DT团队出品

《P4实验室系列》第三季外传篇

美国国家地理杂志刊文攻击闫丽梦博士报告说明什么

**** ****
序号 分类 内容
B21 The report also asserts that SARS-CoV-2 is “suspiciously” similar to two strains of bat coronaviruses, called ZC45 and ZXC21, that were discovered by scientists at military labs in China. The authors claim these strains could have been used as a template to clone a deadlier virus. But other scientists balk at this idea. 报告还声称，SARS-CoV-2“可疑”，类似于两种蝙蝠冠状病毒，称为ZC45和ZXC21，这是由中国军方实验室的科学家发现的。 作者声称这些菌株可能被用作克隆作为致命病毒的模板。 但其他科学家对这个想法不置可否。
B22-C2 It looks legitimate because they use a lot of technical jargon. But in reality, a lot of what they're saying doesn't really make any sense.ANGELA RASMUSSEN, COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 又一位著名科学家证明报告的荒谬：“看起来合理，使用了很多技术术语，但是在现实中，很多话没有意义（没有必要相信）”
B23 First, the two strains differ by as much as 3,500 nucleotide base pairs, the chemical “letters” used in genetic code. As such, they would be a poor starting point for bioengineering SARS-CoV-2. Engineering a virus in which you had to replace more than 10 percent of its genome is inefficient, if not impossible, according to Rasmussen and several other virologists. The fact that these strains were identified at a Chinese military lab is also “just circumstantial,” says Robertson. The bat coronaviruses were circulating in wild bats and could have been discovered by anyone.
B24 The report also argues that SARS-CoV-2 has “restriction-enzyme sites,” or genetic sequences that can be cut and manipulated by enzymes. These genomic features are sometimes used in cloning, and the report claims their presence is indicative of an engineered virus. But scientists point out these sites naturally occur in all types of genomes, from bacteria to humans.
B25 “It looks legitimate because they use a lot of technical jargon. But in reality, a lot of what they're saying doesn't really make any sense,” says Rasmussen. She adds that the type of cloning that uses restriction enzymes is very outdated, and so it is unlikely to be used to make a viral bioweapon. And on a basic level, making an engineered virus is not a trivial matter. Scientists are still just trying to understand the molecular and genetic reasons why some viruses are more infectious than others. Adding features to a virus to make it more transmissible, for example, is called gain-of-function research. It is highly controversial for its potential to make bioweapons and was even banned in the U.S. for a time, limiting the data available on how it works.
B26-D3 So how was the Yan report published?那么闫报告是如何发表的呢？
B27 A hallmark of the pandemic has been a rapid influx of research and free sharing of information to increase the pace of discovery. This practice of posting “preprints”—reports that haven’t been reviewed by academic peers—has its advantages. 报告的发布采用的是预印本的方式， 这种张贴“预印本”的做法有其优点，这些报告没有得到学术同行的审查。
B28 “For the scientific community [it] has been very useful,” says Robertson, since more researchers can quickly analyze the available data. But preprints have a dark side too. Misinformation has been another hallmark of the pandemic, and preprints have played a role in fueling news coverage of unproven claims, including the virus mutating into a more deadly form, coming from snakes, or being less deadly than it truly is. “对科学界来说（它）非常有用，”罗伯逊说，因为更多的研究人员可以快速分析现有的数据。 但是预印也有阴暗面。 错误信息一直是这一流行病的另一个标志，预印本在推动新闻报道未经证实的说法方面发挥了作用，包括病毒变异成更致命的形式，来自蛇，或比它真正的致命程度低。
B29 “It can be very hard to disentangle when that's real news and when it's not news,” he says, citing the fact that even some peer-reviewed papers on coronavirus have made errors in the rush to publish. This mixture of honest mistakes and insidious ones may just be indicative of a larger trend with publishing during a rapidly evolving crisis. 他说：“当真正的新闻和非新闻在一起时，很难理清头绪。”他指出，即使是一些经过同行评审的关于冠状病毒的论文也在急于发表时出现了错误。 这种诚实的错误和阴险的错误的混合可能只是表明在迅速演变的危机中出版的更大趋势。
B30 “I don’t think the preprint system is being weaponized so much as all channels of information are being used to disseminate misinformation: everything from social media to manipulating the mainstream media to preprints to peer-reviewed journals,” says Rasmussen. 拉斯穆森说：“我不认为预印系统被武器化了，因为所有的信息渠道都被用来传播错误信息：从社交媒体到操纵主流媒体到预印到同行评审的期刊。
B31-D4 Bad news travels fast 坏消息传得很快
B35 Despite the objections of experts, the Yan report and other similar instances of coronavirus misformation, such as the Plandemic documentary, have gained traction on social media because they take advantage of vulnerable human emotions. Those feelings can drive the viral spread of hoaxes. 使用媒体传播的例子证明
B36 Back in 2018, Aral and his team at the MIT Media Lab put their novelty hypothesis to the test by analyzing 11 years of data from Twitter, or about 4.5 million tweets. Their calculations showed a surprising correlation: “What we found was that false news traveled farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth in every category of information that we studied, sometimes by an order of magnitude,” Aral explains. 早在2018年，Aral和他在麻省理工学院媒体实验室的团队通过分析来自Twitter的11年数据，或大约450万条推文，将他们的新颖性假设进行了检验。 他们的计算显示出惊人的相关性：“我们发现，虚假新闻比我们研究的每一类信息中的真相传播得更远、更快、更深、更广，有时甚至是一个数量级，”Aral解释道。
B37 More is at play than just novelty, as Aral discusses in his new book The Hype Machine. The way people react to emotional stories on social media is intense and predictable. Vitriol fills the replies, and false news then becomes 70 percent more likely to be retweeted than the truth. 更多的是在发酵效应，而不仅仅是新奇，正如阿拉尔在他的新书“炒作机器”中所讨论的。 人们对社交媒体上的情感故事的反应是强烈和可预测的。 Vitriol填满了回复，然后虚假新闻比真相更有可能被转发高达百分之70。
B39 A complicated combination of psychological factors is at work whenever a reader decides to share news, and otherwise smart people can become part of the cycle of disinformation. 当读者决定分享新闻时，心理因素的复杂组合就在起作用，并且聪明的人就会成为虚假信息循环的一部分。
B40 One factor is knowledge neglect: “when people fail to retrieve and apply previously stored knowledge appropriately into a current situation,” according to Lisa Fazio, an assistant professor of psychology and human development at Vanderbilt University. 一个因素是知识忽视：根据范德比尔特大学心理学和人类发展助理教授丽莎·法齐奥(Lisa Fazio)的说法，“当人们无法适当地检索和应用先前存储的知识时。
The human brain seeks out easy options. Readers cut corners, often sharing stories with grabby headlines before looking deeper into the story itself. Even when social media users do read what they share, their rational mind finds other ways to slack off. 人脑寻找容易的选择。 读者可以偷工减料，在深入了解故事本身之前，通常会先与抢标题分享故事。 即使社交媒体用户确实阅读了他们分享的内容，他们的理性思维也会找到其他方法来放松。
B41-C3 If you hear something twice, you're more likely to think that it's true than if you've only heard it once.LISA FAZIO, VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY如果你听到了两次，你更可能认为这是真的，而不是如果你只听过一次。丽莎·法齐奥，范德比尔特大学
B42 For instance, humans are prone to confirmation bias, a way of interpreting new information as a validation of one’s preconceived notions. Motivated reasoning switches on too, and the brain tries to force these new conceptual puzzle pieces together, making connections even when they don’t fit. 例如，人类容易产生确认偏见，这是一种将新信息解释为验证一个人的先入为主的方法。 有动力的推理也会打开，大脑试图把这些新的概念拼图拼在一起，即使它们不合适，也会建立联系。
B43 The most potent factor that warps critical thinking is the illusory truth effect, which Fazio defines with this scenario: “If you hear something twice, you're more likely to think that it's true than if you've only heard it once.” So prevalence turbocharges false news, and echo chambers then turn into self-perpetuating whirlwinds of misbelief. 扭曲批判性思维的最有力因素是虚幻的真理效应，法齐奥用这个场景定义了这个效应：“如果你听到两次，你更有可能认为它是真的，而不是你只听过一次。”因此，流行加剧了虚假新闻，回声室随后变成了自我延续的错误信念旋风。
B44 If the news involves politics, it gets yet another virality boost. “Political news travels faster than the rest of false news,” says Aral. “We can speculate that it’s such a lightning rod because it’s so emotionally charged.” And to Aral, the Yan report has every attribute of a false news story that was primed to go viral. 如果新闻涉及政治，它会得到另一个致命的提升。 “政治新闻比其他虚假新闻传播得更快，”Aral说。 “我们可以推测，它是这样一个避雷针，因为它是如此的情感充电。”对阿拉尔来说，严的报道有一个虚假的新闻故事的每一个属性，被引向病毒。
B45 “In terms of that specific story, I would say all of these analyses of why false news spreads apply,” Aral explains. “It’s shocking; it’s salacious. It's immediately relevant to political debates that are happening, but obviously coronavirus is on everyone’s mind. Trying to understand its origins is a big story.” “就这个具体的故事而言，我要说的是，所有这些关于为什么虚假新闻传播适用的分析，”Aral解释说。 “这太令人震惊了；它很吸引人眼球。 这与正在发生的政治辩论立即相关，但显然冠状病毒在每个人的脑海中。 试图理解它的起源是一个大故事。

