Pandemic Illusions
Pandemic Illusions
"On reading," by Simon Wain-Hobson, is a weekly discussion of scientific papers and news articles around gain of function research in virology.
Since January 2024, Dr. Wain-Hobson has written weekly essays for Biosafety Now discussing risky research in virology. You can read his entire series here.
And now for something completely different. When things are complex, interconnected systems can behave in unpredictable ways. Second-order effects abound, as does randomness that undermines the very notion of control. This can be hard for many to accept. Most scientists would accept the first two sentences, but the third?
Research shows that leaders know only a small percentage of the solutions (less than 20 percent), and in general they know that they do not know. In the old days, they turned to God; today they turn to McKinsey. However, they cannot say they do not know as they are expected to know. Meanwhile, those below often know that leaders do not know, but they still expect them to know. So the circle is complete: leaders do not know, they know that they do not know, but they feel they cannot say that they do not know as they are expected to know by a whole load of people who know they do not know anyway! This is a common charade that feeds the illusion of control.
This provoked a flashback to Donald Rumsfeld’s 2002 unknown unknowns speech that attracted much comment and generated a critique of GOF virology. Twelve years of the DURC (ex-GOF) controversy has seen some of the virologists change somewhat their positions although the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) hasn’t reconsidered. The new USG policy is proof (New USG DURC policy).
The issue is not just an issue of leadership. Followers also suffer from the same illusion. We crave for someone to be in charge, to be in control in today’s messy, complex world. Robert Michels’s Iron Law of Oligarchy plays a part, in that within a hierarchical system, followers will defer to leaders who take increasing control. It is a deep emotional need, exploited by some. Oblensky doesn’t pull punches. On reading would proffer that those below are only too happy to have someone above taking the hits. Anyway, the NIH is so influential, nobody wants to be on the other side so researchers go along with pax-NIH even though the DURC research that ignited the controversy in 2012 could never deliver anything tangible. Another illusion.
Brenda Zimmerman was the first to contextualize complexity . . .she described three contexts: the simple, the complicated, and the complex. The example she gives of the simple is cooking a meal following a recipe; the complicated is sending someone to the moon; and the complex is raising a child.
As we progress from the simple via the complicated to the complex, control by leaders can become more and more of an illusion. Indeed, leaders trying to control in a complex fast-changing domain not only follow an illusion but often get in the way. Amen, especially as decision makers in science are not always specialists in the field.
Since the publication of the research into these principles, leaders from across the world have assessed their teams and organizations. The findings are surprising... …The overall average score of enablement is 47 percent - in other words, much leadership in organizations is more disabling than enabling. Most of this is due to overcontrol: 87 percent do not let go enough, of whom 21 percent find it hard to let go at all, with some 29 percent micromanaging.
Science is bottom up and for it to be creative and productive, science administrators mustn’t interfere. Making decisions before the field had even had time to discuss the Fouchier and Kawaoka experiments was an error that has fractured virology (Chilled virology).
Predicting viral pandemics is complex with many possible viruses, variables and unknowns. Our track record is zero apart from saying we’ll have another influenza virus pandemic in the next 10-20 years - common knowledge. The Illusion of Control is well worth reading as are many of the references. The final excerpt is attention grabbing: The importance of stopping the urge to control and letting people get on with things was observed by Peter Drucker half a century ago regarding knowledge workers, and more recently reflected by Steve Jobs: “It doesn’t make sense to hire smart people and then tell them what to do. We hire smart people so they can tell us what to do.”
That’d be a great place to stop but no, deductions need to be verbalized. While full of generalizations, The Illusions of Control shows that those at the top making decisions don’t know that much. And in the case of DURC (ex-GOF) flu virology nobody has made an articulate defense in that has resisted criticism in over a decade. We learn that those at the top cannot admit errors for fear of appearing incompetent. Those among the lower echelons may know more but are happy for people above to take the flack. We’ve already seen that it is unsafe for those at the lab bench to speak out (Sounds of silence). Whistle blowers and independent minds are often sidelined, if not shafted.
And all this is going on in science and academia where we have some of the best trained minds in society. We’re brimming with PhDs and MDs. Sadly, scientists no longer believe in exemplarity or transmission, it all about getting grants and publishing in high impact journals. Nothing else counts. Accordingly, nobody will offend the powers that be. This allows those at the top to continue not knowing.
In a forthcoming essay, we will address the first report from the independent UK inquiry into COVID – a 240 page affair. Two excerpts from this hard-hitting document tie in well with the Illusion of Control.
• In 2019, it was widely believed, in the UK and abroad, that the UK was not only properly prepared but was one of the best-prepared countries in the world to respond to a pandemic. This Report concludes that, in reality, the UK was ill prepared for dealing with a catastrophic emergency, let alone the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic that actually struck.
• Across the UK, systems had grown to be overly bureaucratic. Instead of focusing on skills, technology and infrastructure, they were focused on creating groups, sub-groups and documents.
We’re up against a heady mix of complex problems, hubris, the unwillingness to discuss, to share even a little bit of knowledge with the public, failure to embrace competence, the danger of appearing incompetent combined with deep emotional needs of others. And this in contexts where millions of lives are at stake.
Now scroll back to Steve Jobs.
Another brilliant article. Gift “with the pen” being a too full of analogy of what follows.
From a non- scientist point of view, it’s easiest to see, there is a flaw and a bias in this beautifully passionately argument. The flaw is that the perfectly balanced virology oversight system can be constructed and maintained forever - I.e. Apple will forever be Apple - and the bias is that virology itself - biolabs - are an absolute necessity. We’ve arrived, we’ve reached a point in scientific understanding where a biolab is now and permanently one of the elements in a tool of existential evil, and is the only point where that existential evil stands a chance of being thwarted and permanently so. The knowledge and pathogens must be destroyed to the extent they can be, the overseers peopled by those of integrity to the extent they can be, but it is the labs themselves that must go. Absolutely. It is an inescapable logic, and of all people, decent people, this must be the most difficult of all, dark realities to accept. But you of all, Mr. Wain-Hobson, sir, are one of the ones of the mindset, goodness and authority that can and must rise to be a leader in this existential, abolitionist cause. Sooner the better. Recruit others like yourself.