The origin of the very first coronavirus case in humans is still unknown. A leading Danish WHO chief believes that the theory that it originated from a laboratory in Wuhan is more probable than was first expressed.
Despite the WHO’s conclusion that the virus did not originate from a leak from a laboratory, a chief investigator now says that patient zero may well be an employee at the laboratory.
The first coronavirus outbreak in the world took place in the city of Wuhan in China at the end of 2019. One of the theories that has been circulating since then is that the outbreak started when an employee at one of the country’s laboratories was infected by a bat during fieldwork or in a laboratory in Wuhan.
One who looks at the theory as the most likely is Peter Embarek, writes Danish TV 2. He was one of the 17 leading international experts sent by the World Health Organization (WHO) to China in mid-January 2021.
In total, the group of international experts was in China for 28 days to find out more about where the coronavirus first originated and where humans were first infected by it.
During their stay, they visited the relevant hospitals, institutes, laboratories and markets.
Also read: WHO chief turns around – admits they wrote off lab theory prematurely
Central report
At the end of March, the report came out. The researchers presented documentation on the studies they had done and the data they had reviewed showed that in the first week of 2020, Wuhan experienced a drastic increase in the number of lung disease-specific deaths. Two weeks later, the same development was seen throughout the Wuhan region, Hubei province.
“It indicates that the epidemic was first in Wuhan before it spread to the rest of Hubei province,” the report said.
Furthermore, in the report, the researchers jointly summarized what they concluded with was the probability of different ways in which the virus may have begun to spread among humans.
- Direct zoonotic transmission (virus transmitted to humans via animals) is a possible and probable route of transmission.
- Through an intermediate host is considered to be a probable to very probable route of transmission.
- Through colds or foods are seen as a possible route of transmission.
- Through an incident in a laboratory is considered extremely unlikely.
Also read: Biologist put forward startling theory about Covid-19. There is only one problem
– Can not write off lab theory
To Danish TV 2 says the researcher, who specializes in zoonoses (viruses that are transmitted to humans from animals) and food safety, that the transmission of infection may have taken place by collecting or working with bats in connection with the research that took place in Wuhan.
That is, that an infected employee at a laboratory is a probable scenario, despite the wording of the WHO report.
– An employee who is infected in the field when he took samples is one of the probable hypotheses. This is where the virus can be transmitted directly from bats to humans, Embarek told the channel.
In that case, it would be a laboratory employee instead of a random villager or another person, who has regular contact with bats. So it is actually in the category of probable ways, the researcher continues.
Also read: New research: Corona epidemic ravaged East Asia 20,000 years ago
The bat is central
Researchers and experts have on several occasions stated that the original host of the coronavirus was most likely a bat. More specifically, a Chinese horseshoe bat.
But no horseshoe bats live freely in the wild in the Wuhan area. The only ones known to have been close to this bat species are employees at the laboratories in Wuhan.
When WHO envoys were to conduct investigations at the laboratories in Wuhan, they encountered problems, according to Embarek.
– 48 hours before we finished the entire research report, we had not talked about the laboratory part. It was at the very end that it was discussed whether we should include it or not, says the WHO expert.
Did not see documentation
He says that they were not allowed to look at reports or documents directly from the laboratories in Wuhan, but that they were given a presentation and they were given the opportunity to ask questions. According to Embarek, they did not receive any documentation for what was said or presented.
The researcher says that the definition used in the report was a compromise that was made between the researchers, so that the lab theory should be mentioned at all.
In an earlier edition of the article, we got hurt for omitting a “no” in the first sentence of the article. (Despite the WHO’s conclusion that the virus did not originate from a leak from a laboratory, a chief investigator now says that patient zero may well be an employee at the laboratory.)
–
