Joe Rogan Experience #1616 - Jamie Metzl

Jamie Metzl 0:00 (drumming music plays) Joe Rogan podcast, check it out. The Joe Rogan Experience.

Joe Rogan 0:06 Train by day, Joe Rogan podcast by night, all day. (rock music plays) Okay, cool. What's up, Jamie? Good to see you, man.

Jamie Metzl 0:16 Hey, Joe, nice to see you again.

Joe Rogan 0:17 Thanks for coming down here. Appreciate it.

Jamie Metzl 0:18 It's really my pleasure.

Joe Rogan 0:19 And bringing your chocolate with you, again. (laughs)

Jamie Metzl 0:20 You know I always bring the chocolate, you gotta be ready.

Joe Rogan 0:22 (laughs) Yeah, you're a, a legitimate chocolate fiend.

Jamie Metzl 0:26 I'm definitely a legitimate chocolate fiend.

Joe Rogan 0:27 How much do you eat a day? How much chocolate do you eat a day?

Jamie Metzl 0:29 You know, I, I, every single morning I have hot chocolate and it takes about 45 minutes of preparation time, has about four different, uh, ingredients. So I start that and then I have some chocolate over the course of the day.

Joe Rogan 0:40 45 minutes?

Jamie Metzl 0:42 Yeah, a lot of it is simmering, so it's not really fully active, but, it's, it's some active and some passive intervention.

Joe Rogan 0:48 So is this a preparation that you do, like, uh, is it, does it prepare you for the day? Is it like-

Jamie Metzl 0:54 It just-

Joe Rogan 0:54 ... a meditation thing?

Jamie Metzl 0:55 ... it's, uh, you know, it's probably some kind of morning ritual, but it-

Joe Rogan 0:59 Mm-hmm.

Jamie Metzl 0:59 ... it's just, I don't know, it's very calming for me, and, uh, by the time, after this 45 minutes, it's like pudding. I mean it's like this thick, bubbling hot chocolate. It just, it brings me joy, I feel like everyone should start their day with joy.

Joe Rogan 1:10 Well, there's some, like, positive qualities. And it's not just a good tasting thing, right? Like-

Jamie Metzl 1:16 Oh, yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:16 ... chocolate, chocolate has some-

Jamie Metzl 1:18 Well, yeah, dark chocolate especially, has all kinds of very positive health benefits. I'm not saying that everyone should just eat chocolate bars all day and you're gonna live forever, but actually, the, the world, the woman who lived longest of everyone in recorded history ate two pounds of chocolate a week, Jeanne Calment in France. So, uh, at least, it's, it could help.

Joe Rogan 1:38 Two pounds seems excessive, but-

Jamie Metzl 1:40 It's a lot, but she lived to 122.

Joe Rogan 1:42 But, n- but chocolate's different in terms of like, some chocolate is like really sugar-

Jamie Metzl 1:48 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:48 ... sugar-based.

Jamie Metzl 1:48 Yes.

Joe Rogan 1:49 And some chocolate is more of like, uh, kinda ... I really like dark chocolate-

Jamie Metzl 1:52 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:52 ... and peanut butter together.

Jamie Metzl 1:54 You know-

Joe Rogan 1:54 Like a chocolate bar.

Jamie Metzl 1:56 Y- yeah, or like a Reese's Piece. Yeah, so the, the dark chocolate is the healthier version of chocolate, on, on, on average. And so these, the darker, pure cacao, that's where the, the health benefits are.

Joe Rogan 2:08 But, some people think there's like a, there's some psychoactive benefits to chocolate, right, to cacao as well, right?

Jamie Metzl 2:13 Well, there is a little bit, yeah. Well, it's, so cacao has been used ceremonially for about 5,000 years, so there definitely is a, is a history of that. And, and it has some, I mean it's not as psychoactive as some of the other stuff you talk about on the show, but-

Joe Rogan 2:28 Right. (laughs)

Jamie Metzl 2:28 ... it, it has a little bit of it.

Joe Rogan 2:29 Well, we did a podcast before the podcast while we were getting COVID tested out there.

Jamie Metzl 2:33 Yep, yeah. (laughs)

Joe Rogan 2:33 (laughs)

Jamie Metzl 2:33 Exactly, exactly. Talking about our experience last time.

Joe Rogan 2:37 Yeah, um, and you, so, there's another thing that happens that I was reading about, some people like chocolate because it replaces, uh, like it gives them a feeling of being loved. Have you ever read that?

Jamie Metzl 2:51 I haven't read that, but, uh, I mean, maybe it's true. I don't know whether there's some ... I don't, I doubt there's something that's chemical about chocolate, but it's ki- uh, I think there's probably an association-

Joe Rogan 3:01 Mm-hmm.

Jamie Metzl 3:01 ... with chocolate and happiness and everybody's, uh, hope- lots of people's grandma- grandmothers gave them little chocolates. So I think that there's a little bit of that, maybe it's part of the chocolate, maybe it's part of our experience.

Joe Rogan 3:11 I think it's like a, oh, God, I wish I could remember it. See if you can find this, like- There's tryptophan in it. Tr- really, that's what it is? That's what this article says- Okay. ... there's tryptophan, amino acids, small quantities of chocolate.

Jamie Metzl 3:21 But it, flavonoids is the, yeah.

Joe Rogan 3:23 And phenylethine, or something like that.

Jamie Metzl 3:24 Yeah, yeah.

Joe Rogan 3:24 Does it have something to do with, uh, love? What is what it says here?

Jamie Metzl 3:28 Oh, this is, wow, this is fast acting.

Joe Rogan 3:30 Chocolate and the brain, the science behind chocolate. But, okay, there we go, butterflies we feel when falling in love. Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 3:36 Wow, all right. Great.

Joe Rogan 3:38 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 3:38 Well if the, if the internet says it, it must be true.

Joe Rogan 3:40 Must be. Be- that was the idea that I had read, that, uh, some people like chocolate, like, when they're depressed, like when they're heartbroken-

Jamie Metzl 3:48 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 3:48 ... th- they'll have chocolate sort of a replacement for love.

Jamie Metzl 3:52 Yeah, I mean, uh, definitely, if you're feeling bad, and you eat chocolate, it, you're probably gonna feel better. So maybe it is a replacement, in a little way.

Joe Rogan 4:00 So, you were a part of this, uh, open letter recently-

Jamie Metzl 4:04 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 4:04 ... about COVID-19.

Jamie Metzl 4:05 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 4:06 Where you want to get to the bottom of the origins of it. And, um, this is something we've talked about on the podcast before, and a lot of people have been talking about it lately-

Jamie Metzl 4:14 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 4:14 ... now that Trump's out of office, it's sort of freed up the discussion.

Jamie Metzl 4:17 Right.

Joe Rogan 4:17 Uh, for the longest time, discussing that in terms of like, it not being just some sort of a random mutation-

Jamie Metzl 4:26 Right.

Joe Rogan 4:26 ... from bats and coronaviruses-

Jamie Metzl 4:28 Right.

Joe Rogan 4:28 ... that it may have been a lab leak-

Jamie Metzl 4:29 Right.

Joe Rogan 4:29 ... was so taboo because it was what Trump was pushing.

Jamie Metzl 4:33 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 4:33 And it's, it's so crazy that something which is, uh, science, it's a, it's a, it's a scientific discussion, an inquiry, that it can be stunted by these political ideas. When someone is so polarizing, like Trump, that people just completely want to reject like very plausible and possible ideas just because of him.

Jamie Metzl 4:56 It's exactly right. I, I was the lead drafter, um, with a community of other, uh, of other people and lead scientists around the world, um, of this letter. And since the beginning of last year, 2020, I had maybe the leading website in the world that was just, um, stating what is the evidence about the origins of COVID-19, particularly the evidence for a lab leak. Um, and the evidence is actually really strong. It's all circumstantial evidence, um, but we don't have any evidence of the other hypotheses of where COVID comes from, like these, this, uh, series of jumps through different animals, uh, in the wild. And so I, for a long time, more than a year, have been saying, "Hey, we need to look really seriously at this." Not because we know, or certainly I don't know for sure that's where COVID comes from, but it, in my view, it's the most likely hypothesis worthy of a, of a full investigation. And so, uh, there was a, a World Health Organization or- uh, organized an independent advisory committee.And they went on a, a study mission, uh, to China, uh, in earlier this year, 2021. And then they came out with a r- uh, with a... th- they had a press event in Wuhan, which was a joint press event between this committee and their Chinese government counterparts. And in that press event, what they said was, um, "We're... we don't support investigating the possibility of a lab leak any further, um, but we should investigate what seems like a much less likely hypothesis, uh, that COVID started with frozen foods being, uh, shipped to Wuhan." And so we already had a community of scientists and others who'd been meeting virtually, um, for a while trying to say... to really say, "Where does this come from? What's the evidence?" Uh, we had academic presentations challenging the data, f- trying to figure out where are the gaps. And we looked at that and we said, "That, that can't be right." And we decided we needed to put out an open letter, which we, which we recently released, and it was covered in, in newspapers all around the world. And the letter, uh, made kind of key points. One is that this is a terrible pandemic. We have to understand where it came from. Two, that this, uh, current investigation is not the kind of full investigation that's needed. And three, here's what a full investigation looks like, and we call on, on governments to do it. But your point that it's been i- it's been taboo for the year is exactly right. And it's just crazy because it seems... this is a really, in my view, likely possibility. I can't say for sure. We should be investigating all hypotheses, not saying we can't even look at something that, that really, uh, could be the, the real story here.

Joe Rogan 7:40 And it's also really unfortunate that a lot of people are not trusting anything that the World Health Organization says anymore, because-

Jamie Metzl 7:48 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 7:49 ... the World Health Organization... I, I'm sure you saw the, uh, spokesperson for the World Health Organization speaking with a reporter, and he wouldn't even mention the name Taiwan. Did you see that?

Jamie Metzl 7:59 Yeah, no. So it's... I did see that. And, and-

Joe Rogan 8:02 He logs off and then comes back on.

Jamie Metzl 8:05 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 8:05 And then she asks him again about Taiwan's response to COVID-19, and he says, "Well, China's done an amazing job and let's just-"

Jamie Metzl 8:11 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 8:11 "... change subjects." And-

Jamie Metzl 8:13 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 8:13 ... like, the woman keeps getting back to Taiwan and he won't recognize Taiwan because China doesn't recognize Taiwan.

Jamie Metzl 8:20 Yep.

