Scan barcode
rick2's review against another edition
3.0
Very interesting book. This book definitely challenged and changed some of my beliefs about the origins of Covid, whereas I went into this book mostly thinking spillover event, now I would say I’m a lot less certain in that and at the same time totally clueless about what the actual origins would be. Granted I went into reading this thinking that the “lab leak” hypothesis was mostly ranting Twitter conspiracy. So big marks for presenting the information as credible.
The book is a bit dense with genetic sequences and various spices and things that quite frankly went over my head. I mostly followed along and Ridley does a good job of explaining it, I just have no real literacy for the topic.
I do think that the book meanders at times, refusing to say anything definitive for a variety of reasons, political, scientific uncertainty, professional, reputational. This at times undermines the authors points from saying much of anything at all. It’s just a bit too nudge and a wink for me. There were parts, especially the last few chapters that get political, that seemed like a hedge. Don’t tell Michael Lewis, because he will write a middling book about it, but the narritave seemed to creep into “little guy on Twitter takes on CDC coverup” territory.
I think the take away for me is probably very similar to the US intelligence committees that, in a report from August 27, 2021, collaborated about the origins of Covid. Eight agencies participated. Four of them concluded with low certainty that COVID-19 was likely some sort of spillover event. Three had no idea and were not willing to directly speak to anyone or anything. And one agency believed a non-foul play lab leak was moderate probability. And until more information comes to light, that sort of uncertainty seems to be the most reasonable take.
The book is a bit dense with genetic sequences and various spices and things that quite frankly went over my head. I mostly followed along and Ridley does a good job of explaining it, I just have no real literacy for the topic.
I do think that the book meanders at times, refusing to say anything definitive for a variety of reasons, political, scientific uncertainty, professional, reputational. This at times undermines the authors points from saying much of anything at all. It’s just a bit too nudge and a wink for me. There were parts, especially the last few chapters that get political, that seemed like a hedge. Don’t tell Michael Lewis, because he will write a middling book about it, but the narritave seemed to creep into “little guy on Twitter takes on CDC coverup” territory.
I think the take away for me is probably very similar to the US intelligence committees that, in a report from August 27, 2021, collaborated about the origins of Covid. Eight agencies participated. Four of them concluded with low certainty that COVID-19 was likely some sort of spillover event. Three had no idea and were not willing to directly speak to anyone or anything. And one agency believed a non-foul play lab leak was moderate probability. And until more information comes to light, that sort of uncertainty seems to be the most reasonable take.
alj24's review
informative
slow-paced
3.0
Lots of science-y stuff that went over my head, but I feel like I know more now.
mark_lm's review against another edition
5.0
An excellent in-depth, step-by-step discussion of all of the data (that they found) with two penultimate chapters written as if an attorney were presenting a case for either choice - wayward bat vs lab leak.
mikiher's review against another edition
4.0
This is a well written description of the search for the origins of Covid-19. In the end, the authors are leaning towards the lab origin hypothesis, although they are very careful in stating that there's not enough evidence either way. It's fascinating to read how this topic, which has very serious implication on world health and how we prevent and deal with future pandemics, has instantly (from the very beginning of the pandemic) become politicized, and how this made finding the true answer (with certainty) almost impossible.
It's also a (yet another) very interesting example in which non-professional "sleuths", as Ridley calls them, helped make what was initially almost a conspiracy theory into mainstream one, by just pouring over data and making sense of it.
It's also a (yet another) very interesting example in which non-professional "sleuths", as Ridley calls them, helped make what was initially almost a conspiracy theory into mainstream one, by just pouring over data and making sense of it.
queenvalaska's review against another edition
dark
emotional
informative
mysterious
reflective
medium-paced
4.0
skigirl1689's review against another edition
4.0
Not an easy read via audiobook, so I'd recommend against that format due to how scientific and dense this book is. But it is extremely well researched and doesn't (strongly) favor one conclusion over the other, but it raises the relevant questions to allow the reader to consider what the reader thinks of the evidence the authors presented.
myjourneywithbooks's review against another edition
5.0
In the beginning we were told it originated in a meat market in Wuhan. But soon conspiracy theories emerged about lab leaks and engineered viruses. Or were they conspiracy theories? The question still remains, where did the virus known as SARS-CoV-2 come from?
Written by genetic engineering expert Dr. Alina Chan and renowned science writer Matt Ridley, Viral explores the possible origins of the virus that has wreaked havoc the world over. Highly methodical and well researched, the book will take you from bat-infested caves to food markets to advanced laboratories in an attempt to provide a detailed background to the hypotheses examined within its pages.
Honestly, all I knew before reading this book was that the virus had somehow jumped from bats to other wild animals and then humans, the first transmission suspected to have taken place in a market in Wuhan. I had more recently been hearing suggestions of lab leaks and the words gain of function. But that was about it. If that's the extent of your knowledge as well (or even if not), reading Viral is sure to be an eye-opener.
Going as far back as 2012, the authors outline the relationship between bats, viruses and scientists. Each chapter goes into great detail in an efforto teach the reader something new, whether it's the comparison between SARS and SARS-CoV-2 or the way viruses have been modified in labs or the varied responses of different scientists from around the world.