刊文涉及人物

1 文章作者 MONIQUE BROUILLETTE 国家地理杂志
REBECCA RENNER 国家地理杂志
Data scientist Sinan Aral
免疫学与微生物学家 Kristian G. Andersen 美國斯克里普斯研究所(Scripps Research) 免疫學及微生物學副教授
生物学家 Carl Bergstrom 华盛顿大学的生物学教授
计算生物学家 David Robertson 英國格拉斯哥大學的計算生物學家
病毒学家 Ian Lipkin 国际知名新病原发现领域权威专家，现任美国哥伦比亚大学公共卫生学院、感染与免疫研究中心教授，同时还担任美国国立卫生研究院（NIH）诊断与发现中心主任、中国疾病与预防控制中心病原发现联合实验室主任等重要职务
病毒学家 Anthony Fauci 美國免疫學家，現任美國國家過敏和傳染病研究所主任。他在對艾滋病和H1N1甲型流感以及COVID-19等傳染病的研究中作出重大貢獻。
病毒学家 Angela Rasmussen 哥伦比亚大学病毒学博士
心理学家 Lisa Fazio 范德堡大學心理學助理教授
传染病学家 Edward C. Holmes 上海市（复旦大学附属）公共卫生临床中心名誉客座教授Edward C. Holmes（悉尼大学Marie Bashir传染病和生物安全研究所教授
微生物与免疫学家 Robert F. Garry 美國杜蘭大學醫學院微生物與免疫學教授
生物学家 Peter Daszak 生态健康联盟主席
生物学家 Kevin Bird 密歇根州立大学基因学学者