Joe Rogan 8:20 And China has some sort of strange... w- I don't know what it is, but there's some sort of political influence on the World Health Organization.

Jamie Metzl 8:29 Yeah, so there's a lot there. So first, full disclosure, I'm a member of the World Health Organization International Advisory Committee on human-

Joe Rogan 8:36 You were until this podcast. It's over.

Jamie Metzl 8:38 What's that?

Joe Rogan 8:38 I said you were up until this podcast.

Jamie Metzl 8:39 Exactly (laughs) . Exactly.

Joe Rogan 8:40 You're gonna cut you off.

Jamie Metzl 8:40 Bring it on. Um, uh, Advisory Committee on Human Genome Editing. Um, and, um, so I'm actually a real supporter of the World Health Organization. But there's a big problem, and that problem is being realized, and, and we're seeing it through the course of this pandemic. So first, in the earliest days of the, uh, of the pandemic, why was it, um, that World Health Organization, uh, inspectors weren't able to go to Wuhan? And the reason was the Chinese government wouldn't give them visas, and there was nothing that WHO could do. Why was it that, um, the WHO was just essentially, unfortunately, parroting, uh, the reporting from the Chinese government in the earliest days? And, and part of that, at least, is because they don't even have the authority to have their own surveillance network. Why is it, referencing your point about Taiwan, that Taiwan has all kinds of expertise, um, in, uh, treating and responding to terrible outbreaks like this, which is why they've only had nine COVID deaths in Taiwan since the very beginning? Um, why is it that the WHO is in this weird position? It's in part because the WHO is created by these member states that have a lot of, of influence. And it's terrible, and we, we're all suffering because Taiwan didn't have a full voice. Tai- on December 31st, 2019, Taiwan declared a national emergency ba- on COVID. That was way before we did. I wish Taiwan had had a, a bigger voice. So WHO is in a really, really difficult position because on one hand, we're asking them to investigate and call out a member state. On the other hand, their governing body essentially is made up of member states, including China.

Joe Rogan 10:27 Yeah, it's... it's just so strange to see scientific inquiry and analysis pushed and, and manipulated by politics.

Jamie Metzl 10:36 Well, that's the whole story here.

Joe Rogan 10:38 You know.

Jamie Metzl 10:38 I mean, that's, that's unfortunately the story of COVID, is that. I mean, it was politics that made it so that you could have a... this outbreak. And we can talk more about where the, the outbreak started. But wherever it started, whether it was a lab leak or, or something else, if you had had a fully functioning system, if it hadn't been Chinese politics and the national insti- the n- the national, uh, instinct or the natural instinct hadn't been to cover up, to silence-

Joe Rogan 11:04 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 11:04 ... the whistleblowers, to give... to lie essentially to the World Health Organization and the international community, it could well have been possible to suppress COVID in the first few weeks and we wouldn't be having any of this. So... and then it was politics that made China, again, whatever the origin, um, carry out this massive cover-up over the course of the last year where they destroyed samples, eliminated or removed databases, uh, imprisoned journalists, Chinese journalists asking tough questions, and put a universal gag order on their scientists, uh, making it impossible for them to speak about, about any of this stuff.

Joe Rogan 11:42 That's pretty incredible that that's not really well-known, that, that-

Jamie Metzl 11:45 Yeah. I mean, I... I've... so for me, it's been more than a year and I have it on my Jamie Metzl website, and I've been trying to tell everybody not...... to point fingers, but to say like, "We have a real problem here. Unless we can just be really honest about what's the problem that we're facing, how are we possibly going to address it?"

Joe Rogan 12:04 Now, what is the circumstantial evidence?

Jamie Metzl 12:06 All right, so let me, let me start from the beginning-

Joe Rogan 12:09 Okay.

Jamie Metzl 12:09 ... um, of, of this. So, um, we know we have a long history of these pathogenic outbreaks, and they tend to happen, uh, in more tropical parts of, of China and Southeast Asia and, and just tropical, uh, parts of, of the world. So when SARS... when this outbreak began, um, uh, for me, I, I'd had a little bit of background. One of the reasons why I started to get suspicious very early on is I'd recently, before then, been in Wuhan and I knew w-... Wuhan wasn't a place where a bunch of yokels are eating bats. Wuhan is a really sophisticated city. It's their Chicago. Uh, and I knew that they didn't have horseshoe bats in Wuhan. As a matter of fact, when the outbreak happened, it was, uh, it was winter there, and so there weren't bats there. Um, and I knew early on that this whole story of the wet market, uh, was a lie, and as the Chinese government knew, and they for many, many months pushed that, uh, that story, um, even, uh, knowing it w- it wasn't true.

Joe Rogan 13:10 How'd you know it was a lie?

Jamie Metzl 13:11 Well, bec- uh, the, uh, the Wuhan story?

Joe Rogan 13:13 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 13:13 Because there was a, a paper that came out in The Lancet in January of 2020, and in that paper, it made clear, uh, that around a third of the first COVID cases had no exposure to the w- to that market. And so if everything started in the market, you would have expected all of the early cases to have had a, a, a market exposure. And so that was known... The- their government knew that in January, but they didn't admit it until May of last year.

Joe Rogan 13:42 Was there a common denominator for all the people that were exposed or that- that did-

Jamie Metzl 13:45 Wh- that's, that's the big question. Now, so the, the... Finding patient... So-called Patient Zero, that's the essential, the essential question. If the lab leak hypothesis is true, then either Patient Zero, um, would be someone who works at one of the- these, uh, Chinese virology institutes, probably the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or, um, it would be someone who was exposed to a virus that had somehow escaped from that, whether it was through waste or in... maybe an animal escaped or, or, or something like that. If this... uh, the alternative story that many scientists believe and, and could also... could well be true, uh, that the Patient Zero, it comes from a series. There was animal-to-animal, what are called intermediate hosts. It started with a bat, and then went bat to a pangolin or whatever, and eventually to a human. Then you would find a patient zero somewhere that was that first human. But if... I mean, I think this is a really (laughs) important point. Um, if that's the case, you'd have to say, well, what are the chances that that patient zero from this series of animal-to-animal-to-human transmissions, it just happens to be it shows up in Wuhan, which is the only city in China with a level four virology institute, that has the world's largest collection of bat coronaviruses, that is doing gain-of-function research trying to make those viruses more virulent, particularly by making them, uh, more e- able to infect human cells? So it, it... In my mind, if you... if Patient Zero is just somebody who had an exposure to an animal, you have a... the mathematical odds of that person just showing up in, in Wuhan, um, would be actually kind of absurd.

Joe Rogan 15:38 There's also an issue with the actual structure of the virus itself, right?

Jamie Metzl 15:42 Yes. Yeah. So, uh, well, this is a virus that is, um, ready-made for getting to humans. For the first SARS, we were able to track how it jumped. And you could see in, in retrospect how you could see it got closer and closer, and as it... as the, the virus mutated, it became more able, uh, to infect humans. This virus showed up fully able to infect humans. As in... uh, uh matter of fact, in the comparative studies of different animals, including humans, humans are the most susceptible to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. So somehow you have to explain how this virus shows up kind of seemingly out of nowhere in Wuhan, ready for action, ready to fully infect, uh, infect humans.

Joe Rogan 16:32 Now, this level four virology lab, it's in Wuhan. What are they doing those studies for? Like-

Jamie Metzl 16:38 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 16:38 ... what is the, the intent?

Jamie Metzl 16:40 Yeah, it's a really important question because there are a lot of people who are s- are saying things that I don't agree with that, "Oh, this is some kind of, uh-"

Joe Rogan 16:48 Bioweapon, yeah.

Jamie Metzl 16:48 "... military bioweapon." And, and say what you want about Chinese government, they're not stupid. Um, and so for them, I, I truly believe, if you had to ask me what's the most likely story, um, I believe that they've recognized that these kinds of, um, pathogens are a big threat to humans, and, uh, that we're getting more and more. The frequency of these kinds of outbreaks is growing, and rather than being behind the curve and waiting for, uh, for some terrible outbreak, the idea was, well, can we predict how these viruses will evolve? Um, can we get ahead of the game in developing treatments and vaccines for what we think may be coming? And that's what this, this gain-of-function research is about. And so we know, um, that the Chinese government... uh, the, the... I'm sorry, the Wuhan Institute of Virology was doing this kind of gain-of-function research. Some of it is actually funded, um, with United States government money through the NIH, and I know you'll get a lot of action in the Twittersphere on, on this, but... Um, so we know, and I, and I tr- truly believe that there was w-... well-intentioned work trying to develop vaccines and treatments, trying to understand how the most dangerous pathogens might, uh, might develop. And if my hypothesis, uh, is, is true, I think that's... there was an accident. And there's a whole history of people who were warning, saying, "Well, we're trying to, um, prevent some kind of future threat, but in our effort to prevent it, we're actually increasing the likelihood of it happening."

Joe Rogan 18:20 Wasn't that lab cited in 2018 for safety violations as well?

Jamie Metzl 18:23 Yes. Yeah, so the US Embassy, uh, sent a, a, a small delegation. They visited the lab, uh, and then there was, there were two cables about this saying, "Hey, this is really dangerous. They're doing experimentation with these dangerous coronaviruses, um, and their safety protocols aren't up to snuff." So there was a lot of warning and a lot of fear.

Joe Rogan 18:45 Ugh. Um, ha- have any of the people that were initially skeptical or pushing back against the idea that it came from this level four lab, are they coming around or are they still-

Jamie Metzl 18:57 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 18:57 ... digging their heels in?

Jamie Metzl 18:58 So some are, are, are coming around. And, um, so certainly there are people like, uh, like Matt Ridley, who's a member of the House of Lords in the, in the UK, a, a kind of very well-known science communicator, he was firmly on the other side, and now he's started to be more open and actually has been quite, uh, quite vocal.

