The Origin of COVID: Why Doesn’t the World Have the Most Important Response to the Pandemic?

International scientists sent to China for the World Health Organization to find out the origin of the coronavirus, they reported that the investigation has stalled and they have warned that the window of opportunity to solve the mystery “is closing quickly”.

In a letter published in the magazine Nature, the experts appointed by the WHO they declared that origin research is at a “critical moment” which requires urgent collaboration, but has rather stagnated. Among other things, They noted that Chinese authorities remain reluctant to share some raw data, citing concerns about patient privacy.

Earlier this year, the WHO Shipping a team of experts in Wuhan, the city where the first human cases of coronavirus were reported in December 2019. They went to investigate what may have triggered the pandemic that has caused more than four million deaths worldwide.

In his analysis, published in March, the WHO team concluded that the virus probably jumped to humans from animals, and qualified as “Extremely unlikely” possibility of a laboratory leak.

Connoisseurs of WHO they said that your report was only meant to be a first step and claimed: “The window of opportunity to carry out this crucial research is closing quickly: any delay will make some of the studies biologically impossible,” and they illustrated: “Antibodies decrease, For what collecting samples from people who may have been exposed before December 2019 will have diminishing returns”.

Meanwhile, a President-ordered U.S. intelligence review Joe biden was inconclusive on the origin of the virus, including the hypotheses that it could have passed from an animal to a human or if it had escaped from a Chinese laboratory, he recently said. reported The Washington Post.

For its part, China stated that the researchers they should “focus on other possible pathways that can help trace the origin” of COVID-19 and suggested that studies be carried out in other countries. The regime of Xi Jinping encouraged the theory that although the first outbreak occurred in Wuhan, some cases detected early in other countries open the possibility that “patient zero” did not occur in Chinese territory. For its part, Fu Cong, Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of China, agreed that it was “a pity” that the search for the origin of COVID-19 was at a standstill, but say that it was not China’s fault.

In July, the WHO informed Member States of the plans to create a committee that will oversee studies on the origins of diseases in the future. Member State representatives should negotiate detailed terms around the sensitive issue of research laboratories, then nominate and select team members, who should then develop a work plan.

It is important to know the origins of the pandemic, but this is not possible without “radical and complete transparency”, Singapore’s Foreign Minister said, Viviane Balakrishnan. Let me speak as a scientist or as a doctor: what we need is radical and complete transparencyHe told the CNBC show, Squawk Box Asia. “We need to know how these things are happening, where the next outbreak will be and what the likely dynamics of these future pandemics will be, ” added.

After highlighting how difficult it is for scientists to find the origins of any new pathogen, a few days ago, the WHO insisted that the mission “It is not and should not be an exercise in assigning blame, accusations or political points. It is vitally important to know how the COVID-19 pandemic began, to lead by example in establishing the origins of all future animal-human outbreaks. “

Since access to confidential information is crucial for the success of new studies, the UN agency noted that the investigation should include “a more detailed examination of the raw data of the first cases”, with blood serum from potentially infected people in 2019, before the coronavirus epidemic was declared a pandemic. “Sharing raw data and allowing samples to be retested in laboratories reflects scientific solidarity at its best and is no different from what we encourage all countries, including China,” said the WHO, before repeating that access to data was “fundamentally important for developing our understanding of science and should in no way be politicized”.

However, some scientists They are afraid that the best opportunity to collect samples was missed during the first weeks after the discovery of the first human cases linked to a seafood market in Wuhan. Chinese researchers collected hundreds of environmental samples immediately after the discovery of the coronavirus, but the number of people or animals tested is currently unknown.

“Once the wildlife traders switched to another type of employment due to the uncertainty of whether they could continue to do so, that window started to close,” he said. he declares. Los Angeles Times, Maciej Boni, a professor of biology Pennsylvania State University who studied the origins of viruses and was not part of the team recruited by the WHO. Even so, he claimed that Scientists could locate the animal origin of COVID-19 by looking for closely related viruses in species such as raccoon dogs, minks or ground squirrels. But pointed out that it could take up to five years to do the kind of in-depth studies needed.

The search for the origins of COVID-19 has become a bitter source of disputes between the United States and China. In May, Biden ordered US intelligence agencies a 90-day review the hypothesis of transmission from animals to humans and the theory that it escaped from a laboratory. In July, even the CEO of the WHO, Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, he said that it was premature to reject the laboratory theory, adding that investigative accidents are frequent.

A few days ago the President of the United States received an inconclusive U.S. intelligence classified report on the origin of COVID-19, What it has not determined whether the virus has passed from an animal to a human or left a lab in China. This was confirmed by two officials of the The Washington Post.

There are reasonable doubts about what was done and how it was worked at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. China took a year for an international WHO team to travel to Wuhan to find the origin of the virus. Their conclusion was that SARS-CoV-2 is “very likely” to be of animal origin, although it is not known which one. Unfortunately, it was the Chinese government that collected the data, samples and all the information, while the international team was only able to work on these data and reports.

On the other hand, we knew that since before 2008, experiments in genetic manipulation of the SARS and MERS coronaviruses, called “function gains”, to improve its ability to infect and transmit. And since 2014, the US government had suspended funding for this type of experiment because of its dangerousness and its potential pandemic.

In March 2020, the heads of the Wuhan Institute pointed out that none of these workers had tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. But recently it was made public that at least three scientists at the Institute fell ill with compatible symptoms of COVID-19 one month before the official announcement of the existence of a new coronavirus, serious doubts therefore remain about the Institute’s level of biosafety.

In a 2018 report by technicians from the US State Department to verify the biosafety of Institute facilities, it was shown concern about lack of security, weaknesses in laboratory management and lack of specialized staff, and described that much of the work was not done in the BSL4 facility.

With the data we currently have, the most likely hypothesis is that SARS-CoV-2, like the rest of human CoVs, is of natural origin, a natural reservoir of CoV of bats and through some species intermediate (still unidentified) where it has been adapted to humans. Nature has sufficient resources to generate this virus and any other. Even so, the opacity and lack of transparency of the Chinese government means that it cannot be ruled out as a hypothesis, less likely but possible, a laboratory origin. Just a survey transparent, objective, data-driven and independent will tell us the truth.

“In this context, accusations and counter-accusations are particularly futile, and the process to find the origins of SARS-CoV-2 must be collaborative and fully transparent ”, noted Jonathan Stoye, virologist at the Francis Crick Institute in London in World time in a recent interview. “It might be a little naive, but I really believe that we have to put aside all political or cultural differences to understand this issue for the benefit of all the people of the world ”, concluded.

KEEP READING: