You are putting in text from a journalist accusing the entire scientific community and all our publications on coronavirus ecology as politically motivated and effectively fraudulent. There's no way you can include such patently false information here without much stronger sourcing. Tag: Manual revert |
To give context, copying in some text and references Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 section "Reservoir and origin" into COVID-19 lab leak hypothesis |
||
Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
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> It was 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/> Scientific consensus holds that as with other pandemics in human history, 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> Many scientists have continued to describe the lab leak hypothesis as a "conspiracy theory."<ref>{{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}}</ref><ref>{{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}}</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> The persistent promotion of politically motivated speculation despite the lack of plausible scientific evidence has prompted calls for scientifically rigorous and official investigations to continue in partnership with the WHO and China.<ref name="Lancet">{{cite journal|doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01419-7|journal=The Lancet|title=Science, not speculation, is essential to determine how SARS-CoV-2 reached humans|date=5 July 2021|first1=Charles H|last1=Calisher|first2=Dennis|last2=Carroll|first3=Rita|last3=Colwell|first4=Ronald B|last4=Corley|first5=Peter|last5=Daszak|first6=Christian|last6=Drosten|first7=Luis|last7=Enjuanes|first8=Jeremy|last8=Farrar|first9=Hume|last9=Field|first10=Josie|last10=Golding|first11=Alexander E|last11=Gorbalenya|first12=Bart|last12=Haagmans|first13=James M|last13=Hughes|first14=Gerald T|last14=Keusch|first15=Sai Kit|last15=Lam|first16=Juan|last16=Lubroth|first17=John S|last17=Mackenzie|first18=Larry|last18=Madoff|first19=Jonna Keener|last19=Mazet|first20=Stanley M|last20=Perlman|first21=Leo|last21=Poon|first22=Linda|last22=Saif|first23=Kanta|last23=Subbarao|first24=Michael|last24=Turner}}</ref>{{primary inline}} |
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> It was 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/> Scientific consensus holds that as with other pandemics in human history, 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> Many scientists have continued to describe the lab leak hypothesis as a "conspiracy theory."<ref>{{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}}</ref><ref>{{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}}</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> The persistent promotion of politically motivated speculation despite the lack of plausible scientific evidence has prompted calls for scientifically rigorous and official investigations to continue in partnership with the WHO and China.<ref name="Lancet">{{cite journal|doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01419-7|journal=The Lancet|title=Science, not speculation, is essential to determine how SARS-CoV-2 reached humans|date=5 July 2021|first1=Charles H|last1=Calisher|first2=Dennis|last2=Carroll|first3=Rita|last3=Colwell|first4=Ronald B|last4=Corley|first5=Peter|last5=Daszak|first6=Christian|last6=Drosten|first7=Luis|last7=Enjuanes|first8=Jeremy|last8=Farrar|first9=Hume|last9=Field|first10=Josie|last10=Golding|first11=Alexander E|last11=Gorbalenya|first12=Bart|last12=Haagmans|first13=James M|last13=Hughes|first14=Gerald T|last14=Keusch|first15=Sai Kit|last15=Lam|first16=Juan|last16=Lubroth|first17=John S|last17=Mackenzie|first18=Larry|last18=Madoff|first19=Jonna Keener|last19=Mazet|first20=Stanley M|last20=Perlman|first21=Leo|last21=Poon|first22=Linda|last22=Saif|first23=Kanta|last23=Subbarao|first24=Michael|last24=Turner}}</ref>{{primary inline}} |
||
==Scientific consensus on likely natural zoonosis from bats== |
|||
⚫ | |||
