The Sunday Times of London reported that UK intelligence has changed its mind about the origins of the SARS-CoV-2 virus which has caused the COVID-19 pandemic that has so far raged around the world
Analysts now believe the theory that it originated in a laboratory is plausible. The publication claims that Western intelligence agencies, including Britain, considered such a scenario unlikely. Scientists who claimed a laboratory origin of the virus were not given a pass, not even published in scientific journals.
The British intelligence community is apparently taking its cue from its overseas colleagues. Late last week, The New York Times published an article stating that the US intelligence community had some data that might help determine the origin of the coronavirus. This could be data such as the relocation of lab workers in Wuhan, China and the nature of the spread of the coronavirus there.
And on Sunday, the Daily Caller reported that the wife of a virologist at the Wuhan lab died of COVID back in December 2019, before the first reported outbreaks. It was this death that was the first indication that the virus could spread to humans.
Previously, it was generally accepted that the first cases of coronavirus infection had been reported at Wuhan’s Huangan Market, which sold vegetables, seafood and wildlife meat. The market closed on 1 January 2020.
Scientists have not yet reached a clear conclusion about the role this market played in the spread of the virus. The Daily Caller cites former US State Department official David Asher, who was investigating the origin of COVID-19, as the source of the death of the virologist’s wife.
This series of reports can be interpreted in two ways – either as a genuine indication that SARS-CoV-2 was synthesised in the laboratories of the Wuhan Institute of Virology, or that it does have a natural origin but was kept in the same institute and “escaped” from there for whatever reason. It should be noted that last week, the Anglo-Saxon press again started to discuss the first version – the virus as a product of molecular engineering.
The topic was presented in a “British scientists have proven” format. According to the Daily Mail, Angus Dalgleish, a professor at St George’s University in London, and his Norwegian colleague, virologist Birger Sorenson, claim that their colleagues in China took the basis of the coronavirus from cave bats and then attached proteins to it to infiltrate human cells. The Chinese scientists then allegedly tried to “cover their tracks” so that all the evidence pointed to a natural origin of the virus.
Dalglish also talks about the obstacles to publication of the artificial origin of the virus, including in the authoritative British journal Nature. The article eventually appeared in Cambridge University’s new quarterly journal QRB Discovery, with the main topic of the publication having to be changed, Dalglish lamented.
“A laboratory leak and an artificial creation of a virus are not the same thing. There is no way it could have been an artificial creation by Chinese virologists,” believes Professor Anatoly Alshtein of the Gamaleya Research Centre for Epidemiology and Microbiology. Anatoly Alshtein, professor at the Gamaleya Research Centre for Epidemiology and Microbiology, believes. In his opinion, contrary to the claims of some scientists, it is not yet technically possible to make changes to the four amino acids in the “spike” of the virus so as to make it more pathogenic. If major changes were made to the structure of the virus, this would be noticeable, but this is not the case with SARS-CoV-2, the interlocutor stressed.
“It is conceivable that this virus, isolated from bats or other animals, could have been in the laboratory in Wuhan. But it could not have been created artificially and deliberately by the Chinese. Simply because we don’t know how to do such things yet”, – said Alstein.
In his opinion, a virus leak from the lab is not theoretically ruled out.
“The Wuhan Institute of Virology has been working with coronaviruses for a long time, studying viruses of different geographical origins. But frankly, I don’t have much faith in this version of the origin of the new coronavirus either”, – the specialist summarised.
The version of an artificial or “natural” virus leaking out of the laboratory, which is now being raised again, contradicts the conclusions drawn by experts of the World Health Organization (WHO). They, it may be recalled, visited
Wuhan in February this year. Dr Peter Daszak, a member of the WHO international scientific team, confirmed the most common theory: that the infection caused by SARS-CoV-2 could have spread to China and South-East Asia from bats.
The expert mission report noted that the laboratory origin of the virus was the least likely of the hypotheses considered. The most likely scenario was that transmission had occurred from an animal to another animal and then to humans, TACC recalled.
Immediately after the publication of the WHO mission report, the United States, Britain, several of their European NATO allies, as well as Israel, South Korea and Japan (14 countries in total) expressed concern. Their joint statement asserted that the experts’ work had been significantly delayed and that China had not guaranteed them access to all the information and samples available.
The reaction to the WHO’s findings, the current series of published versions from scientists, and the leaks from intelligence agencies are reminiscent of last year’s situation. Direct and repeated accusations against the geopolitical and trade rival of the United States were then made by President Donald Trump. The State Department claimed that the US had evidence that China had deliberately concealed evidence of the coronavirus outbreak. Beijing has categorically denied all the accusations from Washington. Just as it rejects them now.
Acting US President Joe Biden last week instructed US intelligence to redouble efforts to gather data on the origins of COVID-19 and prepare a new report on the subject in 90 days.
“Where and how the virus came from is a question that only biological scientists can answer, and it is not certain that even they will be able to answer, because it is often the case that the exact source is not always known. At the same time, there has been and remains a clear political interest on the part of the United States in claiming China’s responsibility for the pandemic”, – Vasily Kashin, head of the international military-political and military-economic problems at the Centre for Integrated European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics, told VZGLYAD newspaper. This interest was evident at an early stage of covid proliferation, it was evident in the Trump administration’s statements, the expert said.
“But we should add that China, too, for its part, is trying to promote theories that the virus first originated outside China,” Kashin pointed out.
He recalled a statement by Chinese Foreign Ministry officials who spoke of a possible link between the COVID outbreak and the 7th World Military Games held in Wuhan in December 2019, where, incidentally, the US delegation also participated.
“We have to assume that the topic is politicised to the extreme. We have no clear criteria to understand where the virus originated from, so any version cannot be ruled out”, – Kashin said.
According to the expert, the current wave of anti-China publications may also have a political background.
“Under Biden, contrary to expectations of some observers, there has been a wave of deterioration in relations between the US and China”, – Kashin pointed out. – “In this connection, quite a big effort is being made to demonize China. For example, work is going on to prepare accusations against China about the genocide of Uighurs in Xinjiang. That is, all of this is piling up. This story of accusations of creating a virus is probably a link in the same chain”.
Mikhail Moshkin, VZGLYAD