COVID-19 lab leak theory: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
Moving these details down to article body. If we're going to include details of early reports on this topic, we should just cite the paper "proximal origins...", which for scientists remains the first major investigation into this issue, whose findings have been supported by all subsequently collected data
This is an article about a hypothesis, so the lead should be about the hypothesis, not about perceived scientific consensus against it.
Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit
Line 5: Line 5:
<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point -->
<!-- End of AfD message, feel free to edit beyond this point -->


The '''COVID-19 lab leak hypothesis''' proposes that [[SARS-CoV-2]], the virus responsible for the [[COVID-19 disease]], leaked from a lab in [[Wuhan]], China, resulting in [[COVID-19 pandemic|the pandemic]].<ref name=BMJJuly2021>{{cite journal |last1=Thacker |first1=Paul D. |title=The covid-19 lab leak hypothesis: did the media fall victim to a misinformation campaign? |journal=BMJ |date=8 July 2021 |volume=374 |pages=n1656 |doi=10.1136/bmj.n1656 |url=https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n1656 |language=en |issn=1756-1833}}</ref><ref name=TheConvJune2021>{{cite web |last1=Knight |first1=Peter |title=COVID-19: why lab-leak theory is back despite little new evidence |url=https://theconversation.com/covid-19-why-lab-leak-theory-is-back-despite-little-new-evidence-162215 |website=The Conversation |language=en}}</ref> Scientific consensus holds that SARS-CoV-2 spilled into the human population naturally via [[zoonosis]], and scientists have largely remained skeptical of the a lab leak origin,<ref>{{cite news |last1=Gorman |first1=James |last2=Zimmer |first2=Carl |title=Scientist Opens Up About His Early Email to Fauci on Virus Origins |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/science/covid-lab-leak-fauci-kristian-andersen.html |access-date=18 July 2021 |work=The New York Times |date=14 June 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Graham |first1=Rachel L. |last2=Baric |first2=Ralph S. |title=SARS-CoV-2: Combating Coronavirus Emergence |journal=Immunity |date=19 May 2020 |volume=52 |issue=5 |pages=734–736 |doi=10.1016/j.immuni.2020.04.016 |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7207110 |access-date=18 July 2021 |issn=1074-7613}}</ref> describing it as a remote possibility and citing a lack of supporting evidence.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Stanway |first1=Josh Horwitz, David |title=COVID may have taken 'convoluted path' to Wuhan, WHO team leader says |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-who-china/covid-may-have-taken-convoluted-path-to-wuhan-who-team-leader-says-idUSKBN2A90BW |access-date=18 July 2021 |work=Reuters |date=10 February 2021 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Maxmen |first1=Amy |last2=Mallapaty |first2=Smriti |title=The COVID lab-leak hypothesis: what scientists do and don’t know |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01529-3 |access-date=18 July 2021 |work=Nature |date=8 June 2021 |pages=313–315 |language=en |doi=10.1038/d41586-021-01529-3}}</ref>
The '''COVID-19 lab leak hypothesis''' proposes that [[SARS-CoV-2]], the virus responsible for the [[COVID-19 disease]], leaked from a lab in [[Wuhan]], China, resulting in [[COVID-19 pandemic|the pandemic]].<ref name=BMJJuly2021>{{cite journal |last1=Thacker |first1=Paul D. |title=The covid-19 lab leak hypothesis: did the media fall victim to a misinformation campaign? |journal=BMJ |date=8 July 2021 |volume=374 |pages=n1656 |doi=10.1136/bmj.n1656 |url=https://www.bmj.com/content/374/bmj.n1656 |language=en |issn=1756-1833}}</ref><ref name=TheConvJune2021>{{cite web |last1=Knight |first1=Peter |title=COVID-19: why lab-leak theory is back despite little new evidence |url=https://theconversation.com/covid-19-why-lab-leak-theory-is-back-despite-little-new-evidence-162215 |website=The Conversation |language=en}}</ref> The hypothesis draws mainly upon the seeming [[circumstantial evidence]] that the [[Wuhan Institute of Virology]] is close in proximity to the early outbreak of the [[COVID-19_pandemic_in_mainland_China#Discovery|COVID-19 pandemic in Wuhan]], Hubei Province, China.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/04/inside-the-the-viral-spread-of-a-coronavirus-origin-theory|title=Inside the Viral Spread of a Coronavirus Origin Theory|first=Joe|last=Pompeo|website=Vanity Fair}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/did-coronavirus-really-escape-chinese-lab-here-s-what-we-n1199531|title=Did the coronavirus escape from a Chinese lab? Here's what we know|website=NBC News}}</ref> A central part of the hypothesis is that scientists from Wuhan Institute of Virology were known to have collected SARS-like coronaviruses, and the allegation that the Institute may have performed risky work on those viruses, which it has not disclosed.<ref>https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-escape-theory.html</ref><ref>https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/</ref><ref>https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/</ref>


