Origins of SARS-CoV-2

Origins of SARS-CoV-2

Origins of SARS-CoV-2 512 342 Jamie Metzl

NOTE: This post was originally published on April 16, 2020 and has been updated regularly.

A number of people have reached out to me questioning my assertion that “the most likely starting point of the coronavirus crisis is an accidental leak from one of the Chinese virology institutes in Wuhan.” (See this CNN interviewthis Newsweek editorial, this WSJ editorial, and this The Hill editorial) I have been making this claim consistently since January and will continue to do so until this issue gets the attention it deserves. We owe everyone who has died from COVID-19, all the people who have lost their loved ones and livelihoods, and future generations a thorough investigation of how the tragedy began and has unfolded.

I do not believe this was likely a genetically altered virus (although this paper suggests a possible alternative explanation), just that it had very likely been isolated and cultured in one of the Wuhan labs (probably WIV). I want to be clear that this is only highly informed best guess based on publicly available information and my application of Occam’s razor. I have no definitive way of proving this thesis but the evidence is, in my view, nearly overwhelming. If forced to place odds on the confidence of my assertion, I would say there’s an 85% chance the pandemic started with an accidental leak from the Wuhan Institute of Virology and a 15% chance it began in some other way. If China keeps preventing a full and unrestricted international forensic investigation into the origins of the pandemic, I believe it is fair to deny Beijing the benefit of the doubt. The purpose of this post, however, is to present the evidence and my views so that readers can come to their own conclusions. If there is additional evidence I am missing, please let me know. I do not have a political agenda other than finding out why so many people around the world are dead from COVID-19 and how we can learn the lessons from this catastrophe to prevent the next ones. What we need, and should all be calling for regardless of our nationalities or political persuasions, is a full and unrestricted international forensic investigation into the origins of COVID-19.

Because there is a lot of material to get through below, let me just summarize what I believe to be the most likely scenario. This type of hypothesizing is necessary because a full investigation is being blocked.

  • In 2012, six miners working in a bat-infested copper mine in southern China (Yunnan province) were infected with a bat coronavirus. All of them developed symptoms exactly like COVID-19 symptoms. Three of them died.
  • Blood sampled from these miners were extracted and taken to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the only level 5 biosecurity lab in China that was also studying bat coronaviruses.
  • The WIV carried out gain of function research, almost certainly on these and a range of related and other samples (which is different than genetically engineering the viruses). There has never been a full and public accounting for what viruses are in their sample set and database.
  • In late 2019 the SARS-CoV-2 virus appeared in Wuhan. The closest known relative of this virus is the virus extracted from the Yunnan miners. The difference between the virus extracted from the miners and SARS-CoV-2 could potentially be explained by the gain of function research.
  • In the early stages of the outbreak, Wuhan local authorities worked aggressively to silence the whistleblowers and destroy evidence that could prove incriminating.
  • When Beijing authorities got involved a bit later, they faced a choice of implicating to Wuhan authorities, and, in effect, taking blame for what was quickly emerging as a major global problem, or turning into the curve and going all in for the coverup. They chose the second option.
  • Since then, the Chinese authorities have gone to great lengths to destroy evidence and silence anyone in CHina who might be in a position to provide evidence.
  • In light of all of this, only a full and unrestricted international forensic investigation into the origins of the pandemic, with complete access to all samples, lab records, scientists, health officials, etc. will suffice.

I want to be clear that I am a progressive who believes in asking tough questions and seeking the truth. I in no way seek to support or align myself with any activities that may be considered unfair, dishonest, nationalistic, racist, bigoted, or biased in any way. I also believe that whatever the original reasons for the outbreak, the reason why so many more Americans are dying from COVID-19 than most anyone else is the catastrophic failure of the Trump administration to respond effectively.

As I argued in my Newsweek piece:

Just as we wouldn’t imagine having a plane crash and not immediately trying to figure out what happened, we can’t let the COVID-19 crisis unfold without urgently understanding how our systems have so spectacularly failed. There are plenty of fingers to point, and we must thoughtfully point them now, at all of us, for our own good. For all we know, a new and even worse pandemic could begin even before we have overcome this one… Until we get to the bottom of all these failures and work to fix them, we remain dangerously susceptible to the next pandemic… Whatever the origins of the outbreak, including the possibility of an accidental leak from the Chinese virology lab in Wuhan, China’s dangerous and ongoing information suppression activities are the foundations of this crisis. We have to find out fast where and how this outbreak began… The WHO could have raised hell when China denied access to WHO experts for those critical early weeks, did not need to initially parrot Chinese propaganda and could certainly have sounded the alarm earlier. We have to ask how we can help the WHO do better… The United States had all the information it needed by January to mount a massive response, but Trump actively undermined the findings of his own intelligence and health officials. Worse, he passed misinformation to the American people that potentially led to many thousands of deaths. We’ve got to ask why this happened… Until we get to the bottom of all these failures and work to fix them, we remain dangerously susceptible to the next pandemic… We are all on the same plane with a shared interest in not letting it crash… Let’s work together to safely land the plane.

