US Senate Study Concludes COVID-19 ‘More Likely Than Not’ Result of Research Incident
Colourized scanning electron micrograph of an apoptotic cell (greenish-brown) heavily infected with SARS-COV-2 virus particles (pink), also known as novel coronavirus, isolated from a patient sample. Image captured and colour-enhanced at the NIAID Integrated Research Facility (IRF) in Fort Detrick, Maryland.
WASHINGTON (Sputnik) – Republican members of the US Senate Committee on Health Education, Labor and Pensions released a report that concluded the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) responsible for COVID-19 was most likely the result of a research incident rather than from an animal-to-human transmission.”Based on the analysis of the publicly available information, it appears reasonable to conclude that the COVID-19 pandemic was, more likely than not, the result of a research-related incident… the hypothesis of a natural zoonotic origin no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt, or the presumption of accuracy,” the report said on Thursday.However, the report also said that future information could change the lawmakers’ assessment.A research-related incident is consistent with the novel coronavirus’ early epidemiological spread in Wuhan, China, the report said.The earliest known calls for assistance were located in the area near the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV), which conducted research on “high risk” coronaviruses, the report said.
IndiaNew Wave of COVID-19 Looms in India With The Emergence of Omicron Subvariants18 October, 13:32 GMTWIV experienced persistent biosafety problems relevant to the containment of aerosolized respiratory viruses like SARS-CoV-2, the report said.Advocates of a zoonotic origin theory for COVID-19 must provide clear and convincing evidence that a natural spillover from animals to humans was the source of the pandemic, the report added.The US intelligence community’s analysis of the novel coronavirus’ genesis is split between a zoonotic and research-related origin theory. Four intelligence community elements assessed with low confidence that the virus most likely originated in animals, while one element assessed with moderate confidence that it most likely emerged from a laboratory.