Rumors of a lab leak first began spreading on Chinese social media in January 2020, alleging that the virus was made in the [[Wuhan Institute of Virology]] (WIV).<ref>https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2020/02/18/WHO-confirms-experts-presence-at-coronavirus-epicenter-in-China/8271582041808/</ref> These allegations were amplified by US President [[Donald Trump]], prominent [[Republican Party (United States)|Republicans]], and conservative media in early 2020, and at the time was widely dismissed as a [[conspiracy theory]] with [[Xenophobia and racism related to the COVID-19 pandemic|racist motivations]].<ref name=TheConvJune2021/> In early 2021, some politicians and journalists reversed course and said the hypothesis warranted serious consideration and investigation.<ref name=BMJJuly2021/>
From March of 2020, Senetor Tom Cotton, Secretary of State [[Mike Pompeo]], US President [[Donald Trump]], and conservative media amplified the issue and it was dismissed as a [[conspiracy theory]] with [[Xenophobia and racism related to the COVID-19 pandemic|racist motivations]]. Rumors of a lab leak first began spreading on Chinese social media in January 2020, alleging that the virus was made in the [[Wuhan Institute of Virology]] (WIV).<ref>https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2020/02/18/WHO-confirms-experts-presence-at-coronavirus-epicenter-in-China/8271582041808/</ref> These allegations were amplified by US President [[Donald Trump]], prominent [[Republican Party (United States)|Republicans]], and conservative media in early 2020, and at the time was widely dismissed as a [[conspiracy theory]] with [[Xenophobia and racism related to the COVID-19 pandemic|racist motivations]].<ref name=TheConvJune2021/> In early 2021, some politicians and journalists reversed course and said the hypothesis warranted serious consideration and investigation.<ref name=BMJJuly2021/>


Many scientists have continued to describe the lab leak hypothesis as a "conspiracy theory."<ref name="FrutosMarch2021">{{cite journal |last1=Frutos |first1=Roger |last2=Gavotte |first2=Laurent |last3=Devaux |first3=Christian A. |title=Understanding the origin of COVID-19 requires to change the paradigm on zoonotic emergence from the spillover to the circulation model |journal=Infection, Genetics and Evolution |date=March 2021 |pages=104812 |doi=10.1016/j.meegid.2021.104812 |issn=1567-1348 |pmc=7969828 |pmid=33744401}}</ref><ref name="Hakim">{{cite journal |last1=Hakim |first1=Mohamad S. |title=SARS‐CoV‐2, Covid‐19, and the debunking of conspiracy theories |journal=Reviews in Medical Virology |date=14 February 2021 |doi=10.1002/rmv.2222 |issn=1099-1654 |pmc=7995093 |pmid=33586302}}</ref> Some scientists, despite misgivings, agree that more investigation is warranted.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Zimmer |first1=Carl |last2=Gorman |first2=James |last3=Mueller |first3=Benjamin |title=Scientists Don’t Want to Ignore the ‘Lab Leak’ Theory, Despite No New Evidence |journal=The New York Times |date=27 May 2021 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/27/health/wuhan-coronavirus-lab-leak.html |issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Mallapaty |first1=Smriti |title=After the WHO report: what’s next in the search for COVID’s origins |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00877-4 |access-date=18 July 2021 |work=Nature News |date=1 April 2021 |pages=337–338 |language=en |doi=10.1038/d41586-021-00877-4}}</ref>
Many scientists have largely remained skeptical of the a lab leak origin,<ref>{{cite news |last1=Gorman |first1=James |last2=Zimmer |first2=Carl |title=Scientist Opens Up About His Early Email to Fauci on Virus Origins |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/14/science/covid-lab-leak-fauci-kristian-andersen.html |access-date=18 July 2021 |work=The New York Times |date=14 June 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Graham |first1=Rachel L. |last2=Baric |first2=Ralph S. |title=SARS-CoV-2: Combating Coronavirus Emergence |journal=Immunity |date=19 May 2020 |volume=52 |issue=5 |pages=734–736 |doi=10.1016/j.immuni.2020.04.016 |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7207110 |access-date=18 July 2021 |issn=1074-7613}}</ref> describing it as a remote possibility and citing a lack of supporting evidence.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Stanway |first1=Josh Horwitz, David |title=COVID may have taken 'convoluted path' to Wuhan, WHO team leader says |url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-who-china/covid-may-have-taken-convoluted-path-to-wuhan-who-team-leader-says-idUSKBN2A90BW |access-date=18 July 2021 |work=Reuters |date=10 February 2021 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Maxmen |first1=Amy |last2=Mallapaty |first2=Smriti |title=The COVID lab-leak hypothesis: what scientists do and don’t know |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01529-3 |access-date=18 July 2021 |work=Nature |date=8 June 2021 |pages=313–315 |language=en |doi=10.1038/d41586-021-01529-3}}</ref> Many scientists have continued to describe the lab leak hypothesis as a "conspiracy theory."<ref name="FrutosMarch2021">{{cite journal |last1=Frutos |first1=Roger |last2=Gavotte |first2=Laurent |last3=Devaux |first3=Christian A. |title=Understanding the origin of COVID-19 requires to change the paradigm on zoonotic emergence from the spillover to the circulation model |journal=Infection, Genetics and Evolution |date=March 2021 |pages=104812 |doi=10.1016/j.meegid.2021.104812 |issn=1567-1348 |pmc=7969828 |pmid=33744401}}</ref><ref name="Hakim">{{cite journal |last1=Hakim |first1=Mohamad S. |title=SARS‐CoV‐2, Covid‐19, and the debunking of conspiracy theories |journal=Reviews in Medical Virology |date=14 February 2021 |doi=10.1002/rmv.2222 |issn=1099-1654 |pmc=7995093 |pmid=33586302}}</ref> Some scientists, despite misgivings, agree that more investigation is warranted.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Zimmer |first1=Carl |last2=Gorman |first2=James |last3=Mueller |first3=Benjamin |title=Scientists Don’t Want to Ignore the ‘Lab Leak’ Theory, Despite No New Evidence |journal=The New York Times |date=27 May 2021 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/27/health/wuhan-coronavirus-lab-leak.html |issn=0362-4331}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last1=Mallapaty |first1=Smriti |title=After the WHO report: what’s next in the search for COVID’s origins |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-00877-4 |access-date=18 July 2021 |work=Nature News |date=1 April 2021 |pages=337–338 |language=en |doi=10.1038/d41586-021-00877-4}}</ref>