Joe Rogan 19:18 What was his motivation for being on the other side? Did he-

Jamie Metzl 19:21 Yeah, I think that in the beg- there, uh, it's a really interesting story because in the earliest days of the pandemic, there was a concerted effort by a relatively small number of high profile, uh, scientists, virologists, who recognized, um, that if the story was that this came from a series of what are called zoonotic jumps between animal hosts in, in the wild, that was going to lead to kind of a positive outcome where we'd say, "Hey, let's be very mindful of our encroachment into wild spaces, climate change, all those things that we should be very mindful of." But they were, I think, probably worried, um, that if this story became dominant of an accidental lab leak, I mean, that would have huge im- implications for all of the research that people are doing, and, and a lot of it is, is very well intentioned. So early last year, um, there was a process where a series of, uh, of scientists did two things. One, they came out with a letter in the, in the British, uh, medical journal, The Lancet, which we've subsequently learned was highly manipulated by a small number of people who may have had vested interests, and there was a, a academic paper in a journal called Nature Communications, and both made the case, "Oh, this isn't a lab leak." And then there was a concerted effort to label anybody else as a conspiracy theorist. And so I, I kind of spent last year in that uncomfortable space. I mean, I'm, I, I don't live my life as a conspiracy theorist. I try to be data-driven in everything that I do, but I really felt (clears throat) that this was a very real possibility and it deserved a full investigation. And it was only in the beginning of this year, uh, 2021, that that started to turn. I know I had... Uh, I wrote some things, uh, uh, someone named Nick- Nicholson Baker, he had a great piece in New York Magazine. Um, the Wall Street Journal did a great job, um, covering this. And so the s- the space was starting to, to open up. Then they had that, really, in my mind, ill-fated press event in Wuhan where it was this independent committee and the Chinese government, and they said, "Don't investigate lab leak, investigate the frozen food hypothesis." And then in every newspaper around the world, the headline was, "World Health Organization," um, "says, uh, don't... lab leak is not, is not possible," essentially. And so I immediately sent messages to my, my friends, uh, at the World Health Organization and saying, "Look, you're... this is being misreported. The World Health Organization hasn't said this. Uh, and, uh, it... the, the position of the WHO must be, we have to investigate all hypotheses." And I was very pleased that three days later, so the press event was on a Tuesday, that Friday, uh, Tedros Adhanom, who's the director-general, he then, uh, said in a press event that, "We believe that every hypothesis needs to be investigated," which implicitly meant the lab leak hypothesis. And then our letter, uh, came out, uh, which was just, uh, just last week. I mean, it, it feels... uh, it's been such a whirlwind since then, and that's been picked up in newspapers all around the world. So now I feel like there is an opening and I hope that we can continue. And the goal, in my mind, isn't to prove. Like I don't, I don't feel like I need to... I mean, if it's provable, I'd love to prove it, but the... is not to prove that, right at this point, that it is a lab leak or isn't. But we at least need to have the most thorough, unrestricted, unpoliticized investigation into what happened with access to all the lab records, all the samples. There, there's tons of scientists in China who were working on these issues. Very, very few of them have been interviewed. We don't have access to them. And frankly, I think a lot of them are afraid that if they speak up, uh, they'll be imprisoned or worse.

Joe Rogan 23:13 Yeah, that is the problem, right? The, the people that were initially very vocal, um, and, uh, biased towards the idea that it wasn't a lab leak, and you said they were highly motivated and they-

Jamie Metzl 23:26 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 23:26 ... they labeled all the folks a conspiracy theorist. What, what was motivating them?

Jamie Metzl 23:31 Yeah. So this... it's a really tricky point. And, and so there's been a lot of controversy, uh, g- uh, around a guy named Peter Daszak. And Peter is an interesting figure because if you had asked me, uh, a year ago, a year and a half ago, "Who are the people who you respect most in the field of virology?" He would be really at the top of my list. He was one of the heroes of understanding where the first SARS came from. He has a, an organization called EcoHealth Alliance that was really trying to get a- ahead of the curve on understanding these, uh, these pathogens. But he also, through EcoHealth Alliance, was a funder of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, specifically the gain-of-function research that was being done there. And I, I, and I truly believe it wasn't anything nefarious. It was... the idea was, well, if we're, if we want to understand dangerous pathogens, we have to do it-... in the place where those dangerous pathogens are. Then under the Obama administration, there was a moratorium on this kind of- of- of gain of function research. Um, and then it was lifted in the Trump administration. So, that's one- one piece of it. And so for Peter, I understand that his whole experience of his life has been, "Well, this is where these kinds of outbreaks come from." Um, and- but this could be just a very different story. And- and for me personally, that's- I think one of the reasons why I was able to see this a little earlier perhaps than other people, is that, you know, part of- a big chunk of my life has been in the world of science, but another big chunk of my life has been in the world of understanding China. And so I think if you're just in the world of science, you don't understand China, you think, "Well, the Chinese government says that this isn't from a lab leak. It must not be from a lab leak." But I know they did... The Chinese government, they've totally suppressed the entire basically history of Mao and all the pe- millions of people who died under Mao. When they got their speed trains, uh, going, the first train had this terrible crash, and they just buried the whole train and- and pretended like it- it never happened until there was an outcry and they had to- they had to- to dig it up. So, I- I feel like I understood a little bit more about the pathology of the- uh, of the Chinese government. So, but coming back, I think there were people in the kind of more traditional virology world who felt like we're gonna open up a whole can of worms if we say, "Well, maybe it was a zoonotic jump and maybe it was- it was a lab leak."

Joe Rogan 26:01 So, this one guy and his influence shaped the way the entire world was addressing this outbreak?

Jamie Metzl 26:10 I wouldn't say it's one guy, but it was, I think, a relatively small number of people, um, because they certainly... That- the, uh, The Lancet letter, and it was all kinds of big luminaries who signed it, that really shaped things. Um, and so definitely if- if the story in the beginning had been maybe this comes from a zoonotic jump, maybe it comes from a lab leak, we need to look at both options, or, um... I think that would have been a much healthier place because there would have been more pressure on China. So, it wasn't just one guy, but Peter certainly was- was very influential. And then in spite of this, uh, conflict of interest, he's actually was selected as a member of this World Health Organization Independent Advisory Committee. So, one of the- the people who went on this mission to China was Peter. He also, uh, is the chairman of The Lancet, the same, uh, British journal that I mentioned. They have a- a study- uh, study group. He's the chairman of that. And I'm not saying he's doing anything wrong, I'm just saying if you have that kind of conflict of interest, you shouldn't be in those kinds of roles.

Joe Rogan 27:20 It's just always so disturbing to someone like me who's a non-scientist, who relies on scientists to be unbiased and to just look at the data, when you find out that things are being influenced by very human factors, like ego-

Jamie Metzl 27:35 (clears throat)

Joe Rogan 27:36 ... and-

Jamie Metzl 27:36 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 27:36 ... financial gain and relationships with foreign powers and laboratories that they're involved with.

Jamie Metzl 27:44 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 27:44 And that scares the shit out of me.

Jamie Metzl 27:45 Well, you know this better than most anybody, Joe, because you kind of are here every day looking into people's psyche, and people are people, even- even scientists. And everybody in the world has a story that explains what they're doing and, uh- and why. And so I'm sure that you could, maybe even should, have Peter on the show and he'll give you his- his story. But at least from the outside looking in, the way I would see it is, well, he's- he's invested his entire life into doing the right thing, trying to protect us from this terrible threat of a pathogenic outbreak. He correctly recognizes that encroachment into wild areas and climate change are big threats. Wherever- wherever COVID, uh, 2, however COVID-19 SARS 2 comes from, still those are- are- are good things to do. He has a longstanding relationship with the Wuhan Institute of Virology and a friendship with the people who, uh, who- who work there. Um, and so you- you can see how we ki- he, um... My guess, and, you know, I can't speak for him, he's become kind of a stakeholder in this story. But, I- we shouldn't... This isn't just about Peter. I mean, there are lots of very prominent scientists. I would say there are more prominent scientists who believe that this comes from a series of zoonotic, uh, jumps through intermediate animal hosts in the wild than there are, uh, who believe that it's more likely to come from a lab leak. But what I will say, I get a lot... I'm in touch with lots of people who are world-famous scientists, scientists who many, many people will know, who are privately telling me, "We think that there's a 90% chance that it comes from a lab, but really don't want to speak up because we don't want to get pulled into the muck."

Joe Rogan 29:33 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 29:33 You were talking about Trump before. People remember the Iraq war where there were all kinds of experts who were saying, "Oh, they definitely have nuclear weapons," and then invaded the country. It's like, "Oh, oops, they don't have it." So, people didn't want to justify any kind of bad things. And as scientists, I mean, the problem is the- the scientists rely on data, and there wasn't data because China was- was covering it up. And the- the- the journalists require scientists to make, to legitimate claims about the origins. And so there was this weird thing that's- that's lasted for a year, and our hope is, and we're starting to see that our letter, um, has opened up some space where we can have a real honest conversation about let's- let's look deeply into all the possibilities and try to get to the right answer.

Joe Rogan 30:20 Well, it has started to be discussed mainstream, like Newsweek had the cover-

Jamie Metzl 30:24 Right.

Joe Rogan 30:24 ... where it talked about the lab leak hypothesis, and people are talking about it more often. Uh, Bret Weinstein, who was very vocal about it very early on.

Jamie Metzl 30:32 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 30:32 And Heather Heying were just on Bill Maher talking about-

Jamie Metzl 30:34 I loved it.

Joe Rogan 30:35 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 30:35 It- it was great. I mean, I thought that was a fantastic interview, and that's why I'm so happy to be here with you, Joe, because, you know, it's one thing where people have, like, a gut feeling, like, "Oh, I don't trust China. I feel it was a- a- a lab leak," or, "I've- I want to protect the environment. I feel like, well, this is the kind of thing of nature fighting back." And we don't know, but we have to- we have to follow the data and- and be fearless in- in asking tough questions.

Joe Rogan 30:59 Yeah, that's, uh, a problem that we have with our culture today, is that we've fallen into this very strange situation where we really have two sides of America.

Jamie Metzl 31:09 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 31:09 We have a- a left side and a right side, and I don't understand how it happened this- this abruptly, where it- it- it even...... has an, an influence on the way we view this pandemic. We- it has an inf- uh, way we influence, uh, th- it has an influence on the way we look at scientific inquiry. Like, people-

Jamie Metzl 31:29 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 31:29 ... don't want certain results because those results would somehow or another solidify this political party that's, you know, so polarizing-

Jamie Metzl 31:41 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 31:41 ... or would go against this other party that is to the- more of to their liking. And it's, it's just-

Jamie Metzl 31:47 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 31:47 ... such a strange situation to be. Again, as a non-scientist-

Jamie Metzl 31:50 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 31:50 ... someone who relies on scientists to figure things out, to go, "Hey, what the fuck is going on?" Like-

Jamie Metzl 31:55 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 31:55 ... why, wh-, wh-, why is this politics? We're talking about a pandemic. Like, you, we've gotta know what this is and how to fight it and where it came from. And if you think it's just jumping from animal to, to human that quickly, how, how often can this happen? Can this happen with other ones? Like, this is not a normal thing. It's usually they can trace it.

