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

EUR -
AED 4.272323
AFN 76.901107
ALL 96.34399
AMD 443.867208
ANG 2.08242
AOA 1066.771894
ARS 1668.20484
AUD 1.756258
AWG 2.09399
AZN 1.976567
BAM 1.953034
BBD 2.343182
BDT 142.218617
BGN 1.952761
BHD 0.438569
BIF 3436.648432
BMD 1.163328
BND 1.50867
BOB 8.067611
BRL 6.323501
BSD 1.163353
BTN 104.720165
BWP 15.477151
BYN 3.36455
BYR 22801.223172
BZD 2.339797
CAD 1.608062
CDF 2596.547997
CHF 0.938672
CLF 0.02742
CLP 1075.670733
CNY 8.224839
CNH 8.22457
COP 4457.231965
CRC 568.095569
CUC 1.163328
CUP 30.828184
CVE 110.109084
CZK 24.283648
DJF 207.167538
DKK 7.468866
DOP 74.584388
DZD 151.309343
EGP 55.258182
ERN 17.449916
ETB 180.850491
FJD 2.626099
FKP 0.87253
GBP 0.87349
GEL 3.135191
GGP 0.87253
GHS 13.291237
GIP 0.87253
GMD 84.92322
GNF 10112.680313
GTQ 8.911381
GYD 243.396394
HKD 9.050992
HNL 30.640612
HRK 7.528124
HTG 152.324307
HUF 383.718951
IDR 19418.266183
ILS 3.747236
IMP 0.87253
INR 104.815303
IQD 1524.041937
IRR 48990.628525
ISK 148.78808
JEP 0.87253
JMD 186.505905
JOD 0.824836
JPY 181.307536
KES 150.3603
KGS 101.733296
KHR 4657.425043
KMF 490.924645
KPW 1046.994789
KRW 1708.078917
KWD 0.357293
KYD 0.969531
KZT 594.478211
LAK 25230.381892
LBP 104180.926226
LKR 358.991663
LRD 205.340118
LSL 19.754527
LTL 3.435004
LVL 0.703685
LYD 6.322048
MAD 10.747082
MDL 19.725154
MGA 5187.676479
MKD 61.55284
MMK 2443.021959
MNT 4127.457164
MOP 9.323298
MRU 46.395304
MUR 53.652889
MVR 17.913837
MWK 2017.352074
MXN 21.202066
MYR 4.784783
MZN 74.34859
NAD 19.754527
NGN 1688.476823
NIO 42.809381
NOK 11.789849
NPR 167.552464
NZD 2.016495
OMR 0.447293
PAB 1.163358
PEN 3.913259
PGK 4.937009
PHP 68.818402
PKR 328.799615
PLN 4.234408
PYG 8000.670946
QAR 4.240495
RON 5.088162
RSD 117.389042
RUB 89.045059
RWF 1692.70311
SAR 4.366162
SBD 9.574876
SCR 17.313484
SDG 699.740757
SEK 10.956657
SGD 1.509627
SHP 0.872797
SLE 27.567156
SLL 24394.39831
SOS 663.663097
SRD 44.973043
STD 24078.534907
STN 24.465357
SVC 10.179586
SYP 12862.717918
SZL 19.749035
THB 37.12993
TJS 10.673985
TMT 4.08328
TND 3.417261
TOP 2.801014
TRY 49.504016
TTD 7.881873
TWD 36.263833
TZS 2850.153307
UAH 49.045052
UGX 4116.171448
USD 1.163328
UYU 45.445648
UZS 13949.247684
VES 296.12732
VND 30665.318511
VUV 141.743431
WST 3.244067
XAF 655.032281
XAG 0.020154
XAU 0.000278
XCD 3.143951
XCG 2.096731
XDR 0.814514
XOF 655.02947
XPF 119.331742
YER 277.511843
ZAR 19.815368
ZMK 10471.343142
ZMW 26.903021
ZWL 374.591049
  • RIO

    0.0900

    73.15

    +0.12%

  • RYCEF

    0.3100

    14.8

    +2.09%

  • BCC

    -0.7750

    72.275

    -1.07%

  • CMSC

    -0.0300

    23.4

    -0.13%

  • JRI

    -0.0600

    13.73

    -0.44%

  • RELX

    -0.6550

    39.665

    -1.65%

  • NGG

    0.3700

    75.78

    +0.49%

  • SCS

    0.1400

    16.28

    +0.86%

  • BTI

    0.3200

    57.33

    +0.56%

  • VOD

    0.0550

    12.525

    +0.44%

  • GSK

    0.0400

    48.45

    +0.08%

  • BCE

    -0.3900

    23.16

    -1.68%

  • BP

    0.1600

    35.99

    +0.44%

  • RBGPF

    0.8500

    79.2

    +1.07%

  • CMSD

    0.0700

    23.32

    +0.3%

  • AZN

    -0.0100

    90.17

    -0.01%

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)