==Scientific background==
==Scientific background==

Revision as of 07:13, 20 July 2021

The COVID-19 lab leak hypothesis proposes that SARS-CoV-2, the virus responsible for the COVID-19 disease, leaked from a lab in Wuhan, China, resulting in the pandemic.[1][2] The hypothesis draws mainly upon the seeming circumstantial evidence that the Wuhan Institute of Virology is close in proximity to the early outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China.[3][4] A central part of the hypothesis is that scientists from Wuhan Institute of Virology were known to have collected SARS-like coronaviruses, and the allegation that the Institute may have performed risky work on those viruses, which it has not disclosed.[5][6][7]

From March of 2020, Senetor Tom Cotton, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, US President Donald Trump, and conservative media amplified the issue and it was dismissed as a conspiracy theory with racist motivations. Rumors of a lab leak first began spreading on Chinese social media in January 2020, alleging that the virus was made in the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).[8] These allegations were amplified by US President Donald Trump, prominent Republicans, and conservative media in early 2020, and at the time was widely dismissed as a conspiracy theory with racist motivations.[2] In early 2021, some politicians and journalists reversed course and said the hypothesis warranted serious consideration and investigation.[1]

Many scientists have largely remained skeptical of the a lab leak origin,[9][10] describing it as a remote possibility and citing a lack of supporting evidence.[11][12] Many scientists have continued to describe the lab leak hypothesis as a "conspiracy theory."[13][14] Some scientists, despite misgivings, agree that more investigation is warranted.[15][16]

Scientific background

The first known infections from SARS‑CoV‑2 were discovered in Wuhan, China.[17] The original source of viral transmission to humans remains unclear, as does whether the virus became pathogenic before or after the spillover event.[18][19][20] Because many of the early infectees were workers at the Huanan Seafood Market,[21][22] it has been suggested that the virus might have originated from the market.[20][23] However, other research indicates that visitors may have introduced the virus to the market, which then facilitated rapid expansion of the infections.[18][24] A March 2021 WHO-convened report stated that human spillover via an intermediate animal host was the most likely explanation, with direct spillover from bats next most likely. Introduction through the food supply chain and the Huanan Seafood Market was considered another possible, but less likely, explanation.[25]