Jamie Metzl 32:13 Yeah, yeah, so, um, two great points. One, it really, it, it can happen. It's happening with more frequency of, uh, viruses going from, let's say, bats through intermediate hosts to humans. We've seen it with hantavirus and nipah virus and, and, and other viruses. That's real. But it's really unfortunate. Exactly what you're describing is that people, we live in these kind of, of information cul-de-sacs, where we just-

Joe Rogan 32:38 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 32:38 ... are stuck. And it, it seems to me, we should just say, "Well, let's try to be open-minded." And that doesn't mean we don't have views. We, we all exist on some kinda spectrum, kind of for everything. But if we're just stuck there and we can't even look, we can't even hear what other people are, are saying, we're gonna drive ourselves to, to, not just to ignorance, but terrible decisions.

Joe Rogan 32:59 We just have such a tendency to buy the narratives. And I think now more than ever because there's almost, not almost, there's too much information out there to pay attention to everything.

Jamie Metzl 33:08 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 33:08 So, we find the information that fits our narrative. We lock into it, we hold onto it, and then we just stick with it and argue, uh, against anything that opposes it.

Jamie Metzl 33:18 It's exactly... And I, and I've s- I'm mindful of it because, especially with, with all of the, this conversation about the origins of the pandemic, I'm now on Twitter more than I was before all of this, because there's a lot that's-

Joe Rogan 33:32 Terrible place, isn't it?

Jamie Metzl 33:33 Well, (laughs) I mean, it's great in a way.

Joe Rogan 33:35 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 33:36 But now every time when I go on Twitter, it's like all these people who I really respect, who agree with me, um, I see their feeds. And obviously I like their feeds. And because I like their feeds, the next time I, I, I go on Twitter, I see more of it. And I, so that's why r- we all have to kind of challenge ourselves because social media is kind of pushing us into two things. One, into these little realities that are self-reflective, and two, into a world where conflict is rewarded more than finding middle ground. Like, if you say reasonable things on Twitter, you get like three people like what you say. If you say the most incendiary (laughs) things, you start like a whole you-know-what storm. And, and I just think that that's, uh, I think being mindful of the, of the environment in which these ideas are being shaped is, is e- as important as the ideas themselves.

Joe Rogan 34:29 Y- I, I agree with you wholeheartedly. Now, moving forward from, from here out, what, what do you think needs to be done in terms of, uh, opening up, uh, inquiry, b- b- being able to s- c- completely figure out the origins of this virus, and, uh, what could be done to sort of influence the people that are still either on the fence-

Jamie Metzl 34:53 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 34:53 ... or on the other side?

Jamie Metzl 34:55 So, the, the next step is going to be when this joint committee that I mentioned, made up of the Independent Advisory Committee to the World Health Organization and their Chinese government counterparts, they are going to be issuing their preliminary report within a couple of weeks. Uh, I, as I've said very publicly, I hope that the report is much better than just the, the really just atrocious press event that they, that they had on, on February 9th. In the best case scenario, they'll say, just exactly like, like we did in our, uh, in our open letter, um, that one, this wasn't a full investigation. I mean, they essentially had four weeks on the ground in Wuhan, two weeks in quarantine, and two weeks a fully chaperoned, highly curtailed study tour. But if they were to say, "Here is what a full and unrestricted international forensic investigation into the origins of the pandemic with full access to all samples, records, and personnel would look like," that would be a start. But they're in a real bind, because it's g- it's going to be a joint report. If they say what needs to be said, just in total honesty and fearlessness, this is the full investigation, examining all hypotheses, including the possibility of a lab leak, it's very likely the Chinese government isn't gonna, going to sign off on that letter, on that, on that report. But if they do another compromise, like they tried to do in the February 9 press event in Wuhan, where they try to, you know, s- harrow out some tidbits, have a little more information, but not too much upset their, their Chinese counterparts, then the, that process is going to be delegitimated. So, I, I don't know how they're going to, to get out of that bind, but I certainly hope that they're honest. But let's just say hypothetically for now that they're honest. The Chinese government is unlikely, um, to say, "Oh, oh, sorry about that. We've been doing this, (laughs) this full cover-up for a year. We've destroyed the samples-

Joe Rogan 37:01 Mm-hmm.

Jamie Metzl 37:01 ... eliminated the records, imprisoned the journalists, um, uh, gagged the scientists. Are bad, just come in and, and, and, and do what you want." So, then we can say, "Well, what are the next options?" We can try to negotiate the terms for a new investigation, maybe with different skill sets of people. You still run into the China problem. You could try to go to the United Nations for a stronger mandate. You still (laughs) run into the, the China problem. So, I don't, uh, to tell you the truth-I don't know whether we're going to be able to have the full investigation that we need to get to the bottom of this. But at very least, we should articulate what that is. And if China wants to tell the rest of the world essentially, "Screw you. We have millions of people dead from this totally avoidable pandemic, um, the future of our species depends on understanding where it comes from, but we don't, uh, but we don't want you to, to look at deeply at, at what happened," at least, at very least, there should be a political cost for that. But at most, we'll get as much information as we possibly can.

Joe Rogan 38:12 Y- the... I was reading that if China had been honest about it from the beginning and, and let everybody know about the pandemic, like, the moment they knew about it, it wou- would have saved 95% of the lives.

Jamie Metzl 38:24 I truly believe that. I mean, and, and it could be even more. It could be less, but I, I really think it, it could be more because these, these viruses... I mean, you talked about Patient Zero. So there was one person who had, who had this. Then it became two, and then... I mean, that's what exponential growth, viral... It's what we call viral growth. Um, so but if the earlier you intervene, the greater the possibility to stop it. And this is certainly, certainly a highly contagious virus, um, but in those early critical days... I mean, China, they silenced the whistleblowers. They started destroying the materials. They didn't share that immediately. Even the, the, uh, the genomic sequence of the virus... I mean, really for the first month, China was absolutely atrocious and, and, and there's a percentage. Not the full percentage, but every single person who dies from COVID, part of that is attributable to the failure of the Chinese government, particularly in the first month. There's other parts of it that are attributable to the massive failures that we had here in the United States and elsewhere.

Joe Rogan 39:34 It's such a fascinating country, you know, because they, they have this weird mix of the, the government and business. They're intertwined inexorably, right? And they have influence over the media. They have a full lockdown on the internet. And if anybody promotes anything that's negative about the Chinese government, whether it's bloggers or-

Jamie Metzl 39:57 Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Joe Rogan 39:57 ... journalists-

Jamie Metzl 39:58 Mm-hmm. Yeah.

Joe Rogan 39:58 ... they just arrest them and make them vanish.

Jamie Metzl 40:00 Well, so what I would say is, it's the Chinese government. Even business is-

Joe Rogan 40:05 The Chinese government.

Jamie Metzl 40:05 ... subject to, to the, the Chinese government. And there's a... It's an authoritarian system, and that's an... It's... We've experienced authoritarian systems before. The Soviet Union was one. But never one as sophisticated as these guys. And it's not like... You know, I traveled in, in former Eastern Europe in the old days. I've... We talked about it last time I was on the show. I've, you know, I've traveled all through North Korea. And there's one thing when you go to an authoritarian, or in this case, a totalitarian system, when it's totally dysfunctional, and you see that when you see people pulling plows on their backs in North Korea. It's another thing to go to a place like China where there's an... It's an incredible level of sophistication. I mean, they're... One of the reasons why we're, we're even having this conversation is their level of scientific acumen in artificial intelligence and genomics is... It's incredible. Um, but they have a, a real level of control, and if you stay out of politics, there's a lot they, that you can do, but that's why I am certain that there are many people in China right now who have lots of highly relevant information that could tell us a lot about the origins of the pandemic. Those people don't dare speak because they know, that if they do, the cost to them and maybe even their families would be extremely high.

Joe Rogan 41:25 Well, a lot of people that broke stories about it initially have vanished.

Jamie Metzl 41:28 Yes. Yeah.

Joe Rogan 41:29 Which is really... That's so spooky.

Jamie Metzl 41:31 Well, it's so sp- it's spooky for them and it's spooky for us. I mean-

Joe Rogan 41:34 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 41:34 ... our... One of the things that this virus has shown us, if we didn't already know, is that all of our fates as humans are connected. And so, you know, a virus that starts somewhere and spreads, it affects all of us. So our fate is dependent, in this and in many other ways, on the behavior of, of governments like China's. And so when they have these kinds of, of, you know, terrible catastrophes... I don't even wanna call it a breakdown because maybe the, the, the government was working as designed to prevent the, the, the Communist Party from losing face. Then it affects all of us. And so this idea that, "Well, what happens in your country is your business," it doesn't really make sense when we're talking about, about highly contagious viruses and lots of other things.

Joe Rogan 42:23 Lots of other things. Um, I, I wanna talk about... If, if we're... Is there anything else you wanna say about coronaviruses or about...

Jamie Metzl 42:31 Yeah. No. Just, just... I encourage... I mean, I have a very strong view, um, that... Not just that I, I think lab leak hyp- hypothesis is the most likely, um, but that what we need is a full and unrestricted international forensic investigation into all of this. But I would certainly encourage your listeners not to take my word for it, but to really read the evidence. And that's why on my, on my website, on jamiemetzel.com, I just laid out the evidence. I have lots of links. And I, I would encourage people just to go there and look and read and, and disagree. I mean, I think we have to, we have to have a space for the conversation. I think that's the key point.

Joe Rogan 43:11 And it should be data-driven. It shouldn't be political.

Jamie Metzl 43:13 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 43:13 And I'm hoping that it can be now. Now that Trump's out of office, it seems l- like... I personally feel like the country's more relaxed.

Jamie Metzl 43:20 Oh my God. It's so relaxed.

Joe Rogan 43:22 Right?

Jamie Metzl 43:22 It's like... Well, the... I think the thing is, everybody wakes up, and then you... The first thought is, "Huh, I wonder what I'm gonna have for breakfast." It's not taking out the phone, it's like, "Oh-"

Joe Rogan 43:32 "What did Trump do?"

Jamie Metzl 43:32 Yeah. "What did-" (laughs)

Joe Rogan 43:33 (laughs)

Jamie Metzl 43:33 "What did Trump do?" It's like, we, we don't have to think about politics all the time.

Joe Rogan 43:37 Well, he's so polarizing, unfortunately.

Jamie Metzl 43:40 Yeah, yeah.

