Berliner Boersenzeitung - Pair of new studies point to natural Covid origin

EUR -
AED 4.211393
AFN 72.244796
ALL 95.982096
AMD 432.319357
ANG 2.052753
AOA 1051.557417
ARS 1603.424201
AUD 1.641243
AWG 2.064125
AZN 1.954004
BAM 1.955435
BBD 2.309469
BDT 140.703754
BGN 1.960126
BHD 0.435819
BIF 3404.065016
BMD 1.146736
BND 1.467326
BOB 7.923522
BRL 6.112796
BSD 1.146686
BTN 105.842257
BWP 15.625085
BYN 3.392867
BYR 22476.027392
BZD 2.30607
CAD 1.583471
CDF 2588.183773
CHF 0.912745
CLF 0.026638
CLP 1051.798264
CNY 7.908585
CNH 7.921286
COP 4222.512346
CRC 539.499363
CUC 1.146736
CUP 30.388506
CVE 110.244435
CZK 24.575006
DJF 204.191911
DKK 7.505507
DOP 70.446859
DZD 153.116438
EGP 59.873831
ERN 17.201041
ETB 178.984913
FJD 2.555735
FKP 0.866182
GBP 0.866311
GEL 3.131037
GGP 0.866182
GHS 12.452677
GIP 0.866182
GMD 84.289519
GNF 10052.124908
GTQ 8.79336
GYD 239.895251
HKD 8.97946
HNL 30.352338
HRK 7.568004
HTG 150.351954
HUF 394.179508
IDR 19448.701448
ILS 3.605729
IMP 0.866182
INR 106.170389
IQD 1502.119799
IRR 1515669.760861
ISK 144.837141
JEP 0.866182
JMD 179.916439
JOD 0.813081
JPY 183.185402
KES 148.312334
KGS 100.281732
KHR 4598.142277
KMF 494.243657
KPW 1032.019272
KRW 1723.258101
KWD 0.352542
KYD 0.955522
KZT 561.355287
LAK 24570.416711
LBP 102681.246162
LKR 356.863432
LRD 209.830859
LSL 19.258608
LTL 3.386014
LVL 0.69365
LYD 7.316635
MAD 10.799685
MDL 20.003269
MGA 4761.111877
MKD 61.628504
MMK 2408.293814
MNT 4109.908675
MOP 9.243576
MRU 45.877442
MUR 53.33513
MVR 17.717506
MWK 1988.229122
MXN 20.584147
MYR 4.516425
MZN 73.288336
NAD 19.258608
NGN 1588.807126
NIO 42.19213
NOK 11.176343
NPR 169.34741
NZD 1.985003
OMR 0.440925
PAB 1.146586
PEN 3.954262
PGK 5.014065
PHP 68.334433
PKR 320.169477
PLN 4.298483
PYG 7397.620071
QAR 4.168222
RON 5.117429
RSD 117.34811
RUB 91.632507
RWF 1673.28787
SAR 4.303626
SBD 9.233195
SCR 17.507734
SDG 689.18878
SEK 10.871865
SGD 1.469547
SHP 0.860349
SLE 28.152796
SLL 24046.494883
SOS 654.177972
SRD 43.05769
STD 23735.121842
STN 24.495431
SVC 10.033128
SYP 126.777699
SZL 19.252409
THB 37.071728
TJS 10.99055
TMT 4.013576
TND 3.391067
TOP 2.761065
TRY 50.645643
TTD 7.776549
TWD 36.918714
TZS 2986.942825
UAH 50.565468
UGX 4311.195803
USD 1.146736
UYU 46.061408
UZS 13845.417319
VES 507.665371
VND 30152.278788
VUV 137.132233
WST 3.13652
XAF 655.834663
XAG 0.014239
XAU 0.000228
XCD 3.099112
XCG 2.066515
XDR 0.815648
XOF 655.834663
XPF 119.331742
YER 273.554311
ZAR 19.360243
ZMK 10322.005017
ZMW 22.318837
ZWL 369.248554
  • RBGPF