The first known infections from SARS‑CoV‑2 were discovered in Wuhan, China.<ref name="NatureZhou">{{cite journal |vauthors=Zhou P, Yang XL, Wang XG, Hu B, Zhang L, Zhang W, Si HR, Zhu Y, Li B, Huang CL, Chen HD, Chen J, Luo Y, Guo H, Jiang RD, Liu MQ, Chen Y, Shen XR, Wang X, Zheng XS, Zhao K, Chen QJ, Deng F, Liu LL, Yan B, Zhan FX, Wang YY, Xiao GF, Shi ZL | display-authors = 6 |title=A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin |journal=Nature |volume=579 |issue=7798 |pages=270–273 |date=March 2020 |pmid=32015507 |pmc=7095418 |doi=10.1038/s41586-020-2012-7 |bibcode=2020Natur.579..270Z}}</ref> The original source of viral transmission to humans remains unclear, as does whether the virus became [[pathogen]]ic before or after the [[spillover event]].<ref name="early">{{Cite journal |vauthors=Cohen J |date=January 2020 |title=Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally |journal=[[Science (journal)|Science]] |doi=10.1126/science.abb0611}}</ref><ref name="PopSciJan">{{Cite web |url=https://www.popsci.com/story/health/wuhan-coronavirus-china-wet-market-wild-animal/ |title=We're still not sure where the Wuhan coronavirus really came from |date=28 January 2020 |website=[[Popular Science]] |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20200130003350/https://www.popsci.com/story/health/wuhan-coronavirus-china-wet-market-wild-animal/ |archive-date=30 January 2020 |access-date=30 January 2020 |vauthors=Eschner K}}</ref><ref name="Proximal">{{cite journal |vauthors=Andersen KG, Rambaut A, Lipkin WI, Holmes EC, Garry RF |title=The proximal origin of SARS-CoV-2 |journal=Nature Medicine |volume=26 |issue=4 |pages=450–452 |date=April 2020 |pmid=32284615 |pmc=7095063 |doi=10.1038/s41591-020-0820-9}}</ref> Because many of the early infectees were workers at the [[Huanan Seafood Market]],<ref name="LancetClinical">{{cite journal |vauthors=Huang C, Wang Y, Li X, Ren L, Zhao J, Hu Y, Zhang L, Fan G, Xu J, Gu X, Cheng Z, Yu T, Xia J, Wei Y, Wu W, Xie X, Yin W, Li H, Liu M, Xiao Y, Gao H, Guo L, Xie J, Wang G, Jiang R, Gao Z, Jin Q, Wang J, Cao B | display-authors = 6 |title=Clinical features of patients infected with 2019 novel coronavirus in Wuhan, China |journal=Lancet |volume=395 |issue=10223 |pages=497–506 |date=February 2020 |pmid=31986264 |pmc=7159299 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30183-5}}</ref><ref name="LancetCharacteristics">{{cite journal |vauthors=Chen N, Zhou M, Dong X, Qu J, Gong F, Han Y, Qiu Y, Wang J, Liu Y, Wei Y, Xia J, Yu T, Zhang X, Zhang L | display-authors = 6 |title=Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of 99 cases of 2019 novel coronavirus pneumonia in Wuhan, China: a descriptive study |journal=Lancet |volume=395 |issue=10223 |pages=507–513 |date=February 2020 |pmid=32007143 |pmc=7135076 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30211-7}}</ref> it has been suggested that the virus might have originated from the market.<ref name="Proximal" /><ref name="nature feb2020">{{cite journal |vauthors=Cyranoski D |title=Mystery deepens over animal source of coronavirus |journal=Nature |volume=579 |issue=7797 |pages=18–19 |date=March 2020 |pmid=32127703 |doi=10.1038/d41586-020-00548-w |bibcode=2020Natur.579...18C | doi-access = free}}</ref> However, other research indicates that visitors may have introduced the virus to the market, which then facilitated rapid expansion of the infections.<ref name="early" /><ref name="XivDecoding">{{cite journal |last1=Yu |first1=Wen-Bin |last2=Tang |first2=Guang-Da |last3=Zhang |first3=Li |last4=T. Corlett |first4=Richard |title=Decoding the evolution and transmissions of the novel pneumonia coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2 / HCoV-19) using whole genomic data |journal=Zoological Research |date=2020 |volume=41 |issue=3 |pages=247–257 |doi=10.24272/j.issn.2095-8137.2020.022|pmid=32351056 |pmc=7231477 }}</ref> 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.<ref name="WHOconvened">{{Cite report |url=https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf |title=Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) |date=24 February 2020 |publisher=[[World Health Organization]] (WHO) |access-date=5 March 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200229221222/https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/who-china-joint-mission-on-covid-19-final-report.pdf |archive-date=29 February 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> |
|||
