15min explains: could the new coronavir really come out of Uhane’s lab?

Not only D. Trump and M. Pompeo, but also other politicians, intelligence analysts, healthcare professionals and conspiracy theorists talk about the laboratory in Uhane, which had become the first source of infection.

Chinese officials have been claiming for months that the virus is likely to spread from the Huanan seafood market. Supposedly early infections group He had contact with this bazaar, and many wild animals were sold here, from where the virus spread to humans.

The SARS and MERS viruses, which cause similar symptoms, developed when the coronavirus jumped from one bat to another animal and from the latter to humanity.

The logic is so clear. But not everything is that simple: a more detailed analysis of the first infections with the virus shows that it is more difficult to determine the origin of the virus than previously thought.

Definitely not a biological weapon

For example, a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that of the first 425 infections, only 45 percent. It had something to do with the Wuhan Bazaar.

Another study, published in The Lancet, found that three of the first four cases of infection were unrelated to the market.

“In my opinion, the virus hit the market before it left the market,” said Daniel Lucey, a pandemic expert at Georgetown University.

Additionally, The Washington Post author Josh Rogin published two diplomatic reports from the US State Department. USA From 2018 they warn officials about security concerns at the Wuhan Virology Institute, a laboratory that studies bat-borne coronaviruses.

Of course, fans of all kinds of alternative theories were immediately thrilled. One by one, they asked: is the virus a biological weapon? Is the virus the result of a scientific experiment? Or maybe a virus sample “escaped” from the lab?

Until now, it is really clear that no scientist believes that the new coronavirus developed as a biological weapon. Milton Leitenberg, an expert in such weapons at the University of Mariland, is strict: “Certainly not.”

Many experts agree that the new coronavirus is the result of a natural process. However, the Chinese government shutdown and the fact that there are actually two laboratories operating near the Wuhan market make us ask additional questions.

At least two laboratories

Wuhan coronaviruses, which come from bats, are tested by at least two laboratories, including the aforementioned Wuhan Institute of Virology (UVI) and the Wuhan Center for Disease Control and Prevention (ULKPC).

The UVI is almost 13 km from the Huanan Seafood Market and the ULKPC is almost around the corner.

It is true that different tests are carried out in these laboratories. The UVI Laboratory is the first in China to receive the highest degree of international biological safety certificate (BSL-4). In addition, UVIs also have BSL-3 and BSL-2 level laboratories, and ULKPC operates only one BSL-2 level facility.

“BSL-2 is what we consider a laboratory,” explains Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at Columbia University in New York. “Employees wear special suits and gloves.”

This means that safety in BSL-2 level laboratories is important, but not the maximum. According to Rasmussen, this is due to the fact that “bat coronaviruses rarely infect human cells and are not considered important potential pathogens because they do not spread.”

However, both Chinese institutions have been criticized in recent years for non-compliance with security protocols. A record released last December shows the famous ULKPC researcher Tian Junhua catching bats in the field without adequate protection.

And US diplomats wrote about the BSL-4 level lab at UVI in the aforementioned 2018 reports, saying that their own scientists recognized the lack of properly trained professionals who could work safely.

It is true that Rasmussen does not want to emphasize these warnings: “Absolutely all BSL-4 level labs in the United States are stuck somewhere for security and are not doing everything the way they should.”

It is also important that last year Chinese scientists themselves announced the shortcomings of the labs: missing engineers who are unprepared for the technology.

U.S. diplomats wrote about the BSL-4 level lab at UVI in the aforementioned 2018 reports that their own scientists recognized the lack of properly trained professionals who could work safely.

Even after the discovery of the new coronavirus, the state-run Global Times published new government guidelines for “solving chronic laboratory problems.”

But the same article also states that some laboratories “did not pay adequate attention to the management of biological waste.”

Does this mean that security breaches could have allowed the new coronavirus to escape the laboratory in the same way that SARS did, even after being identified? There may be several such incidents in the US labs. USA

There are no reliable data in China that can be compared to the Americans. But one of the world’s best coronavirus experts, Shi Zhengli, who works for UVI, said in March that the virus could “escape.”

She told Scientific American that at the beginning of the outbreak she asked herself, “Couldn’t these coronaviruses escape from our laboratory?” And the UVI lab has actually collected tens of thousands of coronaviruses in the past decade.

The scientist quickly changed her mind, or was forced to change her mind. Shi Zhengli already denies that the UVI lab contributed to the outbreak.

Security protocols are not the only obstacle

Security protocols aren’t the only barrier between a virus in a test tube and an infection that kills thousands.

For this to happen, the coronavirus must be able to infect humans (or other animals that can infect humans), and this infection must be powerful enough that it is not immediately ruled out by the immune system. Only in this way can it continue to spread successfully among people.

Many bat coronaviruses do not. However, the new coronavirus can and is new because it has never been presented in research before.

Viruses, like humans, have genetic codes that scientists can wait to trace their origins. As early as February 3, the journal Nature announced that the new virus belongs to a family of well-known coronaviruses carried by bats.

The new virus is shared by almost 80 percent. genome with the original SARS-CoV and almost 96 percent. – genome – with the RaTG14 virus previously identified by Shi Zhengli’s team.