In this spirit, I think it fair to list some of the publicly available sources I am relying for my assertions. I do not necessarily ascribe to all of the assertions made in these sources. These sources include:

My only mission is to seek to understand where this outbreak originated. I am extremely open to other views and welcome any additional information. If you have anything you believe relevant, I would be grateful for you to pass it along.

As I have already stated publicly, “Even if the coronavirus is an accidental leak from a Wuhan lab, we are all one interconnected humanity who must work together to get through this crisis.” It is my view that Chinese researchers at these institutes were studying these viruses with the best intentions of developing surveillance systems, treatments, and vaccines for the good of humanity. Countries make mistakes, even terrible and deadly ones. I was in the White House when the US bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. We believed it was an accident but many Chinese people thought it was a deliberate act. I understood why. 

Moments like these are inherently difficult and we should all do our very best to find the answers to our most important questions in the most honest, careful, and considered manner possible.

We must all be doing everything we can to build the surveillance, response, treatment, vaccine development, and public health capacities we need to make us safe. This pandemic is terrible but there could very well be much worse facing us in the future.

In this spirit, I have compiled this summary of the available evidence. Because China is still restricting access to the relevant data and people, the case remains speculative by necessity. Those restrictions themselves should concern us all.

  • Beginning on December 10, 2019, increasing numbers of people, many of who had visited the Hunan Seafood Market in Wuhan, fell ill due to a new disease.
  • There is strong evidence that the novel coronavirus outbreak did not originate in the seafood market (Lancet). (This was clear early on but Chinese officials held to this story until late May 2020, when the evidence against this claim became wholly indefensible, more below.)
  • The Huanan Seafood Market didn’t have bats for sale, and most bats species in Wuhan would be hibernating at the time of outbreak. It was reported that 34% of cases had no contact with the market, and ’No epidemiological link was found between the first patient and later cases.’ (Lancet)
  • It seems extremely unlikely, perhaps borderline impossible, the outbreak originated in the seafood market. (New Yorker)
  • This market is less than 9 miles away from The Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), Chinese Academy of Sciences, which:
    • Developed chimeric SARS-like coronaviruses
    • Conducted ’dangerous’ gain-of-function research on the SARS-CoV-1 virus, some of which had been funded by the US government (Asia Times)
    • Established a 96.2% match with SARS-CoV-2 and a virus they sampled from a cave over 1,000 miles away from Wuhan
    • Injected live piglets with bat coronaviruses as recently as July 2019
    • Published a paper on a close descendant of SARS-CoV-1, MERS-CoV, in November 2019
    • Was hiring researchers to work on bat coronaviruses as recently as November 2019
  • United States embassy and consular officials who visited the Wuhan Institute of Virology in January 2018 were deeply concerned. Their cable sent to the State Department noted:
    • “the new lab has a serious shortage of appropriately trained technicians and investigators needed to safely operate this high-containment laboratory”
    • “the researchers also showed that various SARS-like coronaviruses can interact with ACE2, the human receptor identified for SARS-coronavirus. This finding strongly suggests that SARS-like coronaviruses from bats can be transmitted to humans to cause SARS-like diseases. From a public health perspective, this makes the continued surveillance of SARS-like coronaviruses in bats and study of the animal-human interface critical to future emerging coronavirus outbreak prediction and prevention.” (Washington Post)
  • The market is also less than 3 miles away from the Wuhan Centre for Disease Control, which:
    • Was accused of being the source of the outbreak from a now-withdrawn academic paper from a notable Chinese scholar at the South China University of China
    • Once kept horseshoe bats, a known reservoir of SARS-CoV-1, within its labs
    • Once performed surgery on live animals within its labs
    • Had a researcher who quarantined on two separate occasions; once upon coming into contact with bat blood after being ’attacked’ and another time when he was urinated upon in a cave while wearing inadequate personal protection
    • Had previously done bad virus research funded by the US NIH (in a grant to EcoHealth Alliance)
    • possessed the virus that is the most closely related known virus in the world to the outbreak virus, bat virus RaTG13. This virus was isolated in 2013 and had its genome published on January 23, 2020. Seven more years of bat coronavirus collection followed the 2013 RaTG13 isolation. One component of the novel-bat-virus project at the Wuhan Institute of Virology involved infection of laboratory animals with bat viruses. Therefore, the possibility of a lab accident includes scenarios with direct transmission of a bat virus to a lab worker, scenarios with transmission of a bat virus to a laboratory animal and then to a lab worker, and scenarios involving improper disposal of laboratory animals or laboratory waste.  (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)
    • began its gain of function research program for bat coronaviruses in 2015. Using a natural virus, institute researchers made “substitutions in its RNA coding to make it more transmissible. They took a piece of the original SARS virus and inserted a snippet from a SARS-like bat coronavirus, resulting in a virus that is capable of infecting human cells.”  (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)
  • Even before this outbreak, China had a very poor safety record at many of its biosecurity facilities.