Research into the [[natural reservoir]] of the virus that caused the [[2002–2004 SARS outbreak]] has resulted in the discovery of many [[Bat SARS-like coronavirus WIV1|SARS-like bat coronaviruses]], most originating in [[horseshoe bat]]s. Phylogenetic analysis indicates that samples taken from ''[[Chinese rufous horseshoe bat|Rhinolophus sinicus]]'' show a resemblance of 80% to SARS‑CoV‑2.<ref name="MedVirEvolution">{{cite journal |vauthors=Benvenuto D, Giovanetti M, Ciccozzi A, Spoto S, Angeletti S, Ciccozzi M |title=The 2019-new coronavirus epidemic: Evidence for virus evolution |journal=Journal of Medical Virology |volume=92 |issue=4 |pages=455–459 |date=April 2020 |pmid=31994738 |pmc=7166400 |doi=10.1002/jmv.25688}}</ref><ref name="NCBI-Bat">{{Cite journal |date=15 February 2020 |title=Bat SARS-like coronavirus isolate bat-SL-CoVZC45, complete genome |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MG772933 |access-date=15 February 2020 |website=[[National Center for Biotechnology Information]] (NCBI) |name-list-style=vanc |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200604011749/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MG772933 |archive-date=4 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref><ref name="NCBI-Bat2">{{Cite journal |date=15 February 2020 |title=Bat SARS-like coronavirus isolate bat-SL-CoVZXC21, complete genome |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MG772934 |access-date=15 February 2020 |website=[[National Center for Biotechnology Information]] (NCBI) |name-list-style=vanc |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200604011744/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MG772934 |archive-date=4 June 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> Phylogenetic analysis also indicates that a virus from ''[[Intermediate horseshoe bat|Rhinolophus affinis]]'', collected in [[Yunnan|Yunnan province]] and designated [[RaTG13]], has a 96% resemblance to SARS‑CoV‑2.<ref name="NatureZhou" /><ref name="NCBI-Bat3">{{Cite web |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/1802633852 |title=Bat coronavirus isolate RaTG13, complete genome |date=10 February 2020 |website=[[National Center for Biotechnology Information]] (NCBI) |access-date=5 March 2020 |name-list-style=vanc |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200515133838/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/1802633852 |archive-date=15 May 2020 |url-status=live}}</ref> The RaTG13 virus sequence is the closest known sequence to SARS-CoV-2,<ref name="WHOconvened" /> but it is not its direct ancestor.<ref>{{cite web |title=The ‘Occam's Razor Argument’ Has Not Shifted in Favor of a Lab Leak |url=https://www.snopes.com/news/2021/07/16/lab-leak-evidence/ |website=Snopes.com |publisher=Snopes |access-date=18 July 2021}}</ref> Other closely-related sequences were also identified in samples from local bat populations.<ref name="ZhouCellJune2021">{{cite journal |last1=Zhou |first1=Hong |last2=Ji |first2=Jingkai |last3=Chen |first3=Xing |last4=Bi |first4=Yuhai |last5=Li |first5=Juan |last6=Wang |first6=Qihui |last7=Hu |first7=Tao |last8=Song |first8=Hao |last9=Zhao |first9=Runchu |last10=Chen |first10=Yanhua |last11=Cui |first11=Mingxue |last12=Zhang |first12=Yanyan |last13=Hughes |first13=Alice C. |last14=Holmes |first14=Edward C. |last15=Shi |first15=Weifeng |title=Identification of novel bat coronaviruses sheds light on the evolutionary origins of SARS-CoV-2 and related viruses |journal=Cell (Cambridge) |date=June 2021 |pages=S0092867421007091 |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867421007091 |pmc=8188299 |doi=10.1016/j.cell.2021.06.008 |pmid=34147139 |language=en |issn=0092-8674 |display-authors=6 |access-date=18 June 2021 |archive-date=18 June 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210618160407/https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092867421007091 |url-status=live }}</ref> |
|||