Research into the natural reservoir of the virus that caused the 2002–2004 SARS outbreak has resulted in the discovery of many SARS-like bat coronaviruses, most originating in horseshoe bats. Phylogenetic analysis indicates that samples taken from Rhinolophus sinicus show a resemblance of 80% to SARS‑CoV‑2.[26][27][28] Phylogenetic analysis also indicates that a virus from Rhinolophus affinis, collected in Yunnan province and designated RaTG13, has a 96% resemblance to SARS‑CoV‑2.[17][29] The RaTG13 virus sequence is the closest known sequence to SARS-CoV-2,[25] but it is not its direct ancestor.[30] Other closely-related sequences were also identified in samples from local bat populations.[31]

Bats are considered the most likely natural reservoir of SARS‑CoV‑2.[25][32] Differences between the bat coronavirus and SARS‑CoV‑2 suggest that humans may have been infected via an intermediate host;[23] although the source of introduction into humans remains unknown.[33]

Timeline

First appearance

See also: COVID-19 misinformation § Wuhan lab origin

The idea of a laboratory origin for SARS-CoV-2 was one of the earliest to emerge about the pandemic.[citation needed] Such an idea is not unique to COVID-19, with previous major disease outbreaks, such as HIV, H1N1, SARS and the Ebola virus also having been the subject of conspiracy theories and allegations that the causative agent was created or escaped from a laboratory.[34]

The earliest known tweet to suggest a lab leak was published on 5 Jan 2020.[35] The first media reports of a lab leak appeared in the taboild the Daily Mail and The Washington Times in late January 2020.[35] In a January 31 2020 interview with Science Magazine Professor Richard Ebright said there was a possibility that SARS-CoV-2 entered humans through a laboratory accident in Wuhan, and that all data on the genome sequence and properties of the virus were "consistent with entry into the human population as either a natural accident or a laboratory accident"[36] An February 5 report from Caixin describe these rumors as originating from a paper by an Indian scholar posted to bioRxiv that was later withdrawn, and a later BBC China reported that on February 14th, Chinese President Xi Jinping proposed for biosafety to be incorporated into law, which was affected the next day to "strengthen the management of laboratories, especially the virus."[37][38]

It was initially spread in early 2020 by United States politicians and media, particularly US President Donald Trump, prominent Republicans and conservative media (such as Fox News pundit Tucker Carlson and Steve Bannon). All these groups had a reputation for using conspiracy rhetoric to blame other countries for American problems.[2][39] In April 2020, Trump claimed to have evidence for the theory, but refused to produce it when requested.[40][39] The administration also expressed the intention to sanction China.[41] At that time, the media did not distinguish between the accidental lab leak of a natural virus and bio-weapon origin conspiracy theories. In online discussions, various theories–including this one–were being combined together to form larger, baseless conspiracy plots.[2]

According to surveys, early on in the pandemic up to 30% of Americans believed in the hypothesis at various points.

Renewed media attention

In early 2021, the hypothesis returned to popular debate due to renewed media discussion and circumstantial evidence.[42]

On 27 May 2021, US president Joe Biden ordered the US intelligence community to investigate the origins of COVID-19, including this hypothesis, and provide a report within 90 days.[43] Half way into the investigation, an anonymous source told CNN that several Biden administration officials considered the lab leak theory as credible as the natural origins theory, but that hasty conclusions should be avoided.[44]

In July 2021, a Harvard-Politico survey indicated that 52 percent of Americans believed that COVID-19 originated from a lab leak, while 28 percent believed that COVID-19 originated from an infected animal in nature.[45]

Claims and rebuttals

Deliberate bioweapon

Claims of deliberate engineering of the virus were spread as early as February 2020, and gained the support of various anti-vaccine activists. Judy Mikovits and James Lyons-Weiler, two prominent figures of the movement, both claimed that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a laboratory, with Mikovits going further and stating, in Plandemic, a 2020 conspiracy theory film, that the virus was both deliberately engineered and deliberately released.[34] Weiler's analysis, were he argued that a long sequence in the middle of the spike protein of the virus was not found in other coronaviruses and was evidence for laboratory recombination, was dismissed by scientists, who found that the sequence in question was also found in many other coronaviruses, suggesting that it was "widely spread" in nature.[46]

Gain-of-function research

One idea used to support a laboratory origin invokes previous gain-of-function research on coronaviruses. Virologist Angela Rasmussen writes that this is unlikely, due to the intense scrutiny and government oversight gain-of-function research is subject to, and that it is improbable that research on hard-to-obtain coronaviruses could occur under the radar.[47] The exact meaning of "gain of function" is disputed among experts.[48][49]

In May 2020, Fox News host Tucker Carlson accused Anthony Fauci of having "funded the creation of COVID" through gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).[48] Citing an essay by science writer Nicholas Wade, Carlson alleged that Fauci had directed research to make bat viruses more infectious to humans.[50] In a hearing the next day, US senator Rand Paul alleged that the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) had been funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, accusing researchers including epidemiologist Ralph Baric of creating "super-viruses".[48][51] Both Fauci and NIH Director Francis Collins denied that the US government supported such research.[48][49][50] Baric likewise rejected Paul's allegations, saying his lab's research into cross-species transmission of bat coronaviruses did not qualify as gain-of-function.[51]