While everything is sufficiently explained and defined even for the layman to understand, I feel it would help appreciate the book better if you went into it with some basic knowledge of viruses and genetic engineering. Even with that I felt a little lost in a few places but the authors repeat their explanations without appearing repetitive that by the time you finish the book, the facts will all be clear in your mind.
The point of the book is not to claim without a doubt that the virus originated from a lab leak but to raise awareness on the importance of treating and investing both the natural spillover and the lab leak hypotheses equally. And it succeeds in doing that in a very gripping style.
Written by genetic engineering expert Dr. Alina Chan and renowned science writer Matt Ridley, Viral explores the possible origins of the virus that has wreaked havoc the world over. Highly methodical and well researched, the book will take you from bat-infested caves to food markets to advanced laboratories in an attempt to provide a detailed background to the hypotheses examined within its pages.
Honestly, all I knew before reading this book was that the virus had somehow jumped from bats to other wild animals and then humans, the first transmission suspected to have taken place in a market in Wuhan. I had more recently been hearing suggestions of lab leaks and the words gain of function. But that was about it. If that's the extent of your knowledge as well (or even if not), reading Viral is sure to be an eye-opener.
Going as far back as 2012, the authors outline the relationship between bats, viruses and scientists. Each chapter goes into great detail in an efforto teach the reader something new, whether it's the comparison between SARS and SARS-CoV-2 or the way viruses have been modified in labs or the varied responses of different scientists from around the world.
While everything is sufficiently explained and defined even for the layman to understand, I feel it would help appreciate the book better if you went into it with some basic knowledge of viruses and genetic engineering. Even with that I felt a little lost in a few places but the authors repeat their explanations without appearing repetitive that by the time you finish the book, the facts will all be clear in your mind.
The point of the book is not to claim without a doubt that the virus originated from a lab leak but to raise awareness on the importance of treating and investing both the natural spillover and the lab leak hypotheses equally. And it succeeds in doing that in a very gripping style.
nunom's review against another edition
5.0
For anyone that has some interest in the COVID pandemic, this is definitely a book that should not be skipped.
The authors take a chronological approach to the hypotheses regarding the origin of the current pandemic. The initial, default hypothesis is that sars cov 2 originated from a natural spillover from an animal - likely a bat - either directly or via an intermediary. Meanwhile, new information regarding the initial stages of the pandemic emerged that suggested that a lab leak could equally be at play. This hypothesis now, according to the authors, is not simply just as likely as the natur spillover hypothesis, but it actually has more evidence in its favour.
The authors lay their reasoning in a detailed, and yet not overwhelming manner. They do so without recourse to sensationalism, and their research is extensively quoted.
The different hypotheses that involve a lab leak are well explained, including a potential (and most likely) lab accident with bat samples that had been collected in a different part of South Asia.
Although it is as of now impossible to determine for sure what was the origin of the virus, this book is particularly important as it highlights how badly prepared health institutions, the media and, indeed, the scientists are at tackling a possible problem due to a lab accident. With biotechnology taking centre stage in the world and with so few enforced regulations regarding the handling of dangerous pathogens in laboratories, this book is a wake up call for what not to do in the event of a lab accident. From the immediate dismissal of valid hypotheses by the scientific community at large, to the spread of bad science by the WHO (which has the duty of acting as a defender of good scientific practices), this book reminds us of what needs to be done if we are to produce important scientific knowledge without causing more harm than potential good.
The goal of the book is not to shame China or any other country in the event of a lab accident. Instead, it shows how transparency and dispassionately following the scientific method could have provided us with more answers in a timely manner, instead of muddying the waters, hindering scientific investigations and causing international strained relations at a time when cooperation is most needed.
The authors take a chronological approach to the hypotheses regarding the origin of the current pandemic. The initial, default hypothesis is that sars cov 2 originated from a natural spillover from an animal - likely a bat - either directly or via an intermediary. Meanwhile, new information regarding the initial stages of the pandemic emerged that suggested that a lab leak could equally be at play. This hypothesis now, according to the authors, is not simply just as likely as the natur spillover hypothesis, but it actually has more evidence in its favour.
The authors lay their reasoning in a detailed, and yet not overwhelming manner. They do so without recourse to sensationalism, and their research is extensively quoted.
The different hypotheses that involve a lab leak are well explained, including a potential (and most likely) lab accident with bat samples that had been collected in a different part of South Asia.
Although it is as of now impossible to determine for sure what was the origin of the virus, this book is particularly important as it highlights how badly prepared health institutions, the media and, indeed, the scientists are at tackling a possible problem due to a lab accident. With biotechnology taking centre stage in the world and with so few enforced regulations regarding the handling of dangerous pathogens in laboratories, this book is a wake up call for what not to do in the event of a lab accident. From the immediate dismissal of valid hypotheses by the scientific community at large, to the spread of bad science by the WHO (which has the duty of acting as a defender of good scientific practices), this book reminds us of what needs to be done if we are to produce important scientific knowledge without causing more harm than potential good.
The goal of the book is not to shame China or any other country in the event of a lab accident. Instead, it shows how transparency and dispassionately following the scientific method could have provided us with more answers in a timely manner, instead of muddying the waters, hindering scientific investigations and causing international strained relations at a time when cooperation is most needed.