A team of scientists convened by the World Health Organization to better understand the origins of the coronavirus pandemic and possible future epidemics said a theory that the virus could have escaped a laboratory needed “further research”. However, in a report released Thursday, the WHO-backed team said it had not received any new data that would allow it to better evaluate this theory. Members of the team from Brazil, China and Russia opposed calls for further research into the “laboratory leak” theory. The report also states that the available data indicate that SARS-CoV-2 was of zoonotic origin, which means that it spread among animals in the wild, but that neither the animal that infected the human nor the place where the infection occurred was possible to be recognized. “At this point, the strongest evidence still lies about the transmission of zoonotic agents,” said Marietjie Venter, chair of the WHO team and a virologist at the University of Pretoria in South Africa. “However, the precursor viruses found in bats are certainly not close enough to be the virus that has spread to humans.” The report was prepared by the Scientific Advisory Group on the Origin of New Pathogens (SAGO), a body of experts from the United States, China and 25 other nations that first met last year following widespread criticism of a common WHO- China research on the origin of the coronavirus. WHO officials said the report contained only the preliminary findings of the group, which was set up to advise the World Health Organization (WHO) secretariat. SAGO did not undertake its own studies, but instead reviewed the existing research. The team is designed not only to help investigate the origin of the coronavirus, but also to create a framework for understanding the origin of future outbreaks. His work is expected to last for years, WHO officials said. “This is just the beginning,” Maria Van Kerkhove, a World Health Organization epidemiologist at the SAGO Secretariat, told reporters before the report was released. “They have made some good progress. “They have clearly described that there is more work to be done.” Even so, owning one is still beyond the reach of the average person. While many scientists have supported a theory of the spread of zoonotic agents, the theory of laboratory leakage has gained overwhelming support from some experts, including some US officials. The leak theory in Wuhan’s laboratory is receiving more attention. This is because key elements are still missing. Beijing has strongly rejected the idea that the coronavirus could have escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology or another coronavirus research institute in the Chinese city where Covid-19 was first recorded in late 2019. In his place, Chinese officials promoted wild theories without scientific support, including that the virus originated in the United States or was introduced to China with frozen fish. The SAGO report aimed to assess the origins of the pandemic from a scientific standpoint, Van Kerkhove said. “We have no illusions that we can keep all politics out, but we will do everything we can to stay focused on what needs to be done here.” The SAGO preliminary report was released more than a year after a joint WHO-China team traveled to Wuhan and published its own report dismissing the theory of laboratory leakage as “extremely unlikely”, suggesting the idea of the virus was transmitted from frozen food further research was needed. The WHO-China report concluded that the zoonotic spread was the most likely scenario for the origin of the virus, but failed to find evidence of how it was transmitted to humans. This report was widely criticized after its release in March 2021, with WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus suggesting that the report did not conduct a “sufficiently comprehensive” assessment of laboratory leakage theory and expressing frustration with the low level of access provided. in the mission by Chinese officials. How Chinese pressure on coronavirus research shocked WHO – and led its director to push One of the team’s researchers, Danish food scientist Peter Ben Ebarek, later said in interviews that the team’s Chinese researchers had pushed to include the theory of laboratory leakage in the report. While SAGO was convened to address some of the criticisms of the WHO-China report, it was also able to evaluate some new data, including data on blood samples from 40,000 Chinese donors in Wuhan between September and December 2019. According to the report, more than 200 of these samples were initially positive for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2, but were later found to be false positive. SAGO requested further information regarding the data and the methods used for the analysis of the samples. The new report suffers from some of the same restrictions as the WHO-China Joint Report – including the fact that Chinese officials cannot be required to cooperate in any investigation. According to the SAGO report, Tedros sent letters to Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and Health Minister Ma Xiaowei on February 14 and 21, respectively, requesting information on various factors, including “laboratory cases”. It is not clear whether Tetros received an answer. WHO spokesman Tariq Jasarevic said the body did not share its correspondence with Member States. Venter, president of SAGO, said Chinese officials worked with the team, sending experts to present and discuss new findings. “We recognize that they have done a tremendous job and have addressed many of the questions raised in the WHO-China initial report,” Venter said. However, SAGO found that not much had been done. Venter identified the Huanan Seafood Market in Wuhan as a site that needed further study. “We recognize that the market να may have been a boost to the early epidemic, but it is not clear where all these animals came from. “We have to watch it,” he said.