A 2017 study of chimeric bat coronaviruses at the WIV listed NIH as a sponsor; however, NIH funding was only related to sample collection. Based on this and other evidence, The Washington Post rated the claim of an NIH connection to gain-of-function research on coronaviruses as "two pinocchios", representing "significant omissions and/or exaggerations".[52][51]

Accidental release of a natural virus

Another theory suggests the virus arose in humans from an accidental infection of laboratory workers by a natural sample.[13] Misinformation and confusion about the weight of evidence and likelihood of this scenario has been widespread.[14]

In March 2021, an investigatory report released by the WHO described this scenario as "extremely unlikely" and not supported by any available evidence.[53] The report stated that the possibility could not be wholly ruled out without further evidence.[13] The investigation behind this report operated as a joint collaboration between Chinese and international scientists.[54][55] Nature news described the 300-page report as the result of a "major investigation," stemming from the work of 34 international scientists, SARS-CoV-2 genome tests in early patients, analyses of nearly 1,000 samples from the Huanan Market and from hundreds of market animals, analyses of death certificates, and interviews with researchers at the WIV.[56] A small number of researchers said that they would not trust the report's conclusions because it was overseen by the Chinese government, but other scientists found the report convincing, and said there was no evidence of a laboratory origin for the virus.[56]

After the publication of the report, politicians, talk show hosts, journalists, and some scientists advanced unsupported claims that SARS-CoV-2 may have come from the WIV.[57] In the United States, calls to investigate a laboratory leak reached a "fever pitch," fueling aggressive rhetoric resulting in antipathy towards people of Asian ancestry,[57][58] and the bullying of scientists.[59][60][61] The United States, European Union, and 13 other countries criticised the WHO-convened study, calling for transparency from China and access to the raw data and original samples.[62] Chinese officials described these criticisms as an attempt to politicise the study.[63] Scientists involved in the WHO report, including Liang Wannian, John Watson, and Peter Daszak, objected to the criticism, and said that the report was an example of the collaboration and dialogue required to successfully continue investigations into the matter.[64]

In a letter published in Science, a number of scientists, including Ralph Baric, argued that the accidental laboratory leak hypothesis had not been sufficiently investigated and remained possible, calling for greater clarity and additional data.[65] Their letter was criticized by some virologists and public health experts, who said that a "hostile" and "divisive" focus on the WIV was unsupported by evidence, and would cause Chinese scientists and authorities to share less, rather than more data.[57]