Bats are considered the most likely natural reservoir of SARS‑CoV‑2.<ref name="WHOconvened" /><ref name="LancetBinding">{{cite journal |vauthors=Lu R, Zhao X, Li J, Niu P, Yang B, Wu H, Wang W, Song H, Huang B, Zhu N, Bi Y, Ma X, Zhan F, Wang L, Hu T, Zhou H, Hu Z, Zhou W, Zhao L, Chen J, Meng Y, Wang J, Lin Y, Yuan J, Xie Z, Ma J, Liu WJ, Wang D, Xu W, Holmes EC, Gao GF, Wu G, Chen W, Shi W, Tan W | display-authors = 6 |title=Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding |journal=Lancet |volume=395 |issue=10224 |pages=565–574 |date=February 2020 |pmid=32007145 |pmc=7159086 |doi=10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30251-8}}</ref> Differences between the bat coronavirus and SARS‑CoV‑2 suggest that humans may have been infected via an intermediate host;<ref name="nature feb2020" /> although the source of introduction into humans remains unknown.<ref name="OKeeffeJ2021Mar">{{cite book |vauthors=O'Keeffe J, Freeman S, Nicol A |date=21 March 2021 |title=The Basics of SARS-CoV-2 Transmission |url=https://ncceh.ca/documents/evidence-review/basics-sars-cov-2-transmission |publisher=National Collaborating Centre for Environmental Health (NCCEH) |location=Vancouver, BC |isbn=978-1-988234-54-0 |access-date=12 May 2021 |archive-date=12 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210512134422/https://ncceh.ca/documents/evidence-review/basics-sars-cov-2-transmission |url-status=live }}</ref> |
|||
⚫ | |||
{{see also|COVID-19 misinformation#Wuhan lab origin}} |
{{see also|COVID-19 misinformation#Wuhan lab origin}} |
||
The theory was one of the earliest to emerge about the pandemic. According to surveys, early on in the pandemic up to 30% of Americans believed in the hypothesis at various points. 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.<ref name="TheConvJune2021" /> In April 2020, Trump claimed to have evidence for the theory, but refused to produce it when requested.<ref>{{Cite web|date=1 May 2020|title=Trump claims to have evidence coronavirus started in Chinese lab but offers no details|url=http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/30/donald-trump-coronavirus-chinese-lab-claim|access-date=18 July 2021|website=The Guardian|language=en}}</ref> At that time, the media did not distinguish between the accidental lab leak of a natural virus and [[COVID-19 misinformation#Bio-weapon|bio-weapon origin conspiracy theories]]. In online discussions, various theories–including this one–were being combined together to form larger, baseless conspiracy plots.<ref name="TheConvJune2021" /> |
The theory was one of the earliest to emerge about the pandemic. According to surveys, early on in the pandemic up to 30% of Americans believed in the hypothesis at various points. 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.<ref name="TheConvJune2021" /> In April 2020, Trump claimed to have evidence for the theory, but refused to produce it when requested.<ref>{{Cite web|date=1 May 2020|title=Trump claims to have evidence coronavirus started in Chinese lab but offers no details|url=http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/30/donald-trump-coronavirus-chinese-lab-claim|access-date=18 July 2021|website=The Guardian|language=en}}</ref> At that time, the media did not distinguish between the accidental lab leak of a natural virus and [[COVID-19 misinformation#Bio-weapon|bio-weapon origin conspiracy theories]]. In online discussions, various theories–including this one–were being combined together to form larger, baseless conspiracy plots.<ref name="TheConvJune2021" /> |
||
== Resurgence == |
== Resurgence of lab leak idea == |
||
In early 2021, the hypothesis returned to popular debate by renewed media discussion and circumstantial evidence.<ref name="TheConvJune20212">{{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> |
In early 2021, the hypothesis returned to popular debate by renewed media discussion and circumstantial evidence.<ref name="TheConvJune20212">{{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> |
||
Revision as of 11:51, 19 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] It was 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] Scientific consensus holds that as with other pandemics in human history, SARS-CoV-2 spilled into the human population naturally via zoonosis, and scientists have largely remained skeptical of the a lab leak origin,[3][4] describing it as a remote possibility and citing a lack of supporting evidence.[5][6] Many scientists have continued to describe the lab leak hypothesis as a "conspiracy theory."[7][8] Some scientists, despite misgivings, agree that more investigation is warranted.[9][10] The persistent promotion of politically motivated speculation despite the lack of plausible scientific evidence has prompted calls for scientifically rigorous and official investigations to continue in partnership with the WHO and China.[11][non-primary source needed]
Scientific consensus on likely natural zoonosis from bats