  • In the years since the SARS outbreak, many instances of mishaps involving the accidental release of pathogens have taken place in labs throughout the world. Hundreds of breaches have occurred in the U.S., including a 2014 release of anthrax from a U.S. government lab that exposed 84 people. The SARS virus escaped from a Beijing lab in 2004, causing four infections and one death. An accidental release is not complicated and doesn’t require malicious intent. All it takes is for a lab worker to get sick, go home for the night, and unwittingly spread the virus to others. (Newsweek)
  • Although it does not appear likely this virus was engineered (Nature Medicine), trying to determine the exact pattern and genomic ancestry of the virus is difficult, particularly as many of the recombinant regions may be small and are likely to change as more viruses related to SARS-CoV-2 are sampled. (Cell)
  • Using the current standard genetic engineering technology, many alterations of several bases in the RNA genome would be undetectable, including construction of a chimeric coronavirus encoding an unpublished spike protein in an unpublished genome. (Independent Science News)
  • According to a DIA report, “about 33 percent of the original 41 identified cases did not have direct exposure” to the market. That, along with what’s known of the laboratory’s work in past few years, raised reasonable suspicion that the pandemic may have been caused by a lab error, not the wet market. (Newsweek)
  • A Broad Institute study asserts that genetic examination of four samples containing the virus from the seafood market to those taken from the Wuhan patient are ‘99.9 per cent’ identical. This suggests it came from infected visitors or vendors, indicating ‘Sars-CoV-2 had been imported into the market by humans’. The authors found no evidence ‘of cross-species transmission’ at the market.
  • After months of speculation and with the market origin story indefensible, the Chinese Centers for Disease Control and Prevention finally admitted only in late May 2020 that it has ruled the site out as the origin point of the outbreak. According to Gao Fu, the director of the Chinese CDC, “It now turns out that the market is one of the victims.”
  • Niko­lai Petro­vksy and col­leagues at Flinders Uni­ver­sity in Aus­tralia have found that SARS-CoV-2 has a higher affin­ity for hu­man re­cep­tors than for any other an­i­mal species they tested, in­clud­ing pan­golins and horse­shoe bats. He sug­gests that this could have hap­pened if the virus was be­ing cul­tured in hu­man cells, adding that “We can’t ex­clude the pos­si­bil­ity that this came from a lab­o­ra­tory ex­per­i­ment.” (Wall Street Journal)
  • Similarly, Sirotkin and Sirotkin assert in their Wiley preprint essay: “Unless the intermediate host necessary for completing a natural zoonotic jump is identified, the dual‐use gain‐of‐function research practice of viral serial passage should be considered a viable route by which the novel coronavirus arose. The practice of serial passage mimics a natural zoonotic jump, and offers explanations for SARS‐CoV‐2’s distinctive spike‐protein region and its unexpectedly high affinity for angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE2), as well as the notable polybasic furin cleavage site within it. Additional molecular clues raise further questions, all of which warrant full investigation into the novel coronavirus’s origins and a re‐examination of the risks and rewards of dual‐use gain‐of‐function research.”
  • The Brufsky et al Wiley pre-print letter lays out the underlying science which seems to explain why the gain of function research at the WIV is the most likely origin of the pandemic. To be fair, however, the conclusion these authors draw is extremely cautious: “These unique features of SARSCoV2 raise several questions concerning the proximal origin of the virus that require further discussion.” They do not list he question but the implication is clear enough.
  • Although the genetic difference between the virus extracted from the Yunnan miners and SARS-CoV-2 is significant enough to make many prominent scientists believe they may be separated by decades of “natural” evolution, this difference could potentially be explained through gain of function research that sped up the evolutionary process. Additionally, and quoting a private communication from a scientist I very much trust (who chose to remain anonymous due to personal safety concerns), “The issue is that there is this internal database at the WIV that even other Chinese scientists can’t access. Even the first team to point out the similarity of SARS2 to the 4991 sequence — they had no idea that 4991 aka RaTG13 had been fully genome sequenced. What other viruses are in this database? Was the pangolin CoV RBD also in this database by mid 2019?”
  • China has taken a series of steps since the beginning of this crisis which seem consistent with a coverup. Although the coverup began with local and provincial Wuhan authorities, it later involved decisions made by the Chinese leadership at the highest level. These steps include:
    • On December 31, Chinese authorities started censoring news of the virus from search engines, deleting terms including “SARS variation,” “Wuhan Seafood market” and “Wuhan Unknown Pneumonia.” (Daily Telegraph)
    • Officials closed the market the day after notifying the WHO and sent in teams with strong disinfectants. Samples from animals were taken but, four months later, the results have not been shared with foreign scientists. The actions led to claims that they were deliberately wiping away crucial traces. (Daily Telegraph)
    • Many China scholars noted that it was quite unusual for Chinese government authorities to identify Wuhan’s Huanan South China Seafood Market so quickly as the source of the outbreak. They thought this behavior so uncharacteristic that it raised suspicions in their minds.
    • The Hubei health commission ordered genomics companies to stop testing for the new virus and to destroy all samples. 
    • On January 1, an employee of a genomics company in Wuhan received a phone call from an official at the Hubei Provincial Health Commission, ordering the company to stop testing samples from Wuhan related to the new disease and to destroy all existing samples. (Caixin Global)
