The Trump administration has unveiled a new website that champions the controversial lab leak theory regarding the origins of COVID-19, replacing official government sites such as covid.gov and covidtests.gov. The site features a bold, full-color picture of the ex-President. It unflinchingly proclaims “Lab Leak” and lambasts the Biden administration for its pandemic response. This major move on Biden’s part is an overlapping step to change the narrative of COVID-19 origins and cure seekers.
The website focuses on five main points that have been used to bolster the lab leak theory. The site claims that the evidence proves this theory to be true. It argues that this explanation is the most plausible alternative to the prevailing theory that the virus originally emerged from a wildlife market. The House investigation into the origins of the virus previously concluded that a lab leak is the most likely scenario.
The website’s opening salvo takes aim directly at some of the public health measures. It particularly focuses on mask requirements, lockdowns, and social distancing measures put in place during the COVID-19 pandemic. The site further claims the federal government is demonizing alternative treatments and silencing narratives that go against the government’s narrative.
“Public health officials often mislead the American people through conflicting messaging, knee-jerk reactions, and a lack of transparency.” – White House site
This assertion echoes claims made by Kaelan Dorr, a White House spokesperson during the Trump administration, who stated that their administration aimed to be “the most transparent administration in U.S. history.”
Experts immediately disputed the credibility of many of the claims featured on the new website. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan in Canada, discusses what’s wrong with the lab leak hypothesis. She has doggedly maintained that the five pieces of evidence in favor of it are not unique and inaccurate. She characterized the website’s content as “factually incorrect, embellished, or presented in a misleading way.”
“Every one of the five pieces of evidence supporting the lab leak hypothesis … is factually incorrect, embellished, or presented in a misleading way.” – Angela Rasmussen
Michael Worobey, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Arizona, one of the theories most vocal critics, took particular umbrage at that notion. His conclusion was that the evidence does not support any of the numerous suggested lab leak theories. Rather, he argued that the far more likely scenario is that the virus jumped from animals to humans in a Wuhan wet market.
“That evidence does not support ‘any of the many, often contradictory, lab leak scenarios that have been proposed.’” – Michael Worobey
Jamie Metzl, who has been a leading advocate for investigations into the origins of COVID-19 since early 2020. Despite the attacks on his motives, he continues to support initiatives to look at different theories. He was glad to see new initiatives to deepen understanding but warned of distractions from life-saving, existing public health initiatives.
“As someone who has pushed for a full accounting for COVID-19 origins since early 2020, I welcome all efforts to dig deeper.” – Jamie Metzl
“But it would be a terrible shame if such efforts distracted from essential work to help prevent further infections and treat people suffering from COVID-19 and long COVID.” – Jamie Metzl
Requiring the replacement of these established federal websites with this new platform has public health experts scratching their heads. Critics say that this legislation will further damage public trust in health recommendations and scientific inquiry. The original sites provided important, local information about COVID-19 vaccines, treatments, and testing. Millions of Americans turned to these essential lifelines during the pandemic.
Rasmussen stressed the need to learn how current risky practices in labs are contributing towards future pandemics. She emphasized that studying these threats is essential for U.S. and international security.
“It is a matter of national, and global, security to understand how risky such practices remain.” – Angela Rasmussen