Joe Rogan 43:40 You know, because if he...... did a lot of the things that he did in terms of policy, but didn't have this sort of polarizing personality, we'd have a very different discussion about all these different things.

Jamie Metzl 43:52 Yeah. I mean, I don't disag- I don't agree with a lot of the policy things, (laughs) but there was a-

Joe Rogan 43:57 A big difference. Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 43:58 ... style and, and I think there... People have always had a sense, I think, for, for a long time, that if you don't pay attention to government, by and large, they're, at least in the United States, you know, some good things are gonna happen. Sometimes there'll be screw-ups. And I think that when you don't have the faith that your government is gonna do things right or just, or just what to expect or just that when you hear the voice of the president, it does, it's like it should kind of soothe you a little bit.

Joe Rogan 44:25 Right.

Jamie Metzl 44:25 Like Joe Biden, my former boss, when he, when he speaks, I mean, he's a exciting enough guy, but you think like, "All right. I'm gonna listen before bed and then I'll fall f- (laughs) and then I'll fall asleep." But Trump-

Joe Rogan 44:34 You'll fall asleep halfway through this conversation.

Jamie Metzl 44:36 Exactly. (laughs) Yeah. But with Trump, it's like you listen-

Joe Rogan 44:38 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 44:38 ... and then you're all agitated, and then you, you, you pass it to your dog.

Joe Rogan 44:42 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 44:42 And your dog is agitated. Yeah.

Joe Rogan 44:43 Well, Obama was the best example, right?

Jamie Metzl 44:44 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 44:44 'Cause he's such a statesman, like the way-

Jamie Metzl 44:46 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 44:46 ... he would talk would be so measured-

Jamie Metzl 44:47 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 44:48 ... and intelligent and articulate. You, everything that he said, like, you, you, you felt like, "All right. He's got it."

Jamie Metzl 44:53 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 44:54 That's how I felt. When I listened to him talk-

Jamie Metzl 44:56 Yeah, and, and similar.

Joe Rogan 44:56 ... he would talk like a president.

Jamie Metzl 44:57 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 44:57 And you'd go, "All right. That's a president."

Jamie Metzl 44:58 He's, and I mean, and you, whether you agree or disagree, and I agreed with a lot of, of what he did, you think like he's... There's a process that I trust. And, and I think that's... I think we've just gone through this ex- experience where, um, m- many of us just didn't trust the process. It felt chaotic.

Joe Rogan 45:18 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 45:18 I didn't feel safe.

Joe Rogan 45:19 But, uh, uh, to get back to my point, data, it, we, we have to be able to look at these situations like the, the pandemic outbreak, and look at it and not, not be, not have rhetoric, not have these polarizing conversations, not have a vested interest-

Jamie Metzl 45:37 Right.

Joe Rogan 45:37 ... in it being one way or the other. It has to be just looking at it and a- a- analyzing it, and experts looking strictly at the evidence.

Jamie Metzl 45:47 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 45:47 And discussing the evidence without any bias, without any, uh, uh, without, without a need for one conclusion or the other to be true.

Jamie Metzl 45:56 Yeah, exactly.

Joe Rogan 45:57 And that's... I don't feel that that has been the case.

Jamie Metzl 45:59 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 45:59 There's been so many articles. I mean, there was an article written about Brett Weinstein after he came on my podcast about how I was having this guy on to, uh, promote this conspiracy theory-

Jamie Metzl 46:08 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 46:08 ... that's been widely debunked.

Jamie Metzl 46:10 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 46:10 And I remember reading that, and there was no data in that article.

Jamie Metzl 46:14 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 46:14 But it was, it was basically a smear article about-

Jamie Metzl 46:17 Yeah. And you're, and you're gonna get it after this podcast. You'll, you'll get it more, and I guarantee you people, uh-

Joe Rogan 46:22 I think less.

Jamie Metzl 46:23 Well, I hope so. And I, and I-

Joe Rogan 46:23 I think the tide's turned on that theory.

Jamie Metzl 46:25 But, but I think that even in the response to our letter, I mean, we've had... The media response has, has been great, but there are a lot of people who've been saying, "Well, there are more prominent scientists who are saying that the, the zoonotic theory is, is more likely." And my feeling is they may even be right, and I welcome the conversation, but we have to have the conversation.

Joe Rogan 46:44 You have to have the conversation. So is there a possibility of getting those prominent scientists that do have this opinion and matching them up with prominent scientists that believe the lab leak hypothesis and having some sort of, uh, a- an actual scientific debate?

Jamie Metzl 47:00 Yeah. So it's funny that you, uh, mention that because there was a private thing, um, that I will now make, uh, public (laughs) in our, in our conversation. So, um, I sent a note, uh, a few days ago to Peter Ben Embarek, who is, uh, the person who, who leads the, uh, the World Health Organization Organized Independent Advisory Committee. And what I said to Peter in that note, and I haven't yet heard back, but I imagine I will now, um, I said, "Why don't we have a private virt- uh, Zoom dialogue between the members of your committee and the signatories of our open letter, and let's just have this, this conversation?" And I think that's the, the kind of thing that we need, uh, that we need to do, and I, I hope it's possible. Certainly in writing this letter, our goal wasn't to shut down conversation, but to open space for it.

Joe Rogan 47:51 Well, that's best case scenario.

Jamie Metzl 47:53 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 47:53 Best case scenario is scientific inquiry is, you know, is supported. And this becomes something w- we could all look at-

Jamie Metzl 48:02 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 48:02 ... and say, "Okay, these guys are acting rationally now, and let's figure out where this came from." And how does it stop?

Jamie Metzl 48:09 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 48:09 How do we, how do we make sure that this doesn't happen again?

Jamie Metzl 48:12 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 48:12 The, the, the level four virology lab in Wuhan, are they still operational?

Jamie Metzl 48:17 They are. They've been taken over by the military. I mean, the first thing that happened-

Joe Rogan 48:21 Oh, boy.

Jamie Metzl 48:21 ... after the outbreak (laughs) is that the Chinese military came and took over. And it's not only that. There are lots of other virology institutes around China and around the world. I mean, right now, Singapore, for example, is building a level four virology institute. So there's a real conversation to be had. One is how should we think about safety in these kinds of, of, of virology institutes, these kinds of bio labs? Second, should we have them at, um, at hub cities like Wuhan or Singapore, or should we just put them out in the middle of Siberia-

Joe Rogan 48:53 A desert or something like that. Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 48:54 ... (laughs) or, or someplace-

Joe Rogan 48:54 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 48:54 ... like we put nuclear, nuclear waste? And, and those are the kinds of, of conversations that we need to, to have. And it... That's why, coming back to your earlier point, th- this issue of polarization is so significant because, again, if we can't have the conversation, we're screwed.

Joe Rogan 49:10 Well, here's another con- question rather. Um, what did they learn in studying these super dangerous viruses that was applicable in, in this pandemic?

Jamie Metzl 49:21 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 49:21 Because you would hope-

Jamie Metzl 49:23 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 49:23 ... that if you're gonna study-

Jamie Metzl 49:24 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 49:24 ... these super dangerous viruses, you're gonna have some solutions.

Jamie Metzl 49:29 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 49:29 But it didn't seem like there was any solutions on the table when the pandemic initially started.

Jamie Metzl 49:33 Yeah. That's, that's exactly right. And there, there are people, like there's a scientist, Marc Lipsitch at Harvard, who were, who have been traditionally one of the big opponents of gain-of-function research. And they said you're going to... You have the danger of realizing the thing that you're, you, that you're trying to prevent. So there were academic papers (laughs) that, I mean, uh, this is gonna be-... sound crazy, that said, oh, hey, it, it is possible to make, um, coronaviruses more able to infect human cells. Like, that was, I guess, its useful information. Now we have lots of evidence that, uh, coronaviruses can mutate in ways that make them more able to infect human cells. We have hundreds of millions of examples, (laughs) more than 100 million examples now.

Joe Rogan 50:16 But was there any research on how to combat that?

Jamie Metzl 50:19 So that was, that was what they were trying to do. But I don't, I don't, I think that they, um, made progress in identifying the problem. As far as I know, there wasn't any significant, like, were we that far ahead in developing vaccines? No. Were we that far ahead in developing treatments? No. And that's why now I'm, I'm a little more sympathetic to the people who are critics of this, uh, aggressive gain-of-function research than to the people who are its proponents, like Peter Daszak and other scientists at University of North Carolina named Ralph Baric, uh, and others, because I just think that there are an almost an infinite number of viruses that can threaten us. Um, if we are going to try to push these viruses to, to make them more dangerous, I mean, we have to question, is that the right thing to do? And if we do it, we just need to make sure, do we have all of the safeguards in place? And that seems to me as an international question. I mean, if, if China, with all of its problems and all of its insufficient safeguards and, and the culture of pushing science ahead as a, a vehicle for national greatness, if they're just making their own decisions about safety for these, uh, these viruses that have the potential to, to kill as many people as they've potentially now killed, that's, that's not just a Chinese issue. That's an everybody issue.

Joe Rogan 51:44 Also, no accountability in terms of like, "Hey, show us what you were doing to try to stop this virus. Show us what you were trying to do when you were examining these viruses and doing experiments on them. What did, what progress did you make in terms of how to stop a pandemic-"

Jamie Metzl 52:01 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 52:01 "... or how to combat these viruses?"

Jamie Metzl 52:03 It's ex-

Joe Rogan 52:04 Like, where is the work?

Jamie Metzl 52:04 Yeah. No, it's exactly right. And let's just say there's work. That's why in the earliest days of the pandemic, the right response from the Chinese would say, would, would be to say, "All right, this terrible thing has happened. It started in Wuhan. At Wuhan, we have the world's leading center for studying bat coronaviruses, with the largest collection of bat coronaviruses. We are going to make everything open, uh, right now, because let's get to the bottom of this, and maybe-"

Joe Rogan 52:34 Right.

Jamie Metzl 52:34 But instead, they did the exact opposite. They il- they removed access to all of the viral databases. So still to this day, nobody knows what viruses they had. They gagged all of the scientists. There could be scientists in China who actually have known a lot from the beginning about this virus, how it functions, how we might respond to it. Those people have no access to the international community, and that's why there are these pathologies of the Chinese state, which are bad enough if you're living in China. But we're all, whatever the origins of the pandemic, we're all, I think, being victimized by those pathologies now.

Joe Rogan 53:14 And has China offered any, uh, information about how to combat the virus? Have they-

Jamie Metzl 53:23 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 53:23 ... contributed to the development of the mRNA viruses-

Jamie Metzl 53:27 So, uh-

Joe Rogan 53:27 ... or vaccines or anything?