    • On January 1, Wuhan Institute of Virology’s director general, Yanyi Wang, messaged her colleagues, saying the National Health Commission told her the lab’s COVID-19 data shall not be published on social media and shall not be disclosed to the media. And on January 3, the commission sent this document, never posted online, but saved by researchers, telling labs to destroy COVID-19 samples or send them to the depository institutions designated by the state. (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)
    • On January 3, China’s National Health Commission (NHC) ordered institutions not to publish any information related to the unknown disease and ordered labs to transfer any samples they had to designated testing institutions or destroy them. (Caixin Global)
    • Even with full sequences decoded by three state labs independently, Chinese health officials remained silent. (AP)
    • China sat on releasing the genetic map, or genome, of the virus for more than a week after three different government labs had fully decoded the information. Tight controls on information and competition within the Chinese public health system were to blame, according to dozens of interviews and internal documents. (AP)
    • WHO officials complained in internal meetings that they were making repeated requests to the Chinese authorities for more data, especially to find out if the virus could spread efficiently between humans, but to no avail. “We have informally and formally been requesting more epidemiological information,” WHO’s China representative Galea said. “But when asked for specifics, we could get nothing.” (AP)
    • Beijing did not notify the World Health Organization of the outbreak for at least four days after Wuhan officials were notified. A WHO investigation team was not allowed to visit Wuhan until three weeks after that, and the team was not given full and unrestricted access even during this preliminary field visit
    • The Chinese government closed the laboratory in Shanghai that first published the genome of COVID-19 on January 10, explaining that it had been shuttered for “rectification.” Chinese citizens who reported on the coronavirus were censured and, in some cases, “disappeared.” These have included businessman Fang Bin, lawyer Chen Qiushi, former state TV reporter Li Zehua and, most recently, Zhang Zhan, a lawyer. They are reportedly being held in extrajudicial detention centers for speaking out about China’s response to the pandemic.  (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)
    • Chinese government labs only released the genome after another lab published it ahead of authorities on a virologist website on Jan. 11. Even then, China stalled for at least two weeks more on providing WHO with detailed data on patients and cases, according to recordings of internal meetings held by the U.N. health agency through January — all at a time when the outbreak arguably might have been dramatically slowed. (AP)
    • Although international law obliges countries to report information to WHO that could have an impact on public health, the U.N. agency has no enforcement powers and cannot independently investigate epidemics within countries. Instead, it must rely on the cooperation of member states. According to WHO’s chief of emergencies, Dr. Michael Ryan, this type of obfuscation and interference “would not happen in Congo and did not happen in Congo and other places.” (AP)
    • On Jan. 14, the head of China’s National Health Commission said in a confidential teleconference with provincial health officials that the situation was “severe and complex,” that “clustered cases suggest that human-to-human transmission is possible,”  and that “the risk of transmission and spread is high.” The Commission issued a 63-page document on response procedures that same day that was labeled “internal” and “not to be publicly disclosed.” The next day, the head of China’s disease control emergency center, announced on state television that “the risk of sustained human-to-human transmission is low.” This same message was delivered to the World Health Organization. (Washington Post)
    • Between the day the full genome was first decoded by a government lab on Jan. 2 and the day WHO declared a global emergency on Jan. 30, the outbreak spread by a factor of 100 to 200 times, according to retrospective infection data from the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (AP)
    • Offers from the United States to send medical experts Wuhan in early January were rejected by the central government. (Diplomat)
    • This Chinese preprint paper was released in February 2020 and then mysteriously retracted. In it, two Chinese experts assert that, ” Somebody was entangled with the evolution of 2019-nCoV coronavirus. In addition to origins of natural recombination and intermediate host, the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan… Regulations may be taken to relocate these laboratories far away from city center and other densely populated places.”
    • Although WIV officials have commented publicly about social media posting alleging that one of their prior researchers may be “patient zero,” the WIV has not provided any information about that person
    • A WIV researcher who publicly accused the director of the Institute of selling infected lab animals to vendors on Weibo (with pictures of herself and her employee ID included) later claimed she was ’hacked’ and disavowed her prior allegation
    • In contrast to its earlier (and inaccurate) assertion that the outbreak originated in the Wuhan seafood market, a Ministry of foreign Affairs spokesperson on March 12 accused the United States Army of intentionally bringing SARS-CoV-2 to Wuhan
    • Beijing disinfected the Wuhan market before a full international investigation could be conducted and has yet to provide U.S. experts with samples of the novel coronavirus collected from the earliest cases.
    • The Shanghai lab that published the novel coronavirus genome on Jan. 11 was quickly shut down by authorities for “rectification.” Several of the doctors and journalists who reported on the spread early on have disappeared. (Washington Post)
    • On Feb. 14, Chinese President Xi Jinping called for a new biosecurity law to be accelerated. On Wednesday, The Chinese government has placed severe restrictions requiring approval before any research institution publishes anything on the origin of the novel coronavirus. (Washington Post)