    0.1000

    82.5

    +0.12%

  • JRI

    -0.2300

    12.59

    -1.83%

  • CMSD

    -0.1100

    22.99

    -0.48%

  • BCE

    -0.1100

    25.57

    -0.43%

  • BCC

    0.3800

    70

    +0.54%

  • RELX

    -0.0400

    34.14

    -0.12%

  • CMSC

    -0.1500

    22.99

    -0.65%

  • RYCEF

    -1.1300

    16.12

    -7.01%

  • NGG

    0.0900

    90.9

    +0.1%

  • GSK

    -0.8900

    53.39

    -1.67%

  • RIO

    -2.8700

    87.83

    -3.27%

  • VOD

    0.1000

    14.41

    +0.69%

  • AZN

    -2.6000

    189.9

    -1.37%

  • BTI

    0.0400

    59.93

    +0.07%

  • BP

    0.5100

    42.67

    +1.2%

Pair of new studies point to natural Covid origin
Pair of new studies point to natural Covid origin / Photo: Hector RETAMAL - AFP/File

Pair of new studies point to natural Covid origin

An animal market in China's Wuhan really was the epicenter of the Covid pandemic, according to a pair of new studies in the journal Science published Tuesday that claimed to have tipped the balance in the debate about the virus' origins.

Text size:

Answering the question of whether the disease spilled over naturally from animals to humans, or was the result of a lab accident, is viewed as vital to averting the next pandemic and saving millions of lives.

The first paper analyzed the geographic pattern of Covid cases in the outbreak's first month, December 2019, showing the first cases were tightly clustered around the Huanan Market.

The second examined genomic data from the earliest cases to study the virus' early evolution, concluding it was unlikely the coronavirus circulated widely in humans prior to November 2019.

Both were previously posted as "preprints" but have now been vetted by scientific peer review and appear in a prestigious journal.

Michael Worobey of the University of Arizona, who co-authored both papers, had previously called on the scientific community in a letter to be more open to the idea that the virus was the result of a lab leak.

But the findings moved him "to the point where now I also think it's just not plausible that this virus was introduced any other way than through the wildlife trade at the Wuhan market," he told reporters on a call about the findings.

Though previous investigation had centered on the live animal market, researchers wanted more evidence to determine it was really the progenitor of the outbreak, as opposed to an amplifier.

This required neighborhood-level study within Wuhan to be more certain the virus was "zoonotic" -- that it jumped from animals to people.

The first study's team used mapping tools to determine the location of the first 174 cases identified by the World Health Organization, finding 155 of them were in Wuhan.

Further, these cases clustered tightly around the market -- and some early patients with no recent history of visiting the market lived very close to it.

Mammals now known to be infectable with the virus -- including red foxes, hog badgers and raccoon dogs, were all sold live in the market, the team showed.

- Two introductions to humans -

They also tied positive samples from patients in early 2020 to the western portion of the market, which sold live or freshly butchered animals in late 2019.

The tightly confined early cases contrasted with how it radiated throughout the rest of the city by January and February, which the researchers confirmed by drilling into social media check-in data from the Weibo app.

"This tells us the virus was not circulating cryptically," Worobey said in a statement. "It really originated at that market and spread out from there."

The second study focused on resolving an apparent discrepancy in the virus' early evolution.

Two lineages, A and B, marked the early pandemic.

But while A was closer to the virus found in bats, suggesting the coronavirus in humans came from this source and that A gave rise to B, it was B that was found to be far more present around the market.

The researchers used a technique called "molecular clock analysis," which relies on the rate at which genetic mutations occur over time to reconstruct a timeline of evolution -- and found it unlikely that A gave rise to B.

"Otherwise, lineage A would have had to have been evolving in slow motion compared to the lineage B virus, which just doesn't make biological sense," said Worobey.

Instead, the probable scenario was both jumped from animals at the market to humans on separate occasions, in November and December 2019. The researchers concluded it was unlikely that there was human circulation prior to November 2019.

Under this scenario, there were probably other animal-to-human transmissions at the market that failed to manifest as Covid cases.

"Have we disproven the lab leak theory? No, we have not. Will we ever be able to know? No," said co-author Kristian Anderson of The Scripps Research Institute.

"But I think what's really important here is that there are possible scenarios and they're plausible scenarios and it's really important to understand that possible does not mean equally likely."

(S.G.Stein--BBZ)