Jamie Metzl 53:28 Yeah. So, well, first, in terms of a public health response, I, I mentioned that China was absolutely atrocious, particularly in the first month or two of the virus. They also mounted the most aggressive and, in many ways, highly successful response, public health response, to containing it. And so certainly China has been helpful in sharing the lessons. I mean, not everybody has that kind of authoritarian system, but in, when there's a story that helps China, China has, has been more helpful. And now even with the, this idea of, well, where does the, uh, where does the virus come from, if, so China has been very aggressive trying to look for animal hosts. They haven't found any. There's no evidence of it. They've been even more aggressive with this, in my view, somewhat nutty, but maybe worthy of exploration idea, uh, that it came from frozen foods shipped from someplace else. I mean, there's no, absolutely no evidence that that's the case. Um, but not helpful with this, and certainly not helpful with providing access to the scientists who've been studying, just to your point, who've been studying this for years. I mean, the access to those people has mostly vanished.

Joe Rogan 54:45 So they didn't really contribute to treatments. They basically figured out a way to lock people in their homes and, and isolate-

Jamie Metzl 54:53 Well, so-

Joe Rogan 54:53 They had more power-

Jamie Metzl 54:54 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 54:54 ... over the population in terms of, like, stopping their movement.

Jamie Metzl 54:57 Well, but in treatments, they also have put... So they, they have their own vaccine. Uh, it-

Joe Rogan 55:02 When did they develop their vaccine?

Jamie Metzl 55:04 Yeah, they, they actually developed it a little faster than ours. It's, but it had a, when the, when the first tests, uh, came back, it only had about a 50% efficacy rate. So it was a bad vaccine, but they had the first vaccine. They're now, uh, try- working to develop an mRNA vaccine, like the Pfizer and, and Moderna.

Joe Rogan 55:22 What was their vaccine?

Jamie Metzl 55:23 Their vaccine was a, uh, it was-

Joe Rogan 55:25 An inert...

Jamie Metzl 55:26 ... it was in, yeah.

Joe Rogan 55:27 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 55:27 It was an attenuated virus vaccine.

Joe Rogan 55:29 And, but it wasn't very effective.

Jamie Metzl 55:30 It wasn't very effective.

Joe Rogan 55:31 The Johnson & Johnson vaccine is quite a bit less effective-

Jamie Metzl 55:34 It's, yes. Yeah, and that's a-

Joe Rogan 55:36 ... but it's one shot, right?

Jamie Metzl 55:36 Yes. And then so that one, uh, it's called a Trojan horse vaccine, and basically you get a virus, um, that is a, uh, basically a non-harmful virus. You kind of neutralize it by taking out its kind of delivery package and then put the gene that's delivered through that other virus into the body. Whereas the mRNA vaccine, what that's doing, it's hijacking the machinery of your cells-

Joe Rogan 56:02 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 56:02 ... and saying, "Hey, hey, cells, rat," here's like the, the mRNA is the messenger, messenger RNA. If we kind of hijack and say, "Here's a new message," and we say, "The message is, cells make this spike protein," which is something, it's not, uh, it's not part of normal human body, but we, we make this little protein and then our body says, our immunological system says, "Hey, this is an alien thing," and it mounts a response, and that's what gives us our immunity.

Joe Rogan 56:28 And the, the, the problem that I'm reading about the Johnson & Johnson virus is there's, there's religious opposition to it.

Jamie Metzl 56:34 Yeah, exactly.

Joe Rogan 56:35 Because, uh, it was made from cell lines that were derived from aborted fetal tissue.

Jamie Metzl 56:39 Yeah, aborted fetal tissue in the 1980s. So it's, and, and that, so let, look, I just wanna be clear that, that all of these vaccines, certainly the American ones, I think are very effective, great vaccines, and everybody should be happy to take whatever ones they have, have access to. There were some Catholic, uh, bishops and, and, uh, the Vatican was, was not fully this way, um, who said that because the Johnson & Johnson, um, vaccine was derived in part, in small part from a cell line taken from an aborted, uh, fetus in the 1980s, if you have a choice, you should avoid that. I think, in my view, that was an unfortunate statement. I mean, we are in a crisis here. I think this is about health and safety. If anybody has access to a vaccine, it's my view that they should take it, not just for themselves, though they should do it for themselves, but it's also the faster we can reach herd immunity, the more the people who can't take vaccines will be protected, whether it's people in chemotherapy and, and, uh, and, and other things.

Joe Rogan 57:47 Mm-hmm. The Johnson & Johnson vaccine, it, uh, since it's less effective, does it have less side effects?

Jamie Metzl 57:55 No.

Joe Rogan 57:56 No? Same?

Jamie Metzl 57:56 No. I mean, all of these, all of these, uh, vaccines have, uh, the, at least the, the Ame- American ones and pretty much all of the vac- of the vaccines have very, very minimal side effects as far as we know. I mean, these are, these are all vaccines that have been rushed, but I see no reason to, I don't think there's some kind of hidden thing that two years from now we're gonna find out that these vaccines are, are more dangerous than what they were.

Joe Rogan 58:17 No, I'm not saying that.

Jamie Metzl 58:18 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 58:18 But the, the side effects where some people have been pretty extreme. Like, some-

Jamie Metzl 58:22 Yeah, for sure.

Joe Rogan 58:22 ... like Ben Stein was just on television-

Jamie Metzl 58:25 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 58:25 ... talking about, or on the internet rather, talking about, uh, side effects that he experienced-

Jamie Metzl 58:29 Yeah. Well, people-

Joe Rogan 58:30 ... that was pretty ruthless.

Jamie Metzl 58:31 Yeah, and, and I think people are. I mean, this is, what, what we're doing is we're getting our body, like if you, if your body, if there's, i- it's some kind of an alien invasion-

Joe Rogan 58:39 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 58:39 ... that's what we've evolved for and that's why every time you get a fever or whatever, it's your body's fighting something. But in that fight, your body is getting, getting stronger. So I, I definitely think that there are, uh, I wouldn't even, I mean, maybe you can call them side effects, but it's, it's like your body is mounting this kind of, of response and-

Joe Rogan 58:59 It's not a side effect, it's a consequence.

Jamie Metzl 59:00 It's a consequence.

Joe Rogan 59:01 Okay.

Jamie Metzl 59:01 That's exactly right.

Joe Rogan 59:02 Um, let's talk about, uh, I wanna, I wanna talk because we, we got into a little bit about China and genetics. And I, there was an article that I read recently, uh, where they were, uh, there was some sort of a program to try to make, uh, Chinese men more manly, that the government was instituting some sort of a program. And I read that and I... See if you can find it because it was a weird article. They were like doing these like manly exercises and shit.

Jamie Metzl 59:30 Like what are, what are manly exercises?

Joe Rogan 59:32 That's a good question.

Jamie Metzl 59:32 Right. Maybe we should-

Joe Rogan 59:33 I guess aggressive weight lifting or something.

Jamie Metzl 59:34 Oh, all right.

Joe Rogan 59:35 Something along those lines. But, uh, the real ethical dilemma, and this is your area of expertise, right, in, in terms of, um, genetic engineering. The ethical, there's, there's mu- many ethical dilemmas, right? One of them is the haves and the have-nots.

Jamie Metzl 59:50 Mm-hmm. Sure.

Joe Rogan 59:50 That's the big one to me. It's like if really, really wealthy people can figure out how to genetically manipulate their children and their bodies before it's available to anyone else, they'll have such a massive advantage that the gaps between the haves and the have-nots will, will grow ever wider.

Jamie Metzl 1:00:05 Yeah. Yeah, I mean, that, that's a real possibility.

Joe Rogan 1:00:08 Here it is. China promotes education, education drive-

Jamie Metzl 1:00:11 Yeah. (laughs)

Joe Rogan 1:00:11 ... to make boys more manly.

Jamie Metzl 1:00:12 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:00:12 So you see these boys-

Jamie Metzl 1:00:13 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:00:14 ... what are they doing there?

Jamie Metzl 1:00:15 Let's see. I don't know if that, um-

Joe Rogan 1:00:16 Punching sand?

Jamie Metzl 1:00:16 Oh, that's hilarious. Yeah, I don't think that has anything to do with genetics.

Joe Rogan 1:00:19 Press send?

Jamie Metzl 1:00:19 But it seems like whatever they're doing...

Joe Rogan 1:00:22 They're flexing.

Jamie Metzl 1:00:23 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:00:23 That guy's, the middle guy's got some good chest muscles.

Jamie Metzl 1:00:26 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:00:26 What does it say here? Uh, while, Chinese government, what does it say?

Jamie Metzl 1:00:29 Oh.

Joe Rogan 1:00:29 Uh, promote, oh, the pro- proposal to prevent the feminization of male adolescents.

Jamie Metzl 1:00:35 Yeah. I guess they don't want Chinese men to become too metro.

Joe Rogan 1:00:38 Hmm. Well, is metro feminization? I thought metro was just style.

Jamie Metzl 1:00:42 I, that's what I think, but I don't know.

Joe Rogan 1:00:43 Feminization seems like-

Jamie Metzl 1:00:45 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:00:45 ... a different-

Jamie Metzl 1:00:46 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:00:46 ... different take.

Jamie Metzl 1:00:47 It's, yeah. So I don't, this is, I don't think this is genetics. I think it's, uh, it's culture and-

Joe Rogan 1:00:53 Oh, for sure.

Jamie Metzl 1:00:53 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:00:54 But, uh, but my question is when does it lead to genetics? It says while Chinese government has signaled concern that the country's most popular male role models are no longer strong athletic figures-

Jamie Metzl 1:01:05 That's funny.

Joe Rogan 1:01:05 ... like, "army heroes." Um-

Jamie Metzl 1:01:09 (laughs) You know, if, if I had to guess, I, I, I, um, do a lot of, a lot with Korea. And in Asia, there's a thing called Korean wave, and it's Korean culture. As a matter of fact, if you can pull up, uh, Korean wave on this screen. Um, but there's like the, the Korean pop stars and these movie stars, they have a little bit of a feminine look, and I think that style has spread certainly across Asia and Japan and, uh, and-

Joe Rogan 1:01:38 Hmm. The Korean wave.

Jamie Metzl 1:01:39 Oh, there we go. (laughs) So my guess is that-

Joe Rogan 1:01:42 That's feminine? That guy looks jacked.