96 percent. maybe it would seem like a lot, but that 4 percent. found in the part of the virus that binds to human cells. And since they don’t exist, Lucey, a professor at Georgetown University, says: “It’s interesting, but I wouldn’t talk about outbreaks between people.”

Also, these two viruses take a long time. Edward Holmes, a virologist at the University of Sydney who spends much of his time on the origins of the new virus, says that viruses have a common ancestor that “lived long ago”.

“That means the new coronavirus does not exist it is derived from RaTG13, “said Holmes, who recalled that another SARS-CoV-2-like virus was found in a cave a thousand miles from Wuhan.

Perhaps the infected bat was brought into town by a smuggler. Perhaps another animal took over the virus from a bat a few years ago, allowing it to change precisely so that it could infect humans.

“But it is not yet similar enough to be a direct ancestor.” It is also very important that the other virus is not from the Wuhan Institute of Virology or from Wuhan in general, “added the researcher.

Then there is the next question. How, then, was the world’s devastating coronavirus found thousands of kilometers from its closest relative? There may be more than one explanation, as is usually the case.

Perhaps the infected bat was brought into town by a smuggler. Perhaps another animal took over the virus from a bat a few years ago, allowing it to change precisely so that it could infect humans.

The world doesn’t know much

But if the virus is from Shi Zhengli’s lab and is not the source of the new coronavirus, that body is still filled with a wide variety of bat coronavirus variants. So maybe some experiment failed?

The UVI lab actually conducts experiments (albeit not the most dangerous) in which researchers change the virus strain to highlight the pathogen’s natural properties.

In 2017, Shi Zhengli and his team published a study that revealed they found bat coronavirus that could be transmitted directly to humans. But Rasmussen, after studying the material, said that by itself it did not mean that the virus was effectively clinging to humans.

“Hanging is such an important part of the process that it doesn’t say much about the virus’s ability to reproduce,” Rasmussen said, adding that genome analysis also showed that no virus sample could be altered to give birth to the virus causing it. COVID-19.

True, this is just a study. The UVI published dozens of studies, and US experts interviewed by The Washington Post, who observed the experiments, said the protective measures were not necessarily effective, both in catching bats on rocks and in the laboratory.

The world does not know what was specifically affected in those two laboratories in Uhan, and without identifying the first case of infection and not having more data on the evolution of the virus, it is all just a hypothesis.

Such studies can increase the risk of accidental transmission. But scientists are not convinced by such theories.

“Our analysis clearly shows that SARS-CoV-2 is not a laboratory product or a targeted virus,” said Christian Andersen, an American professor of immunology and microbiology.

On the other hand, completely ruling out the possibility that the virus has spread from the laboratory, experts dare not.

After all, the world doesn’t know what exactly was done in those two Uhan labs, and without identifying the first case of infection and having more data on the evolution of the virus, it’s all just a hypothesis.

“The question of whether the virus began to spread among humans by accidentally infecting a laboratory worker is a historical, not a scientific one. This question will not be answered by scientific research, “says Richard Ebright, a microbiologist and biosecurity expert.

China’s response

After all, Beijing’s own behavior contributes more to the fact that accusations of the Chinese crisis are not diminishing.

The Straits Times reports that the Chinese government has not yet notified the epidemic to the World Health Organization, but has ordered scientists to destroy the first samples of the virus.

Then officials were quick to point out: the outbreak started in the Wuhan market. However, no convincing evidence has been provided, as only 33 of the 585 samples taken on the market reported finding the new coronavirus.

31 of those 33 samples were taken in a market where exotic animals are sold. Exactly anywhere is unclear. Maybe in one of the cages, and maybe in the bathroom.

Furthermore, several doctors, journalists and investigators working in China have been suspiciously silent, although they actively published information from Wuhan a few months ago. The New York Times reported in mid-January that “Chinese scientists have cut off official relations” with their American counterparts.

China is asking for peace and allowing scientists to work. The US government USA It will not budge, and the American intelligence community will continue to carefully analyze all new information.

On February 6, Botao Xiao, a researcher in molecular biomechanics at South China University of Technology, said in an article that “the killer coronavirus has probably spread from Uhane’s laboratory.” He also mentioned previous incidents.

When the article began to travel the world, Chinese officials immediately denied any incidents, and Botao Xiao later announced that he was withdrawing his words, that he was speculating on public information and that he had no solid data.

In other words, Beijing’s behavior has avoided and does not allow the scientific community to trace the source of the virus and only raises suspicion.

“It all seems like an incredible coincidence that the coronavirus outbreak starts theoretically in a bat in the same city where there is a BSL-4 level lab, whose security concerns are voiced not only by foreigners but also by the Chinese.”

It’s all speculation, of course, but it’s pretty surprising, “said Emily de La Bruyere, a Chinese expert.

China, of course, is asking for calm and allowing scientists to work. The US government USA It will not budge, and the American intelligence community will continue to carefully analyze all new information.

So far, scientific evidence suggests that the new coronavirus was born in the wild, in the Wuhan market, or elsewhere. But China is hurting itself by not providing as much information as possible that can dispel any doubts.