases including cancer and adult-onset diabetes. His group also is developing animal models of genetic disorders to test potential therapeutic approaches." [0] [0] Kresge N, Simoni RD, Hill RL. The Molecular Genetics of Cystic Fibrosis: The Work of Francis Collins. J Biol Chem. 2011 Aug 12;286(32):e8–9. doi: 10.1074/jbc.O111.000248. PMCID: PMC3151108
- jeremyjh 5y ago
  Yes, that is the management part of his job. He runs a research group and probably has to spend much of his time looking for funding for that group while lightly supervising the actual science it is doing.
  - dash2 5y ago
    That’s what most senior scientists do. It doesn’t condone violating the norms of science, though.

johncena33 5y ago

> warned it could damage “international harmony”. "international harmony" is just a front for hiding self-interest. Many elites, including the said virologists and bureaucrats, have significant financial or other ties with China. That's why any discussion of China and pandemics is very quickly buried with bullying and force [1]. [1]: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FI3V-gdWQAkWyJS?format=jpg&name=4096x4096 https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FI3V-gdWQAkWyJS?format=jpg&name=...

blockwriter 5y ago

This is the behavior of a priesthood.

grover35 5y ago

throwawaysea 5y ago
The CCP is already furthering oppression more than anyone else. They have absolutely decimated the indigenous way of Chinese life because they are anti culture and anti religion, except where it aligns with their party ideology. Harming their credibility actually helps the “actual” indigenous Chinese people and way of life.
pault 5y ago
I can’t tell if this is satire or not…
slowmotiony 5y ago
Oh give me a fucking break. Ever been to China? The country is ruled by Han supremacists and is openly racist to its own citizens who aren't Han. To defend the CCP using the argument of "Deep racism since the West existed" is just absurd party propaganda.
- dang 5y ago
  Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar, regardless of how right you are or feel you are. It just leads to hell. Also really tedious and repetitive threads, and we want the opposite. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

ifkngluvscience 5y ago

"Science" is a big-money industry with motivated sponsors, government influence, and strict gatekeeping. When the quote says "further debate would do unnecessary harm to science," it's talking about this, the big S Science industry. The scientific method is a way to verify truths by testing hypotheses. The Science industry will kick you out if you uncover inconvenient truths or even test the wrong hypotheses.

awb 5y ago

> The entire foundation of science is based upon empirical observation and asking hypothetical questions True, but it’s possible to ask questions that sway public opinion. Look at all the “studies” tobacco companies paid for. Or the racist scientific theories that attempted to justify slavery. If you’re asking questions about a lab leak out of genuine scientific interest, that’s perfectly legitimate. But if you’re asking out of a desire to win political points, stir up tensions, etc., that’s destructive. There are plenty of actors on both sides, using the same tool of scientific inquiry for good and for ill.

whatshisface 5y ago
Your examples don't match the point you were making. The bent studies from tobacco companies were falsifying answers, not just asking questions, and the racist theories were operating on a hazy pseudoscientific level that can't even be called "falsification," but were also, by another means, giving false answers. There may have been a time in history when asking questions alone has been used maliciously, but it's neither of those.
- awb 5y ago
  They’re the end result of asking biased questions then manipulating answers to fit those biased questions. My point is that if you ask biased questions it won’t be long until someone provides biased answers. You need to ask unbiased questions to get unbiased answers.
  - whatshisface 5y ago
    "Does tobacco smoking cause cancer," isn't a biased question... What's biased is answering it with a "no."
    - awb 5y ago
      Right but when asked by biased people, with biased intent, it solicits biased answers. It looks innocent on the surface but it’s anything but.

throwaway4good 5y ago

Check out Peter Daszak twitter profile for an example for the abuse you will get if you speak out against the lab leak hypothesis: https://twitter.com/PeterDaszak https://twitter.com/PeterDaszak Quite understandable if you would not want to participate in that.

JudasGoat 5y ago
Somewhat telling that you need a "throwaway" to point that out...
- throwaway4good 5y ago
  JudasGoat was already taken ...
- throwaway4good 5y ago
  But seriously. It is easy to be labelled "CCP-shill" or "useful idiot" if you question the lab leak theory. And what is even crazier is that the lab leak-proponents are convinced that they are being censored. Even though they are completely dominating here (and elsewhere) in the hn comments, commenting on a pro-lab leak theory article from a major UK newspaper.
  - mandmandam 5y ago
    Facebook, Twitter and Instagram deleted millions of posts for simply discussing the mere possibility of a lab leak. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/27/facebook-lifts-ban-on-posts-claiming-covid-19-was-man-made https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/may/27/facebook-... That's not conspiracy, that's fact; and it's weird no one called you out on it.