Jamie Metzl 1:01:45 Yeah. Well-

Joe Rogan 1:01:45 Look at the guy in the middle, that's not feminine at all.

Jamie Metzl 1:01:47 All right. Okay, fair enough. I mean-

Joe Rogan 1:01:48 That guy gets all the ladies. Look at him.

Jamie Metzl 1:01:49 Anyway, we welcome all Koreans on, on Twitter to give us your thoughts. Um, but my guess is that the Chinese modern history, it all comes out of this mythology of the Long March, this kind of fake history that the Chinese government has, that they fought and defeated the Japanese, where in fact the Nationalists were the ones who actually fought the, uh, fought the Japanese. So my guess is that with this story is they're afraid of kind of their society becoming, quote-unquote, soft, like they maybe see Koreans, the Japanese and us.

Joe Rogan 1:02:21 That's interesting that they... Well, us, really? Americans?

Jamie Metzl 1:02:24 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:02:24 Are we feminizing as well, Jamie?

Jamie Metzl 1:02:26 I think... Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:02:26 Any, any thoughts on that? (laughs)

Jamie Metzl 1:02:29 I don't know whether we are or not, but my guess is they see us as softening-

Joe Rogan 1:02:34 As weak.

Jamie Metzl 1:02:34 ... and weakening.

Joe Rogan 1:02:34 Yeah. Well, a lot of people do. Um, my, my question is, do you think that there's a real possibility of some sort of a government program to manipulate genetics? And now that we understand that CRISPR is a real tool and it's, it's viable and we can... Like they, they've used CRISPR on living humans.

Jamie Metzl 1:02:59 Right.

Joe Rogan 1:03:00 Not just on fetuses, right?

Jamie Metzl 1:03:01 Sure. In China.

Joe Rogan 1:03:02 Can you explain how they do that?

Jamie Metzl 1:03:03 Yeah, yeah. So, uh, it's really an, an incredible story. If you don't mind, I'll just-

Joe Rogan 1:03:07 Please.

Jamie Metzl 1:03:07 ... go back a little bit. Um, so last year, 2020, the Nobel Prize in chemistry went to Jennifer Doudna and Emmanuelle Charpentier, who are scientists who, who developed the tool that you just mentioned called CRISPR. In 2012, they had their famous paper came out, which was essentially describing a basic science tool, something that you would do in a lab. Six years later, in 2018, the world's first three genetically modified CRISPR babies were born in China as a result of highly, in my view, unethical human experimentation by a, a Chinese biophysicist named He Jiankui. As a matter of fact, the World Health Organization committee on which I serve was created in the aftermath of that. So, what He Jiankui was doing and trying to do was to change one gene to try to give these two, and then it became three, kids a greater resistance to HIV later in the life, in life. It doesn't look like he, he, uh, he succeeded. But we've entered the era of genetically modified humans, and it's just in this little way. And, and more broadly, we're entering this, this period where our species has the increasing ability to read, write, and hack the code of life.

Joe Rogan 1:04:24 Wasn't there some sort of, uh... Because they were trying to give them resistance to HIV, didn't it impart some sort of cognitive benefit?

Jamie Metzl 1:04:33 Well, there were, there were stories that it may have from some experiments, um, that were done in mice, and there was some analysis that was later partly debunked from the UK Biobank that, that had suggested that. But the, excuse me, the short answer is nobody really knows. And, and that was why it was so unethical to do these human experimentations because the outcomes were, were so unknown. Having said that, even though this was a terrible first step, it's my absolute expectation that in the future, and whether that future is 10 years from now or 20 years from now, or five years from now or 50 years from now, um, we will begin a process of genetic modification of humans that will start very small. It will certainly start, uh, with making single, uh, changing single mutations that would otherwise condemn a child to die of a terrible, deadly genetic disorder.

Joe Rogan 1:05:32 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 1:05:33 That, that will be the starting point. But over time, as we increasingly understand the complexity, not just of the human genome, but of systems biology more broadly, we will move from that smaller bit of, uh, of engineering to bigger. We'll also use tools of embryo selection. Right now, an average woman, uh, going through IVF has about 15 eggs extracted. Um, let's say you have 10 viable, uh, pre-implanted embryos in in vitro fertilization. So now you can screen each one of those 10 embryos and you can rank order them roughly, uh, in, in tallest, likely tallest to likely shortest in a small number of years, likely highest genetic component to likely lowest genetic component of IQ. I mean, this is all highly, highly controversial stuff, but this is where we're going. So I do think that it will be possible that we'll have embryo selection and then very likely we'll be able to use stem cell technology called induced pluripotent stem cells to turn adult cells into stem cells. So just to make it practical, like let's say, um, a woman has a skin graft and there's millions of skin cells. You induce those skin cells into stem cells, stem cells into egg precursor cells, egg precursor cells into eggs. Now let's say you have 10,000 eggs and average male ejaculation has hundreds of millions or sometimes low billions of sperm. You fertilize those 10,000 eggs, use high throughput screening to extract a few cells and sequence them from each, and now you have 10,000 options. And then you have real possibilities and you don't even need to use genome editing. Our ancestors took chickens laying one egg a month and turned them into chickens laying one egg a day, not knowing anything about genetics, but just through this kind of selection. And what does it mean for humans, for agriculture, for so many other things when we are the drivers of that evolutionary process?

Joe Rogan 1:07:30 That's where people get really uncomfortable, right? Because now we're entering into what many people would consider eugenics.

Jamie Metzl 1:07:37 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:07:37 Right? You're, you're, you're, you're engineering the human race for the most favorable outcomes, and maybe this is an unpopular opinion, but-... sometimes less favorable outcomes create a different strength.

Jamie Metzl 1:07:56 Oh, abs- I think th- that sh- is such a wise point, and it's essential 'cause you talked earlier about equity as being one of the issues. But an- an equally big issue is, is your point, diversity. And so-

Joe Rogan 1:08:10 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:10 ... if you gave everybody a choice, well, what kind of kid would you want? Maybe everyone would say, "I want-"

Joe Rogan 1:08:16 The Rock.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:16 Yeah, (laughs) exactly.

Joe Rogan 1:08:17 Yeah, I want my kid to look like The Rock.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:19 Exactly.

Joe Rogan 1:08:19 Everybody would say that.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:20 Yeah. No, I want The Rock, who, with the, with the mind of Einstein, and- and-

Joe Rogan 1:08:24 Right.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:24 ... and, and whatever. And, and it's not wrong. It's just within the context of our society, those seem like good ideas. Just like if you were a dinosaur, and someone asked a T-rex, "What kinda kid do you want?" The T-rex is like, "F yeah, I want a kid."

Joe Rogan 1:08:40 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:40 "I want a big tail. I want sharp fangs."

Joe Rogan 1:08:42 Right.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:42 And, but then, the astro-

Joe Rogan 1:08:44 And longer arms.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:44 Yeah. (laughs) The asteroid hits, and being a cockroach was actually the right answer. And so, we-

Joe Rogan 1:08:50 Or being a crocodile.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:51 Yeah, exactly. So, so-

Joe Rogan 1:08:52 A lotta rotten meat.

Jamie Metzl 1:08:53 Exactly. (laughs) That's true, but it's ki- it's overcooked. Um, so we, we don't know what the future holds, and our, uh, evolutionary diversity, I mean, that's when, when we, in a Darwinian sense, we talk of random mutation. That's just diversity. That means that something that seems really good now, like being a big T-rex, in some future environment is actually a disadvantage. And so if we start making even well-intentioned decisions to even to eliminate terrible diseases, it may be that we limit not just our diversity, but through our diversity, our resilience as a species.

Joe Rogan 1:09:30 But there's also the, human beings d- tend to, w- w- we like to innovate, right? And, and the more time people spend on innovation and the, the construction of new methods of technology, new things, the more time they spend on that, the better they're gonna get at that. If they're more sexually viable, if they're more aggressive, if they're more athletic, there's gonna be less time being spent on those things. Now, it's like, it's the weird balance.

Jamie Metzl 1:10:01 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:10:02 It's l- it's-

Jamie Metzl 1:10:02 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:10:02 You don't get, uh, uh, no knock on The Rock, but he's not out there inventing CRISPR. You know what I'm saying? It's like, do, we need-

Jamie Metzl 1:10:11 Yeah. We need, we need, uh, a little bit of this, a little bit of that, yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:10:13 No, I, I just think we're fucking around with the way the universe works and the way biology works in a weird way, where, uh, I don't necessarily think we understand the consequences of each individual action. And then right now, it hasn't, it hasn't become a factor because there's a couple babies in China, and there's a few experiments done in America. But once it actually starts happening, that you can pick what kind of child you have, and you, and, uh, w- not just what kind, but if we go forward 100 years or 200 years from now, they, there might be some super sophisticated methods of engineering the type of person. So, we might be able to create people that, as of right now, don't even exist.

Jamie Metzl 1:10:58 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:10:58 People with, uh, extraordinary vision, bulletproof skin. I mean, we, we might be changing the human race. And, uh, maybe that's good. I mean, maybe if you, uh, grabbed a monkey, you know, uh, or, uh, Australopithecus and said, uh, "Hey, man, one day, you're gonna be flying in a plane, and you're gonna be, you know, floating around on a boat." And he'd be like-

Jamie Metzl 1:11:19 (laughs) And, and I think Australopithecus would say, "Well, I wanna sit in business class."

Joe Rogan 1:11:22 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 1:11:22 "I want free orange juice." (laughs)

Joe Rogan 1:11:23 I think Australopithecus would be like, "Fuck that, I'm gonna stay what I'm doing."

Jamie Metzl 1:11:26 Yeah. (laughs)

Joe Rogan 1:11:27 Like, "I don't wanna change. I'm gonna lose all my hair. What do I do?"

Jamie Metzl 1:11:29 Yeah, exactly.

Joe Rogan 1:11:29 "I'm cold."

Jamie Metzl 1:11:30 Exactly.

Joe Rogan 1:11:30 "Well, you're gonna get clothes." "I don't want clothes."

Jamie Metzl 1:11:32 Exactly.

Joe Rogan 1:11:32 "I have hair. I'm good."

Jamie Metzl 1:11:33 Yeah, exactly.

Joe Rogan 1:11:34 They would-

Jamie Metzl 1:11:34 No, no, that's-

Joe Rogan 1:11:35 Right?

Jamie Metzl 1:11:35 ... it's, it's such a p- And the hard part is, yes, we can imagine some earlier time where our ancestors, like Australopithecus, they were, we were just animals.