Since May 2021, some media organizations softened previous language that described the laboratory leak theory as "debunked" or a "conspiracy theory".[66] However, the scientific consensus is that while an accidental leak is possible, it is extremely unlikely.[67][68][69] Some journalists and scientists have said that they dismissed or avoided discussing the lab leak theory during the first year of the pandemic as a result of perceived polarization resulting from Donald Trump's embrace of the theory.[66][70][71][72]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Thacker, Paul D. (8 July 2021). "The covid-19 lab leak hypothesis: did the media fall victim to a misinformation campaign?". BMJ. 374: n1656. doi:10.1136/bmj.n1656. ISSN 1756-1833.
  2. ^ a b c d Knight, Peter. "COVID-19: why lab-leak theory is back despite little new evidence". The Conversation.
  3. ^ Pompeo, Joe. "Inside the Viral Spread of a Coronavirus Origin Theory". Vanity Fair.
  4. ^ "Did the coronavirus escape from a Chinese lab? Here's what we know". NBC News.
  5. ^ https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/coronavirus-lab-escape-theory.html
  6. ^ https://thebulletin.org/2021/05/the-origin-of-covid-did-people-or-nature-open-pandoras-box-at-wuhan/
  7. ^ https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/06/29/1027290/gain-of-function-risky-bat-virus-engineering-links-america-to-wuhan/
  8. ^ https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2020/02/18/WHO-confirms-experts-presence-at-coronavirus-epicenter-in-China/8271582041808/
  9. ^ Gorman, James; Zimmer, Carl (14 June 2021). "Scientist Opens Up About His Early Email to Fauci on Virus Origins". The New York Times. Retrieved 18 July 2021.
  10. ^ Graham, Rachel L.; Baric, Ralph S. (19 May 2020). "SARS-CoV-2: Combating Coronavirus Emergence". Immunity. 52 (5): 734–736. doi:10.1016/j.immuni.2020.04.016. ISSN 1074-7613. Retrieved 18 July 2021.
  11. ^ Stanway, Josh Horwitz, David (10 February 2021). "COVID may have taken 'convoluted path' to Wuhan, WHO team leader says". Reuters. Retrieved 18 July 2021.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  12. ^ Maxmen, Amy; Mallapaty, Smriti (8 June 2021). "The COVID lab-leak hypothesis: what scientists do and don't know". Nature. pp. 313–315. doi:10.1038/d41586-021-01529-3. Retrieved 18 July 2021.
  13. ^ a b c Frutos, Roger; Gavotte, Laurent; Devaux, Christian A. (March 2021). "Understanding the origin of COVID-19 requires to change the paradigm on zoonotic emergence from the spillover to the circulation model". Infection, Genetics and Evolution: 104812. doi:10.1016/j.meegid.2021.104812. ISSN 1567-1348. PMC 7969828. PMID 33744401.
  14. ^ a b Hakim, Mohamad S. (14 February 2021). "SARS‐CoV‐2, Covid‐19, and the debunking of conspiracy theories". Reviews in Medical Virology. doi:10.1002/rmv.2222. ISSN 1099-1654. PMC 7995093. PMID 33586302.
  15. ^ Zimmer, Carl; Gorman, James; Mueller, Benjamin (27 May 2021). "Scientists Don't Want to Ignore the 'Lab Leak' Theory, Despite No New Evidence". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331.
  16. ^ Mallapaty, Smriti (1 April 2021). "After the WHO report: what's next in the search for COVID's origins". Nature News. pp. 337–338. doi:10.1038/d41586-021-00877-4. Retrieved 18 July 2021.
  17. ^ a b Zhou P, Yang XL, Wang XG, Hu B, Zhang L, Zhang W, et al. (March 2020). "A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin". Nature. 579 (7798): 270–273. Bibcode:2020Natur.579..270Z. doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2012-7. PMC 7095418. PMID 32015507.
  18. ^ a b Cohen J (January 2020). "Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally". Science. doi:10.1126/science.abb0611.
  19. ^ Eschner K (28 January 2020). "We're still not sure where the Wuhan coronavirus really came from". Popular Science. Archived from the original on 30 January 2020. Retrieved 30 January 2020.
  20. ^ a b Andersen KG, Rambaut A, Lipkin WI, Holmes EC, Garry RF (April 2020). "The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2". Nature Medicine. 26 (4): 450–452. doi:10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9. PMC 7095063. PMID 32284615.
  21. ^ Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, Ren L, Zhao J, Hu Y, et al. (February 2020). "Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China". Lancet. 395 (10223): 497–506. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5. PMC 7159299. PMID 31986264.
  22. ^ Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X, Qu J, Gong F, Han Y, et al. (February 2020). "Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study". Lancet. 395 (10223): 507–513. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7. PMC 7135076. PMID 32007143.
  23. ^ a b Cyranoski D (March 2020). "Mystery deepens over animal source of coronavirus". Nature. 579 (7797): 18–19. Bibcode:2020Natur.579...18C. doi:10.1038/d41586-020-00548-w. PMID 32127703.