    • This was followed immediately by a China Ministry of Science & Technology announcement of new guidelines for laboratories, especially in handling viruses. Almost at the same time, the Chinese newspaper Global Times published an article on “chronic inadequate management issues at laboratories, including problems of biological wastes.”
    • Labs analyzing the pathogen were instructed to destroy samples, a health center that had published the virus’s genome sequence was temporarily shut down the following day, and doctors were prevented from submitting case information to the country’s infectious disease tracking network. (Diplomat)
    • Reports of health care workers falling ill, an early indicator of human-to-human transmission, were suppressed. More indirectly, state media coverage of doctors being penalized reportedly had a chilling effect on other medical professionals who might have sounded the alarm. (Diplomat)
    • In March 2020, Beijing announced the expulsion of American journalists working for The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post, the media organizations who have exposed some of the most significant misdeeds and coverups by the Chinese government over recent decades
    • In April 2020, with the outbreak in full swing, the WIV deleted a press release detailing the January 2019 U.S. State Department visit
    • The Chinese government has now banned any researcher from publishing anything on the origins of this crisis without prior approval of the Ministry of Science and Technology (Nature)
    • On April 24, the New York Times reported that Beijing has successfully pressured European Union officials to water down references to China an an EU report. The original language had stated, “China has continued to run a global disinformation campaign to deflect blame for the outbreak of the pandemic and improve its international image… Both overt and covert tactics have been observed.”
    • It appears there may have been a sudden drop in cellphone usage at WIV in early October followed be a cellphone blackout, suggesting the possibility of an accident inside WIV on October 6 followed by a traffic closure. Without further detail about sourcing, however, this information remains speculative. (E-PAI report)
  • On April 18, 2020, Director of the Wuhan Institute of Virology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences said in an interview that “there is no way this virus came from us.”
  • “At this stage, it is not possible to determine precisely the source of the virus which caused the COVID-19 pandemic,” the World Health Organization said in a statement to Newsweek.
  • In early May, the World Health Organization’s representative in China, Gauden Galea, publicly complained that China had refused repeated requests to permit the WHO to participate in whatever investigations the Chinese government was undertaking itself. He said that the WHO had not been given access to laboratory logs at the WIV or the Wuhan Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)
  • On May 3, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said “There is a significant amount of evidence that this came from that laboratory in Wuhan.” China’s Global Times, run by the ruling Communist Party’s official People’s Daily, said in an editorial responding to this interview that “The Trump administration continues to engage in unprecedented propaganda warfare while trying to impede global efforts in fighting the COVID-19 pandemic.”
  • On May 4, the Guardian claimed its sources insisted a “15-page dossier” highlighted by the Australian Daily Telegraph accusing China of a deadly cover up was not culled from intelligence from the Five Eyes Network, an alliance between the UK, US, Australia, New Zealand and Canada.
  • Bloomberg reported on May 5 that a majority of the 17 agencies that provide and analyze intelligence for the U.S. government believe the pandemic started after the virus was leaked from the Wuhan lab, but based mostly on circumstantial evidence.
  • The U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Britain’s National Cyber Security Center recently issued a statement saying hackers are “actively targeting organisations … that include healthcare bodies, pharmaceutical companies, academia, medical research organisations, and local government.” This was widely construed as suggesting that state-sponsored Chinese hackers were attempting to steal COVD-19 research. (NPR)
  • On May 19, the World Health Assembly agreed to an “impartial, independent and comprehensive evaluation” of the international response to COVID-19. China did not object to the resolution but Chinese president Xi Jinping said the investigation should only take place after the pandemic is contained. This is not likely to happen any time soon.
  • Investigating the range of possible spillover sites—from the wet market, to an accidental lab or fieldwork infection, or an unnoticed lab leak—requires a forensic investigation. Obtaining case histories, epidemiological data, and viral samples from different times and places, including the earliest possible samples from infected individuals and samples from wildlife, is paramount… A forensic investigation would additionally involve auditing and sampling viral collections at relevant labs that had been studying coronaviruses, examining the types of experiments carried out and the viruses used, and reviewing the safety and security practices in place… A COVID-19 origins investigation will need to be negotiated and begun rapidly before relevant data diminishes or disappears entirely as time passes. (Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists)
  • Determining whether WIV had anything to do with the virus will require a forensic investigation, say several scientists. Investigators would be looking for viruses that matched the genetic sequence of SARS-CoV-2 and, if they found one, any evidence that it could have escaped. To do that, authorities would need to take samples from the lab, interview staff, review lab books and records of safety incidents, and see what types of experiment researchers had been doing. An independent investigation at the WIV facility is probably the only way to convincingly rule out the lab as a possible source of the outbreak, but such a probe is still being blocked by the Chinese authorities. (Nature) This is outrageous.