Joe Rogan 1:11:44 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 1:11:44 There were other animals. We kinda lived like animals. We've left that world. It's now, uh, uh, of all the species that have ever lived, our one little group of monkeys-

Joe Rogan 1:11:54 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 1:11:54 We're not just taking over. We are reshaping all of life on this planet, and we're reshaping our own biology. So yeah, it's, it's scary. It should be scary. And that's the work that our, that our World Health Organization committee is trying to grapple with, is how do we try to create a governance system that can try to prevent terrible abuses? 'Cause we, it's clear, we can identify what feel like, at least for now, terrible abuses. And we can identify some things where we think, "Well, that seems pretty good." I mean, if someone's kid is gonna die of a terrible genetic disorder, and we have the ability to prevent that, well, let's, let's do it. And there's a lot of gray area in between. And, and our sense of what's okay and not okay changes over time. And that's, that's why it's a dynamic process. Just like you were saying before on politics, if we kinda force ourselves into one extreme or another, we'll end up with the wrong answer. But the, the, the challenge is, how do we negotiate this part in the middle that helps us advance the beneficial science but prevent abuses? But we're, but, and that's why the ethics are so important. But we can't, it's really hard to define what the abuses are because people think differently about things.

Joe Rogan 1:13:08 And we also don't really know what the consequences of each individual decision will be-

Jamie Metzl 1:13:12 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:13:12 ... and how they'll lead to more. And-

Jamie Metzl 1:13:14 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:13:15 ... if we have ethics, these ethics are not gonna be globally accepted. There's gonna be people that, or countries, that go, "You know, we don't like our standing in terms of the world market, and, uh, this is one way to really elevate our entire nation-"

Jamie Metzl 1:13:29 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:13:29 "... is to engineer a completely new kinda human."

Jamie Metzl 1:13:31 Well, it's ex- exactly right, that countries, just like in the, in the United States, in the second World War and immediately after, that we had all these wise people, like Vannevar Bush and others, um, who said American leadership in science and technology is the foundation of American power.... right now, that's what the Chinese government is saying. When I went to the Beijing Genomics Institute, or BGI, which is not in Beijing, it's in, in Shenzhen, um, and I saw they have the world's largest collection of sequencing machines, there was a Chinese flag on every one of those sequencing machine. When He Jiankui, the, the, the scientist who I mentioned before, uh, manipulated these embryos for the first CRISPR babies, when he'd hit his, his application, it was all about bringing glory to the, uh, to the Chinese state. So, we are in that environment and that's one of the problems that we face, is that human beings, we've become this species with a global reach-

Joe Rogan 1:14:29 Hmm.

Jamie Metzl 1:14:29 ... that, just like we're seeing with the virus and so many other things, um, small numbers of us are doing things that have big implications for everybody. But we don't have a system, a global way of solving these kinds of problems. There's a really dangerous mismatch.

Joe Rogan 1:14:45 Yeah, I, that's the concern, right? The concern is that other countries are going to do what we would consider to be unethical, but through those decisions, they're gonna gain some sort of an advantage, whether it's an advantage in terms of intelligence, or advantage in terms of athletics. I mean, we already know that countries manipulate people's bodies in order to win the-

Jamie Metzl 1:15:05 Right.

Joe Rogan 1:15:05 ... Olympics.

Jamie Metzl 1:15:05 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:15:06 Have you seen the documentary, Icarus? Have you seen that?

Jamie Metzl 1:15:08 Yeah, yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:15:08 It's amazing, right?

Jamie Metzl 1:15:09 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:15:09 Well, we know Russia will go balls to the wall-

Jamie Metzl 1:15:12 Yep.

Joe Rogan 1:15:12 ... to try to win the Olympics.

Jamie Metzl 1:15:14 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:15:14 Uh, they did, and they got caught, and they've been eliminated from the Olympics because-

Jamie Metzl 1:15:18 Yeah, well, they're clawing, they're clawing-

Joe Rogan 1:15:19 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 1:15:19 ... their way. So, it's exactly right. In my, in my book, Hacking Darwin, I have a whole chapter on this, which is called The Arms Race of the Human Race, and I play out some of those scenarios. So, imagine you are a country that your population has decided, "You know, this stuff, it's too scary. Uh, this, this feels like we're playing God. It's ethically, uh, uncomfortable," and there's another country that has made a different decision. And let's just say that you start to see evidence, and maybe it won't work. I mean, maybe you just do nothing, and it turns out that these guys are taking too big of a risk, a- and then they've got some kind of big problem. Or maybe it actually starts, uh, starts to work. So, then what do you do? Do you just say, "All right, we're sticking to our guns, and we recognize that maybe we'll be less competitive than them in the future, and that's a price that we're willing to pay"? Or do you try to stop them? And maybe you can, maybe you can't. If it's a big, powerful country, you, you probably can't. Um, and if you can't stop them, and you don't wanna pay the pri- price of not doing it, um, m- do you feel that you have to match them? And, and just like in the Olympics, I mean, there are different societies that make different decisions of how they're going to do Olympics. Some say, "Well, just gonna let a bunch of kids play sports, and the best ones will emerge." Some say, "We're gonna measure all these kids and test them when they're five years old and put them..." And then we have a way of measuring those outcomes, which is gold medals, and it's a, and, and maybe it's the case that these different collections of societal decisions will lead to different outcomes. I mean, there's no, there's nothing that's set in stone of why we, in the United States, have a higher standard of living than people in Venezuela or whatever. But if there's, like, a lot of little decisions that add up to these things called national competitiveness, and the application of revolutionary science is one of them.

Joe Rogan 1:17:11 The, the concern for a lot of people is that we're going to get to some situation where, in order to become more competitive, people are going to do things that are very questionable or very unethical, and ultimately very dangerous.

Jamie Metzl 1:17:30 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:17:30 Right? Isn't that, that, that is the question?

Jamie Metzl 1:17:31 Yeah. I mean, we're, we're already seeing it. I don't know, uh, there's a guy named Josiah Zayner who's become kind of infamous for these do it yourself experiments on himself and, and-

Joe Rogan 1:17:41 What is he doing?

Jamie Metzl 1:17:42 It's, it's, it's, like, um, these ge- uh, quote unquote genome ed-, DIY biology, giving people the tools to try to do gene therapies on themselves, fully on-

Joe Rogan 1:17:53 He does it on himself?

Jamie Metzl 1:17:53 He does it on himself. And, uh-

Joe Rogan 1:17:54 Like, what kind of therapies is he doing?

Jamie Metzl 1:17:56 Yeah, I think that, that, so he, he's done some, he injected himself at a science conf- there's a whole, uh, series on HBO called Unnatural Selection-

Joe Rogan 1:18:04 Mm-hmm.

Jamie Metzl 1:18:04 ... which is all about this, uh, about this kind of stuff. And so, yeah, so we are going... Yep, here it is.

Joe Rogan 1:18:10 Is that him?

Jamie Metzl 1:18:10 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:18:11 He looks like the kind of guy that would inject himself for sure.

Jamie Metzl 1:18:12 Yeah, yeah, I don't, I don't know who Rick is, but, um-

Joe Rogan 1:18:14 This guy says he's the first person-

Jamie Metzl 1:18:16 ... exactly.

Joe Rogan 1:18:16 ... to attempt editing his DNA with CRISPR. So-

Jamie Metzl 1:18:19 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:18:19 ... he's like, uh, the guy from The Fly.

Jamie Metzl 1:18:22 Yeah. (laughs)

Joe Rogan 1:18:22 Jeff Goldblum?

Jamie Metzl 1:18:22 Exactly, yeah, exactly.

Joe Rogan 1:18:24 Yeah. Yeah. Remember how that worked out?

Jamie Metzl 1:18:25 Yeah, I remember it. I remember it.

Joe Rogan 1:18:26 Yeah.

Jamie Metzl 1:18:26 So, um-

Joe Rogan 1:18:28 I wanna live in a world where people get drunk, and instead of giving themselves tattoos, they're like, "I'm drunk. I'm gonna CRISPR myself." This guy's an asshole (laughs) .

Jamie Metzl 1:18:36 You know... Yeah, no, I say don't CRISPR yourself (laughs) .

Joe Rogan 1:18:38 What the fuck you doing, bro?

Jamie Metzl 1:18:39 Exactly. No, no, I mean-

Joe Rogan 1:18:41 Oh...

Jamie Metzl 1:18:41 ... what we're talking about here, and it, be- coming back to earlier, w- there's billions of years, almost four billions of years of biology got us from little single cell organisms to this. And so, there's a lot of evolutionary lessons, trade-offs, that are us. I'm not saying we shouldn't change things. We must change things. We don't wanna live like our ancestors-

Joe Rogan 1:19:02 Right.

Jamie Metzl 1:19:02 ... dying of all these terrible preventable diseases. But that doesn't mean that we should just do anything. There shouldn't be regulation. We need to find the right balance.

Joe Rogan 1:19:10 And if you wanted to look at, uh, biological life objectively, you would imagine that there's some sort of, there's these competing elements, right? You have disease and you have, uh, immune systems that fight off the disease. And through this sort of selection and natural selection and mutations, some people develop and, and, uh, continue to breed and advance their, their lines.

Jamie Metzl 1:19:35 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:19:35 And other genetic lines die off 'cause they weren't able to compete or to-

Jamie Metzl 1:19:40 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:19:40 ... to handle (clears throat) these environmental stressors or-

Jamie Metzl 1:19:44 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:19:44 ... these, these viruses or these various things. And it's, uh, it's, on one side, you would say, "Well, I don't ever wanna see someone suffer and die from a disease."

Jamie Metzl 1:19:56 Right.

Joe Rogan 1:19:56 But on the other side, you say, "How many people do we need on this planet?"And that's where people get scared, with-

Jamie Metzl 1:20:00 Yeah.

Joe Rogan 1:20:01 ... with eugenics. Whe- when you, when you say, you know, what we need is the strongest, most healthy, most, uh, disease-free version of humanity. So does that mean people with diabetes should not be allowed to breed? You know what I'm saying?

Jamie Metzl 1:20:17 Yeah. (clears throat)

Joe Rogan 1:20:17 Like people get real weird-

Jamie Metzl 1:20:18 Yeah, and, and they should.

Joe Rogan 1:20:19 ... when it comes to, rightly so, rightly so.

Jamie Metzl 1:20:21 Yeah. No. So the whole history of eugenics is a terrible one. I mean, I think everybody recognizes the horrors of Nazi eugenics. But the Nazis actually learned a lot from the eugenicists