  24. ^ Yu, Wen-Bin; Tang, Guang-Da; Zhang, Li; T. Corlett, Richard (2020). "Decoding the evolution and transmissions of the novel pneumonia coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2 / HCoV-19) using whole genomic data". Zoological Research. 41 (3): 247–257. doi:10.24272/j.issn.2095-8137.2020.022. PMC 7231477. PMID 32351056.
  25. ^ a b c Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) (PDF) (Report). World Health Organization (WHO). 24 February 2020. Archived (PDF) from the original on 29 February 2020. Retrieved 5 March 2020.
  26. ^ Benvenuto D, Giovanetti M, Ciccozzi A, Spoto S, Angeletti S, Ciccozzi M (April 2020). "The 2019-new coronavirus epidemic: Evidence for virus evolution". Journal of Medical Virology. 92 (4): 455–459. doi:10.1002/jmv.25688. PMC 7166400. PMID 31994738.
  27. ^ "Bat SARS-like coronavirus isolate bat-SL-CoVZC45, complete genome". National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). 15 February 2020. Archived from the original on 4 June 2020. Retrieved 15 February 2020.
  28. ^ "Bat SARS-like coronavirus isolate bat-SL-CoVZXC21, complete genome". National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). 15 February 2020. Archived from the original on 4 June 2020. Retrieved 15 February 2020.
  29. ^ "Bat coronavirus isolate RaTG13, complete genome". National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). 10 February 2020. Archived from the original on 15 May 2020. Retrieved 5 March 2020.
  30. ^ "The 'Occam's Razor Argument' Has Not Shifted in Favor of a Lab Leak". Snopes.com. Snopes. Retrieved 18 July 2021.
  31. ^ Zhou, Hong; Ji, Jingkai; Chen, Xing; Bi, Yuhai; Li, Juan; Wang, Qihui; et al. (June 2021). "Identification of novel bat coronaviruses sheds light on the evolutionary origins of SARS-CoV-2 and related viruses". Cell (Cambridge): S0092867421007091. doi:10.1016/j.cell.2021.06.008. ISSN 0092-8674. PMC 8188299. PMID 34147139. Archived from the original on 18 June 2021. Retrieved 18 June 2021.
  32. ^ Lu R, Zhao X, Li J, Niu P, Yang B, Wu H, et al. (February 2020). "Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding". Lancet. 395 (10224): 565–574. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30251-8. PMC 7159086. PMID 32007145.
  33. ^ O'Keeffe J, Freeman S, Nicol A (21 March 2021). The Basics of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission. Vancouver, BC: National Collaborating Centre for Environmental Health (NCCEH). ISBN 978-1-988234-54-0. Archived from the original on 12 May 2021. Retrieved 12 May 2021.
  34. ^ a b Gorski, David (31 May 2021). "The origin of SARS-CoV-2, revisited". Science-Based Medicine.
  35. ^ a b "Timeline: How the Wuhan lab-leak theory suddenly became credible". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2021-07-19.
  36. ^ https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2020/01/mining-coronavirus-genomes-clues-outbreak-s-origins
  37. ^ http://www.caixin.com/2020-02-05/101511817.html
  38. ^ https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp/chinese-news-51540821
  39. ^ a b Nast, Condé (3 June 2021). "The Lab-Leak Theory: Inside the Fight to Uncover COVID-19's Origins". Vanity Fair. Retrieved 19 July 2021.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  40. ^ "Trump claims to have evidence coronavirus started in Chinese lab but offers no details". The Guardian. 1 May 2020. Retrieved 18 July 2021.
  41. ^ Stein, Jeff; Leonnig, Carol D; Dawsey, Josh; Shih, Gerry (30 April 2020). "U.S. officials crafting retaliatory actions against China over coronavirus as President Trump fumes". The Washington Post.
  42. ^ Knight, Peter. "COVID-19: why lab-leak theory is back despite little new evidence". The Conversation.
  43. ^ "Covid: Biden orders investigation into virus origin as lab leak theory debated". BBC News. 2021-05-27. Retrieved 2021-07-18.
  44. ^ Bertrand, Natasha; Brown, Pamela; Williams, Katie Bo; Cohen, Zachary (July 16, 2021). "Senior Biden officials finding that Covid lab leak theory as credible as natural origins explanation". CNN. Retrieved July 18, 2021.
  45. ^ Mir, Alice; Ollstein, A. "POLITICO-Harvard poll: Most Americans believe Covid leaked from lab". POLITICO. Retrieved 2021-07-19.
  46. ^ Hao, Pei; Zhong, Wu; Song, Shiyang; Fan, Shiyong; Li, Xuan (8 March 2020). "Is SARS-CoV-2 originated from laboratory? A rebuttal to the claim of formation via laboratory recombination". Emerging Microbes & Infections. 9 (1): 545–547. doi:10.1080/22221751.2020.1738279. ISSN 2222-1751. PMID 32148173.
  47. ^ Rasmussen AL (January 2021). "On the origins of SARS-CoV-2". Nature Medicine. 27 (1): 9. doi:10.1038/s41591-020-01205-5. PMID 33442004.
  48. ^ a b c d Robertson L (21 May 2021). "The Wuhan Lab and the Gain-of-Function Disagreement". FactCheck.org. Retrieved 4 June 2021.
  49. ^ a b Bryant CC (25 June 2021). "How risky is 'gain of function' research? Congress scrutinizes China". The Christian Science Monitor.