  • On June 7, China issued a white paper called, “China’s Actions to Fight the Covid-19 Epidemic.” This document asserted: “China’s action composes the heroic paean to the people’s lives above all else, highlighting the responsibility of a great power to life, the people, history and the international community. China has always adhered to the concept of a community of a shared future for mankind. It has always worked hand in hand with other countries and fought side by side, making unremitting efforts to fight for an early global epidemic prevention and control.” Some observers noted this narrative did not reflect an accurate assessment of the historical record of the COVID-19 pandemic or Chinese history more generally. It is estimated that 47 million people died senselessly under former Chinese Leader Mao Tse Tung.
  • On July 10, the WHO announced that a two-member advance team of experts has left for China to organise an investigation into the origins of the novel coronavirus. It is unlikely this team will have the authority to conduct the type of full forensic investigation that is required.
  • On July 15, Chinese virologist Shi Zhengli, the noted WIV bat virus specialist, sent written comments to Science magazine refuting allegations of a leak. Nothing in her comments in any way reduces the pressing need for a full and unrestricted international investigation into the origins of the pandemic.
  • In my July 29, 2020 Washington Post editorial, I write: “The closest known relative to SARS-CoV-2 is a virus sampled by Chinese researchers from six miners infected while working in a bat-infested cave in southern China in 2012. These miners developed symptoms we now associate with Covid-19. Half of them died. These viral samples were then taken to the Wuhan Institute of Virology—the only facility in China that’s a biosafety Level 4 laboratory, the highest possible safety designation. The Level 4 designation is reserved for facilities dealing with the most dangerous pathogens. Wuhan is more than 1,000 miles north of Yunnan province, where the cave is located. If the virus jumped to humans through a series of human-animal encounters in the wild or in wet markets, as Beijing has claimed, we would likely have seen evidence of people being infected elsewhere in China before the Wuhan outbreak. We have not. The alternative explanation, a lab escape, is far more plausible. We know the Wuhan Institute of Virology was using controversial ‘gain of function’ techniques to make viruses more virulent for research purposes. A confidential 2018 State Department cable released this month highlighting the lab’s alarming safety record should heighten our concern. Suggesting that an outbreak of a deadly bat coronavirus coincidentally occurred near the only level 4 virology institute in all of China—which happened to be studying the closest known relative of that exact virus—strains credulity.”
  • Understanding the link between the Chinese miners exposed in the Yunnan cave in 2012 and the potential outbreak in Wuhan in late 2019 is essential. Anyone with a serious interest in getting to the bottom of the origins questions should be require to read the July 15 Latham and Wilson Independent Science News paper in full. It states: “We suggest, first, that inside the miners RaTG13 (or a very similar virus) evolved into SARS-CoV-2, an unusually pathogenic coronavirus highly adapted to humans. Second, that the Shi lab used medical samples taken from the miners and sent to them by Kunming University Hospital for their research. It was this human-adapted virus, now known as SARS-CoV-2­, that escaped from the WIV in 2019.”
  • It is impossible to overstate the implications of the SARS-CoV-2­ virus being so well adapted to humans from the outset. Zhan and Chan in theit May 2 paper state that “by the time SARS-CoV-2 was first detected in late 2019, it was already pre-adapted to human transmission to an extent similar to late epidemic SARS-CoV. However, no precursors or branches of evolution stemming from a less human-adapted SARS-CoV-2-like virus have been detected… In comparison to the SARS-CoV epidemic, the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic appears to be missing an early phase during which the virus would be expected to accumulate adaptive mutations for human transmission. However, if this were the origin story of SARS-CoV-2, there is a surprising absence of precursors or branches emerging from a less recent, less adapted common ancestor among humans and animals.” The Latham and Wilson July 15 paper provides by far the best explanation: this virus that escaped from the lab had likely come from a human sample (one of the miners).
  • In my Washington Post editorial, I say: “Not getting to the bottom of this crisis would be the height of absurdity. Too much is at stake. To ensure everyone’s safety, the WHO and outside investigators must be empowered to explore all relevant questions about the origins of the pandemic without limits. This comprehensive forensic investigation must include full access to all of the scientists, biological samples, laboratory records and other materials from the Wuhan virology institutes and other relevant Chinese organizations. Denying that access should be considered an admission of guilt by Beijing.”
  • In my August 17 editorial in The Hill, I state that “Congress should immediately establish a bipartisan national commission, modeled on the 9/11 Commission, to prepare a full, complete account of four essential failures and what we can do to address them.” These four failures are ones made by China, the WHO, the US government, and all of us in not preparing for ht full panoply of global existential threats. “Some may feel that establishing such a commission while the pandemic still rages would be like launching the 9/11 commission while the Twin Towers were still falling. But would it not have been better to do exactly that, rather than blindly charge into two wars without deep analysis and a long-term strategy? Getting to the bottom of our current crisis is not just an intellectual exercise. The COVID-19 pandemic is far from over but there are no guarantees that an even worse pandemic, possibly supercharged by a synthetic pathogen, might be just around the corner.”
  • Keep on keeping on Jaime! We’re here for the truth. I’m sure your going to dig it up …. somehow?…. balanced but true.???

