Results of the WHO Covid-19 origin investigation in Wuhan: Not enough to dispel doubts

Baoquocte.vn. While China praised the World Health Organization (WHO) Covid-19 origin investigation, many countries remain skeptical of this report.

Wuhan Institute of Virology – which is hypothesized to be the source of Covid-19 infection. (Source: Reuters) According to a report published on 30/3, a joint investigation by the World Health Organization (WHO) and China conducted on the origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus causing acute respiratory infections (Covid- 19) concluded that it was “extremely unlikely” that the virus had escaped a laboratory in the central Chinese city of Wuhan. The origin of the SARS-CoV-2 virus is still questionable The report concludes that the virus is most likely transmitted to humans from an unknown animal, while contradicting the theory made by former US President Donald Trump that the Chinese lab may be the birthplace. virus. While China praised the report, 14 countries including Japan, the US, Australia, the UK, Canada and South Korea have expressed “common concern” about the study and claim that the investigation has was “delayed a long time and lacked access to complete data and originals”, and called for “a fast, efficient, transparent, science-based and independent process” to produce international assessments in case of future outbreaks. WHO Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus said: “All theories are still being discussed. Although the team has concluded that the laboratory leak is the least likely hypothesis, it requires requiring further investigation, it is likely that additional missions including many experts will have to be deployed. According to WHO Director-General, the inspection team should have access to full data including biological samples from at least September 2019. He asserted that this report is a very important beginning and not the end. “We have not found the origin of the virus yet, and must continue to follow the science without missing any details”, Mr. Tedros Ghebreyesus stressed. While the majority of the report focuses on molecular studies, viral evolution, and potentially host animals, the report on potential laboratory leaks does. Very sketchy presentation. Although the host origin of SARS-CoV-2 is widely recognized, some scientists still maintain the view that this virus may have been collected and stored in the Wuhan Institute of Virology, despite the fact that Chinese scientists have rejected this claim. Viruses similar to SARS-CoV-2 were reported to have been found in bats and pangolins, but an intermediate host for transmission to humans has yet to be identified. This report is based on a study conducted by an international team of experts that mink and cats, which are known to be susceptible animals, may be one of the potential hosts. Need more information The Trump administration once hypothesized that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could have come from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and claimed that some researchers there had already had Covid-19-like symptoms in the fall. year 2019. However, the team said they found no evidence to support this claim during a January-February 2021 field trip to Wuhan City to investigate the source of the virus. The Chinese authorities have stated that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could have been introduced into the country through imported frozen food. Such transmission is possible but cannot be verified as imported frozen products are not considered a potential path of infection during early spread, the team report said. viruses and there were no tests for them at the time. Matthew Kavanagh, a researcher at Georgetown University, said the report said more in-depth information about the origin of the virus, but more information is needed. “Obviously, the Chinese government does not provide all the necessary data, and until they do this, the conclusions will be very difficult,” said researcher Matthew Kavanagh. The reporting team included experts from many different countries and officials from WHO, World Veterinary Organization and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. The team, after being quarantined for two weeks in Wuhan in mid-January 2021, inspected the research institute and other places believed to be related to the virus such as seafood markets. They also had discussions with Chinese experts. Representatives of the WHO and China expert group at a joint press conference in Wuhan on February 9. (Source: Reuters) “Opposite” views Jesse Bloom, an expert on evolutionary biology at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle (USA), said he does not believe that a lab leak is unlikely. The expert agrees that the virus naturally evolved to spread to humans, but he did not see any explanation in the report disproving the possibility that the SARS-CoV-2 virus could catch. source from a laboratory. Meanwhile, Mr. Peter Daszak, a member of the WHO expert group, a British ecologist in infectious diseases, and the executive director of the Ecological Health Coalition – a disease prevention organization in New York. , has voiced opposition to the flow of comments criticizing the research results and the degree of cooperation of China. Mr. Peter Daszak said that the lab leak hypothesis “has political purposes from the very beginning”. Dr. Daszak added that the WHO team of experts was not prohibited from participating in interviews with scientists who were on the ground during the early stages of the pandemic. Mr. Daszak himself has also been accused of a conflict of interest due to collaborating research on the virus with the Wuhan Institute of Virology, which he thinks an infectious disease ecologist should do. “We were in the right place because we knew there was a risk of disease outbreaks. We were working there with this exact team and it happened,” said Dr Daszak. A group of scientists not affiliated with WHO is calling for a new investigation into the origins of the Covid-19 pandemic. They argue that such an investigation needs to consider the possibility of the virus spreading from a laboratory in Wuhan or infecting people inside it. (synthetic)