Lab leak: Researcher makes serious allegations against Wuhan lab

The SARS-CoV-2 virus actually came from a Chinese laboratory in Wuhan, says Alina Chan, a molecular biologist at the Broad Institute at MIT and Harvard University, in a guest article in the New York Times. He guides readers through his laboratory leak hypothesis in five key points:

Chan writes in his article: “The SARS-like virus that caused the pandemic originated in Wuhan, home of the world’s leading research laboratory for SARS-like viruses.” He points out that the Wuhan Institute of Virology has been searching for SARS-like viruses for more than ten years. Additionally, when the epidemic began, lab director Shi Zhengli publicly wondered if the outbreak could have come from his lab.

die SRF Science Editor Kathryn Zoffel Questioning this statement: No one can rule out that the virus actually came from the lab, and it is indeed very unfortunate that the lab did not release important documents. Yet, only a minority of the scientific community believes this – many researchers continue to believe that, like the SARS outbreak of 2003 or the MERS coronavirus of 2012, Covid was transmitted to human populations from infected animals.

In the year before the outbreak of the epidemic, the Wuhan Institute, together with American partners, proposed to create viruses with the same characteristic features as SARS-CoV-2. Chan writes that a unique property was introduced into the newly created virus that increased its infectivity in humans.

“For the author, the fact that researchers think about creating such a virus is proof that it has actually been done,” comments SRF Science Editor Zöfel.

Chan’s third argument for the laboratory thesis is that the laboratory in Wuhan was unable to contain such an infectious and airborne virus. Of the four biosecurity levels at which labs around the world operate, China’s Wuhan operates the second least expensive.

Alina Chan contradicts the widely accepted belief that Covid-19 came from the Huanan seafood market in Wuhan: her reasoning: “This is not supported by strong evidence” because “not a single infected animal has been confirmed” at the market.

“Without good evidence that the epidemic started in the Huanan seafood market, the fact that the virus originated in Wuhan clearly points to its unique SARS-like virus laboratory.”

SRF editor Zöfel classifies: Chan considers the evidence that the epidemic started in the wildlife market to be weak. “Most experts classify the sources as highly reliable,” says Zöfel.

Chan says that despite intensive investigations into the virus originating from the wildlife trade in Wuhan, there is no evidence to date. The researcher describes it as indisputable that US funding “helped Wuhan create an unprecedented collection of SARS-like viruses.”

Chan is purely speculating, says SRF editor Zöfel. “No funding has been discussed for research with a virus like SARS-CoV-2 mentioned above.”

The timing of the article in the New York Times was not chosen by chance: last Monday, the American immunologist Anthony Fauci, the White House’s chief adviser during the corona epidemic, testified as part of the investigation of the US Congress on the epidemic. .

In her speech, Alina Chan Dr. The world should not continue to tolerate the intolerable risks of research that could cause Fauci to cooperate with the investigation to “identify loopholes.”

China is currently playing a key role in elucidating how the corona pandemic started – but in the wake of Covid-19, the country is now stubbornly refusing to cooperate with researchers from other countries to shed light on the matter.