The first known infections from SARS‑CoV‑2 were discovered in Wuhan, China.[12] The original source of viral transmission to humans remains unclear, as does whether the virus became pathogenic before or after the spillover event.[13][14][15] Because many of the early infectees were workers at the Huanan Seafood Market,[16][17] it has been suggested that the virus might have originated from the market.[15][18] However, other research indicates that visitors may have introduced the virus to the market, which then facilitated rapid expansion of the infections.[13][19] 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.[20]
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.[21][22][23] 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.[12][24] The RaTG13 virus sequence is the closest known sequence to SARS-CoV-2,[20] but it is not its direct ancestor.[25] Other closely-related sequences were also identified in samples from local bat populations.[26]
Bats are considered the most likely natural reservoir of SARS‑CoV‑2.[20][27] Differences between the bat coronavirus and SARS‑CoV‑2 suggest that humans may have been infected via an intermediate host;[18] although the source of introduction into humans remains unknown.[28]
Early dissemination of lab leak idea
The theory was one of the earliest to emerge about the pandemic. According to surveys, early on in the pandemic up to 30% of Americans believed in the hypothesis at various points. 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] In April 2020, Trump claimed to have evidence for the theory, but refused to produce it when requested.[29] 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]
Resurgence of lab leak idea
In early 2021, the hypothesis returned to popular debate by renewed media discussion and circumstantial evidence.[30]
On 27 May 2021, US president Joe Biden ordered US intelligence community to investigate the origins of COVID-19, including this hypothesis, and provide a report within 90 days.[31] Half way into the investigation, it was reported that Biden administration officials considered the lab leak theory "as credible" as the natural origins theory.[32]
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.[33]
See also
References
- ^ 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.
- ^ a b c d Knight, Peter. "COVID-19: why lab-leak theory is back despite little new evidence". The Conversation.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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) - ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ Calisher, Charles H; Carroll, Dennis; Colwell, Rita; Corley, Ronald B; Daszak, Peter; Drosten, Christian; Enjuanes, Luis; Farrar, Jeremy; Field, Hume; Golding, Josie; Gorbalenya, Alexander E; Haagmans, Bart; Hughes, James M; Keusch, Gerald T; Lam, Sai Kit; Lubroth, Juan; Mackenzie, John S; Madoff, Larry; Mazet, Jonna Keener; Perlman, Stanley M; Poon, Leo; Saif, Linda; Subbarao, Kanta; Turner, Michael (5 July 2021). "Science, not speculation, is essential to determine how SARS-CoV-2 reached humans". The Lancet. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(21)01419-7.
- ^ 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.
- ^ a b Cohen J (January 2020). "Wuhan seafood market may not be source of novel virus spreading globally". Science. doi:10.1126/science.abb0611.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ "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.
- ^ "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.
- ^ "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.
- ^ "The 'Occam's Razor Argument' Has Not Shifted in Favor of a Lab Leak". Snopes.com. Snopes. Retrieved 18 July 2021.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ 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.
- ^ "Trump claims to have evidence coronavirus started in Chinese lab but offers no details". The Guardian. 1 May 2020. Retrieved 18 July 2021.
- ^ Knight, Peter. "COVID-19: why lab-leak theory is back despite little new evidence". The Conversation.
- ^ "Covid: Biden orders investigation into virus origin as lab leak theory debated". BBC News. 2021-05-27. Retrieved 2021-07-18.
- ^ 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.
- ^ Mir, Alice; Ollstein, A. "POLITICO-Harvard poll: Most Americans believe Covid leaked from lab". POLITICO. Retrieved 2021-07-19.