    • The triple truth ruth May 19, 2020 at 1:55 am

      The problem with speculation concerning the possibility of an accident is that we still end up in the same place A TWO to THREE YEAR PANDEMIC that can go either way—–deadlier orr benign. As it is it will be hard enough for the rest of the world to get back to the task at hand rebuilding the global economy. I remember past futurists and they all ended up talking what ended up being garbage crystal eyeballing. Anything that makes this worse is exactly the sort of stupidity that got us all here. No one is looking good. Even New Zealand will sooner or later have to deal with the economic consequences. Enough with the blaming and scapegoating. IT’S THE RNA, STUPID and the stupid too.

  • Just FYI, that wet market in Wuhan did sell a lot wild animals in addition to seafood. It even had a wild animal restaurant inside. Apparently not many seafood on the menu.

    • There are identical wet markets in every small and large city all over China with it’s vast 1.3 billion population. Certainly Guandong and Yunan where the suspects are from host countless such markets, and are ~1000 miles away from Wuhan. Everyone please I appeal to your commonsense and try not to believe that somehow this bat virus “choose” Wuhan all places in China to jump to humans, which would be an insane coincidence with no comparison in history.

  • I have an article proving that they were studying Corona type viruses derived from bats at the wuhan lab.
    If you are interested email me at

  • Thank you sharing your insight and review methodology. If you haven’t you may want to look at Curtards published paper that came out early April. It was detailed and thorough. Curtard made the observation that he had only seen this combination of strains expiermently. The link to the full paper is in pubmed. Thank you for asking the difficult questions which it seems for whatever reason the majority in postions of influence, media, institutions or policy arent asking at best or worst censoring those who are. This applies to questions not only of origin but of treatments and management including public policy decisions. Unfortunately the general public en masse are also getting angry about these questions being raised which is baffling; you cant make robust and critical decisions that affect many without vigirous review of all the data, science and scenarios especially from the perspective of cost benefit analysis and therapeutic management.

  • This is in that Nature Medicine paper you reference first:
    “Theories of SARS-CoV-2 origins
    It is improbable that SARS-CoV-2 emerged through laboratory manipulation of a related SARS-CoV-like coronavirus. As noted above, the RBD of SARS-CoV-2 is optimized for binding to human ACE2 with an efficient solution different from those previously predicted7,11. Furthermore, if genetic manipulation had been performed, one of the several reverse-genetic systems available for betacoronaviruses would probably have been used19. However, the genetic data irrefutably show that SARS-CoV-2 is not derived from any previously used virus backbone20. Instead, we propose two scenarios that can plausibly explain the origin of SARS-CoV-2: (i) natural selection in an animal host before zoonotic transfer; and (ii) natural selection in humans following zoonotic transfer. We also discuss whether selection during passage could have given rise to SARS-CoV-2.”

    • No one is asserting that this virus was manipulated with genome editing tools or even that it was grown via in vitro culture (evidence of immunoevasive adaptations make it most likely to have evolved in a host); but there is evidence that these labs were collecting wild type viruses and doing animal passage gain of function experiments, both of which could have brought this strain to Wuhan before an accidental release.

  • I referenced a paper looking at the covid19 strains earlier. In error I listed the scientist name as Curtard. Its Coutard. You can access it here:

  • Thank you so much for putting together this excellent summary. I’ve been following this closely since the beginning and you brought out some points that I was not aware of.
    We have the freedom to speak out and if we don’t speak out we might find some day in the near future that we can no longer. So thank you and keep on keepin on.

    • Steven Atukwase May 3, 2020 at 6:47 am

      As some one with some knowledge in zoology, i think that it would be necessary for the habitat of the alleged animals ie bats that could have been the source of COVID-19 virus to be thoroughly scanned in minute detail to confirm or dismiss that hypothesis. Because if the virus was from bats that were taken from a natural ecosystem, then there must be other bats over the habitat which carry those pathogens. There is no way that only one animal ( one bat) could have contracted and spread the virus because they normally live in large groups., there should be others which have it. If it is discovered that there are no other bats carrying the virus then this is likely to help question the validity of that hypothesis. With the natural occurrence of the virus eliminated, that would leave the scientists to highly suspect the artificial (lab) hypothesis.
      At the same time there is need to ask: If infected bats were experimented on, didn’t other people e.g hunters at a different location or traders at a different market get into contact with bats from the same source and get infected? The assumption here is that the habitat was not restricted, but freely accessed. If it was restricted then the controller should be contacted for information.
      The inquiry into the origin of COVID-19 is essential to prevent the resurgence of the disease after some time so it should be highly encouraged.
      Mr Jamie Metzl, thank you for the interest to conduct that research as it will contribute to preventing the likely resurfacing of that virus.

  • Hi Jamie, keep up your good work. At the moment we don’t know why China behaved the way it did. This makes for conspiratorial thinking. While we have the freedoms to question China’s behaviour and motives we should. If our conspiratorial ideas turn out to wrong at least we shall be sure of this. Keep up the investigating,

  • I used to manage a BSL-3 virology lab. I agree the most likely explanation is a laboratory accident. If this had occurred anywhere else in China I would have believed otherwise. As stated in the article these accidents happen, for instance, a very uncommon but highly lethal infection is monkey B virus which has killed researchers in the past:

    A comment that has troubled me coming out of the Chinese government was along the lines of how their authoritarian government was superior for fighting pandemic outbreaks. This was likely a reaction to some White House comment, but China is definitely a student of history and one has to wonder what steps they would take to finally become the biggest power in the world and have the Renminbi become the world’s reserve currency. The later would require an enormous debt event, which we are now facing.

