In recent days, a lot of evidence seems to converge to support the thesis that the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the cause of the Covid-19 pandemic, originated from a leak from the P4 laboratory in Wuhan. Han. We explain to you what invites us to examine this hypothesis more seriously.
After more than two years marked by the global upheaval caused by Covid-19, we still know nothing about the origins of this coronavirus. While the natural origin argument was initially supported – with a virus transmitted from bats and through an intermediate host, possibly pangolins – the trail leading to the leak from the P4 laboratory in Wuhan is getting stronger and stronger.
Covid-19: BA.4, BA.5 … effective vaccine against all variants available in September?
Jeffrey Sachs ‘doubts’
The first prominent academic to raise serious questions in recent days about the man-made origins of SARS-CoV-2: Jeffrey Sachs. American economist and special consultant to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, he is the head of the Covid committee established in a direct partnership with the prestigious scientific journal. Fingertips. At the end of May, he explained in an interview how his doubts were born and reinforced over the months.
“There are serious reasons to be concerned and believe that this virus may have emerged from a research laboratory,” he summarized. Why ? Because in 2018 a research project was sent to the US Department of Defense with the goal of “inserting” into the bat body, “a furin cleavage site”. However, this furin cleavage site is exactly what makes SARS-CoV-2 a distinct virus in the large family of coronaviruses, and this makes it particularly contagious in humans.
Covid-19: BA.5, hospitalizations are on the rise… what’s happening in Martinique, where pollution is breaking out?
Furthermore, this research project is signed by a man named Peter Daszak, a famous British animal disease expert who is none other than the scientist behind the letter published by 27 public scientists. father in Fingertips in February 2020, which “strongly condemns conspiracy theories that Covid-19 has no natural origin”. Furthermore, at the time, the authors of this letter did not disclose any connection to the laboratory in Wuhan. However, Peter Daszak holds the position of president of EcoHealth Alliance, which is based in the United States. And the latter funded research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Origin of Covid-19: “The probability of an accident in a laboratory in Wuhan is 70 to 75%”
In addition, in September 2021, a survey conducted by walkie talkie published a survey showing that 26 out of 27 scientists who signed the letter smearing the lab leak theory had (or had) ties to researchers at China’s Wuhan Institute of Virology. .
Jeffrey Sachs, who is still appointed to head a committee whose aim is to establish, among other things, that the truth about the origin of the virus is completely transparent, not exposed to the silence and denial of the NIH . (National Institutes of Health), US government organizations responsible for biomedical and medical research.
“What we’re asking for is a real discussion among adults: we’re not saying there was a leak in the lab, we’re not saying there was manipulation that could lead to this type of virus. this virus, but we say it certainly could have happened, because the techniques to do the exact insertion of the part of the virus make it remarkable (in terms of transmissibility to humans, editor’s note) are not only known, but they are the subject of a grant application to be examined.”
(sequence found from 7:10 in this video)
Natural origin is increasingly being removed
If the man-made origin of the virus is solidified, it is also because its natural origin has never been proven at this stage. And this is despite the tens of thousands of tests that have been carried out on animals in China to identify an intermediate host – since direct human-to-bat transmission is also not allowed. At first, it will not be a pangolin, gradually increasing. Simply put, this particular strain of SARS-CoV-2 has not been found anywhere, including one of its immediate relatives.
Therefore, the recommendation in a report published this Thursday, June 9 by the Scientific Advisory Group on the Origin of New Agents research around animals may have been frequented. Huanan market in Wuhan, several factors led to the perception that it could be the starting point of the pandemic.
Big and interesting SAGO report. The Scientific Advisory Group on the Origin of the New Pathogen asked to repeat many of the points of the investigation into the origins of SARS-CoV-2. Reportage sent to the press is 44 million. Extract.? https://t.co/RPqtgmPc4X
– Stephane Lagarde (@StephaneLagarde) June 9, 2022
This report specifically explains that the survey of animals sold at Huanan market between 2017 and 2019 identified several species known to be susceptible to the virus (raccoon dogs, foxes) that were not sampled in studies presented at SAGO. Could they be such a famously sought-after intermediate host?
The report also recommends identifying livestock sites that supply the Huanan market with the aim, where possible, of conducting retrospective investigations of animals supplied to the Wuhan market in 2019.
WHO investigation thwarted
In the search for the origin of this virus, the World Health Organization (WHO) has never been able to benefit from the cooperation of the Chinese authorities, mainly regarding the possibility of a laboratory leak. experience. Therefore, a new request was made on Thursday, June 9 by the organization, through the SAGO expert group, to conduct “further research” on this thesis. The World Health Organization (WHO) is angry that there is no solid evidence of the origin of the pandemic, regardless of the scenario considered.
Covid-19: Towards the 7th wave of pollution in France because of the new BA.4 and BA.5 variants?
The experts pointed out that their report “is not intended – nor does it – to draw definitive conclusions about the origin of SARS-CoV-2”, in part because they need “more information”, especially In particular, they hope to get “thanks for the research that the report recommends”.
Therefore, they believe that “additional investigations must be carried out with laboratory personnel responsible for biosafety management and implementation in laboratories in Wuhan and wherever the first case of COVID-19 was detected retroactively,” explains RFI journalist Stéphane Lagarde.
The final investigation will have to determine “what these labs were doing before the first cases of Covid were reported in Wuhan”, “if there were any biological control violations or incidents”. labs are reported”, or even “evaluate potential situations where a biosecurity process failure could lead to a possible laboratory-acquired infection”.