  50. ^ a b Dapcevich M (20 May 2021). "Did Fauci Fund 'Gain of Function' Research, Thereby Causing COVID-19 Pandemic?". Snopes.
  51. ^ a b c Kessler G (May 18, 2021). "Analysis - Fact-checking the Paul-Fauci flap over Wuhan lab funding". The Washington Post.
  52. ^ Kessler, Glenn. "About The Fact Checker". The Washington Post. Retrieved 13 July 2021.
  53. ^ "WHO-convened global study of origins of SARS-CoV-2: China Part". World Health Organization. Retrieved 21 May 2021. WHO gratefully acknowledges the work of the joint team, including Chinese and international scientists and WHO experts who worked on the technical sections of this report, and those who worked on studies to prepare data and information for the joint mission.
  54. ^ Mallapaty S (1 April 2021). "After the WHO report: what's next in the search for COVID's origins". Nature. pp. 337–338. doi:10.1038/d41586-021-00877-4. Retrieved 15 June 2021.
  55. ^ Huang Y (8 April 2021). "What the WHO Investigation Reveals About the Origins of COVID-19". Retrieved 15 June 2021.
  56. ^ a b Maxman, Amy (30 March 2021). "WHO report into COVID pandemic origins zeroes in on animal markets, not labs". Nature. 592. doi:10.1038/d41586-021-00865-8. Retrieved 17 July 2021.
  57. ^ a b c Maxman, Amy (27 May 2021). "Divisive COVID 'lab leak' debate prompts dire warnings from researchers". Nature. 594. doi:10.1038/d41586-021-01383-3. Retrieved 17 July 2021.
  58. ^ Alba D (19 March 2021). "How Anti-Asian Activity Online Set the Stage for Real-World Violence". The New York Times.
  59. ^ Mello MM, Greene JA, Sharfstein JM (August 2020). "Attacks on Public Health Officials During COVID-19". JAMA. 324 (8): 741–742. doi:10.1001/jama.2020.14423. PMID 32777019. S2CID 221099095.
  60. ^ Izri T (27 October 2020). "Winnipeg epidemiologist faces online threats, as concerns about COVID-19 misinformation deepen". Winnipeg. Experts say the hostility against public health officials is being fueled in part by online conspiracy theories.
  61. ^ Marcelo P (20 April 2021). "They were experts in viruses, and now in pitfalls of fame". AP NEWS. Retrieved 16 June 2021.
  62. ^ Nectar Gan. "14 countries and WHO chief accuse China of withholding data from coronavirus investigation". CNN. Retrieved 31 May 2021.
  63. ^ Zarocostas, John (10 April 2021). "Calls for transparency after SARS-CoV-2 origins report". The Lancet. 397 (10282): 1335. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00824-2. ISSN 0140-6736. PMC 8032220. PMID 33838748. S2CID 233186234. Health diplomats speaking on condition of anonymity said that senior Chinese officials viewed the statements as an attempt to politicise the study.
  64. ^ Zarocostas, John (10 April 2021). "Calls for transparency after SARS-CoV-2 origins report". The Lancet. 397 (10282): 1335. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)00824-2. ISSN 0140-6736. PMC 8032220. PMID 33838748.
  65. ^ Bloom, Jesse D.; Chan, Yujia Alina; Baric, Ralph S.; Bjorkman, Pamela J.; Cobey, Sarah; Deverman, Benjamin E.; Fisman, David N.; Gupta, Ravindra; Iwasaki, Akiko; Lipsitch, Marc; Medzhitov, Ruslan; Neher, Richard A.; Nielsen, Rasmus; Patterson, Nick; Stearns, Tim; Nimwegen, Erik van; Worobey, Michael; Relman, David A. (14 May 2021). "Investigate the origins of COVID-19". Science. 372 (6543): 694. Bibcode:2021Sci...372..694B. doi:10.1126/science.abj0016. ISSN 0036-8075. PMID 33986172. S2CID 234487267. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |lay-url= ignored (help)
  66. ^ a b Swanson I (25 May 2021). "The Memo: Media face hard questions on Trump, Wuhan lab". The Hill. Retrieved 2 June 2021.
  67. ^ "WHO-convened global study of origins of SARS-CoV-2: China Part". www.who.int. Retrieved 3 July 2021.
  68. ^ See, for example, the following:
  69. ^ Maxmen A (June 2021). "Divisive COVID 'lab leak' debate prompts dire warnings from researchers". Nature. 594 (7861): 15–16. Bibcode:2021Natur.594...15M. doi:10.1038/d41586-021-01383-3. PMID 34045757. S2CID 235232290.
  70. ^ Elliott P. "How Distrust of Donald Trump Muddled the COVID-19 'Lab Leak' Debate". Time. Retrieved 7 June 2021.
  71. ^ "Nature-based or lab leak? Unraveling the debate over the origins of COVID-19". ABC News. Retrieved 16 June 2021. Political voices in favor of the lab-leak theory, particularly from President Donald Trump, served to polarize the issue further and largely pushed the scientific community away from a willingness to consider the lab-leak theory.
  72. ^ Chow D (16 June 2021). "There's still no evidence of a Chinese lab leak. But here's what's changed, scientists say". NBC News. Chan said there had been trepidation among some scientists about publicly discussing the lab leak hypothesis for fear that their words could be misconstrued or used to support racist rhetoric about how the coronavirus emerged.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=COVID-19_lab_leak_theory&oldid=1034502648"