  • Hazel Henderson May 11, 2020 at 4:45 pm

    Thank you for this very useful summary. I co- wrote an article in March, 2020 with physicist Fritjof Capra, as a global systems -oriented futurist scenario , pointing to feedback loops from natural ecosystems to our unsustainable industrial lifestyles which not only make pandemics more likely, but also relate to all the crises in natural systems resulting from fossilized sectors emissions of greenhouse gases and other pollutants..This article ” Pandemics :Lessons Looking Back from 2050 ” is at , which is a global alternative media Certified B.Corporation I founded and have personally funded with my book royalties and our global TV series since 2004. We take no advertising and have 30,000 professional users .We would be happy to serve pro bono as one of your ” media partners”.I just signed up for your Newsletter .

  • Thank you so much Jamie for helping everyone to focus on the “on the record” facts, common sense, and logic.
    As someone with a strong connection to China, I can say that there are identical wet markets in every small, medium, and large city all over China with it’s vast 1.3 billion population. Certainly Guangdong and Yunnan province where the suspects bats are from, 1000 miles from Wuhan, have countless such markets. Everyone please I appeal to your commonsense and try not to believe that somehow this bat virus “choose” Wuhan near the WIV of all places in all of China to jump to humans, which would be an unbelievable coincidence with no comparison in history.
    On more thing that is little mentioned. is that this prolific “bat woman” coronavirus research program based out of the WIV regularly treks to bat cave in Yunnan and elsewhere to collect virus samples. So the accident itself does not necessarily have to have happened inside the WIV. Despite the requirement for full hazmat suits and virus deactivation at collection, humans make mistakes and they could have accidentally infected themselves and brought it back to Wuhan where they work and live.
    A final point is that the WIV is a very new lab, only commissioned 2-3 years ago as the flagship lab in China, widely praised by state media in print and even video documentaries. It’s China’s first attempt at the top BSL4 security. Again, common sense: new lab, new practices = higher likelihood of accidents.

  • I didn’t want to believe you at first because it’s the same theory that Chump is pushing but science is science and we must get to the bottom of this! 🙂 I believe you now because you don’t have a dog in the hunt and you said:

    – There weren’t any bats for sale;
    – They would’ve been hibernating during that time;
    – The virus was a 96.4% match;
    – China has a history of poor security; and
    – Although you didn’t say this, I believe this theory now because Pompous said that he had significant evidence that he couldn’t share with a smug look on his face. It’s like he’s got the smoking gun document and he’s going to release it right before the election…

    Anyway, what I don’t understand is why you don’t think the virus hasn’t been genetically manipulated? I’m not a scientist, but as a layman, I have been following COVID-19 closely, and I’ve noticed that it has attacked in sequence:

    1) The elderly;
    2) Those with comorbidities;
    3) Those with latent comorbidities — almost like it’s accelerating whatever is going to kill you when you grow old;
    4) People of color;
    5) Now children; and
    6) Possibly hiding and coming out later.

    It’s acting like a bioweapon?

  • Hi Jamie, it’s a great summary and analysis, thanks.
    I’d as well add here a link to the withdrawn paper of dr. Xiao, cited as well in

    I think that this is really important for these reasons:
    – I think it’s the first (only?) Chinese scientist paper which tries to explain the outbreak.
    Some statements are actually also pretty seious and wild like
    “the killer coronavirus probably originated from a laboratory in Wuhan.”
    “In summary, somebody was entangled with the evolution of 2019-nCoV coronavirus”

    – dr Xiao also hypothesized two possible ways in which the contamination might have occurred:

    1) from the WCDC to the market:

    “Surgery was performed on the caged animals and the tissue samples were collected for DNA and RNA extraction and sequencing
    The tissue samples and contaminated trashes were source of pathogens. They were only ~280 meters from the seafood market.”

    2) in another hypothesis he links a possible contamination between the WHCDC (WIV)
    and the adjacent Union hospital:

    “The WHCDC was also adjacent to the Union Hospital where the first group of doctors were infected during this epidemic.
    It is plausible that the virus leaked around and some of them contaminated the initial patients in this epidemic, though solid proofs are needed in future study. ”

    – and then he goes on explaining the chimeric researches performed at the WHCDC(or WIV) and why a lab accident is likely.

    “The second laboratory was 12 kilometers from the seafood market and belonged to Wuhan Institute of Virology, Chinese Academy of Sciences.
    This laboratory reported that the Chinese horseshoe bats were natural reservoirs for the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS-CoV) which caused the 2002-3 pandemic
    . The principle investigator participated in a project which generated a chimeric virus using
    the SARS-CoV reverse genetics system, and reported the potential for human emergence
    . A direct speculation was that SARS-CoV or its derivative might leak from
    the laboratory.”
    typo: the market is 280 meters away from the WCDC not 3 miles
    “The market is also less than 3 miles away from the Wuhan Centre”

  • Typo: “It ((is)) my view that Chinese researchers at these institutes were studying these viruses with the best intentions of developing surveillance systems, treatments, and vaccines for the good of humanity. “

  • “47 million people died senselessly under former Chinese Leader Mao Tse Tung”——it is a lie.

  • Is there any chance it was done deliberately, as an act of biological warfare?

  • I agree with you