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

EUR -
AED 4.26841
AFN 80.362394
ALL 97.542216
AMD 446.735356
ANG 2.080099
AOA 1065.794205
ARS 1481.767207
AUD 1.776887
AWG 2.092071
AZN 1.980459
BAM 1.954642
BBD 2.348809
BDT 141.226338
BGN 1.956132
BHD 0.43834
BIF 3466.946195
BMD 1.162261
BND 1.493215
BOB 8.038238
BRL 6.486005
BSD 1.163311
BTN 100.147673
BWP 15.618748
BYN 3.807045
BYR 22780.325028
BZD 2.336716
CAD 1.596076
CDF 3354.287055
CHF 0.932981
CLF 0.029194
CLP 1120.296341
CNY 8.342655
CNH 8.346165
COP 4674.330945
CRC 587.052233
CUC 1.162261
CUP 30.799929
CVE 110.199718
CZK 24.634179
DJF 206.947405
DKK 7.463699
DOP 70.258379
DZD 151.514244
EGP 57.439973
ERN 17.433922
ETB 161.636047
FJD 2.620788
FKP 0.864949
GBP 0.86668
GEL 3.150183
GGP 0.864949
GHS 12.127816
GIP 0.864949
GMD 83.106172
GNF 10094.020343
GTQ 8.931709
GYD 243.385819
HKD 9.121487
HNL 30.445964
HRK 7.532663
HTG 152.739518
HUF 398.923459
IDR 18977.696027
ILS 3.908598
IMP 0.864949
INR 100.127437
IQD 1523.897249
IRR 48945.741055
ISK 142.354235
JEP 0.864949
JMD 186.029797
JOD 0.824089
JPY 172.932309
KES 150.300962
KGS 101.640213
KHR 4662.238109
KMF 491.989694
KPW 1046.046309
KRW 1616.942576
KWD 0.355234
KYD 0.969426
KZT 620.152624
LAK 25087.138481
LBP 104232.653
LKR 350.972086
LRD 233.241828
LSL 20.596898
LTL 3.431856
LVL 0.703041
LYD 6.327252
MAD 10.519168
MDL 19.788278
MGA 5176.933206
MKD 61.523554
MMK 2439.678938
MNT 4168.013035
MOP 9.404829
MRU 46.275587
MUR 53.119698
MVR 17.903172
MWK 2017.205016
MXN 21.777182
MYR 4.935007
MZN 74.338683
NAD 20.596898
NGN 1779.387897
NIO 42.814637
NOK 11.838157
NPR 160.236077
NZD 1.94976
OMR 0.446995
PAB 1.163311
PEN 4.140847
PGK 4.817146
PHP 66.377189
PKR 331.310933
PLN 4.244785
PYG 9003.666265
QAR 4.229694
RON 5.072695
RSD 117.080642
RUB 91.375869
RWF 1681.00418
SAR 4.36165
SBD 9.64543
SCR 17.082281
SDG 697.942292
SEK 11.245095
SGD 1.492813
SHP 0.913355
SLE 26.62005
SLL 24372.046713
SOS 664.806172
SRD 43.245469
STD 24056.466061
STN 24.485495
SVC 10.17897
SYP 15112.803405
SZL 20.592801
THB 37.628259
TJS 11.196867
TMT 4.079538
TND 3.419874
TOP 2.722137
TRY 46.947496
TTD 7.897322
TWD 34.181766
TZS 3030.404801
UAH 48.58252
UGX 4168.530579
USD 1.162261
UYU 46.882227
UZS 14725.276806
VES 135.943958
VND 30404.760344
VUV 138.92149
WST 3.080055
XAF 655.568644
XAG 0.030448
XAU 0.000347
XCD 3.14107
XCG 2.096558
XDR 0.815317
XOF 655.568644
XPF 119.331742
YER 280.163552
ZAR 20.586499
ZMK 10461.752209
ZMW 26.785133
ZWL 374.247723
  • CMSC

    0.0900

    22.314

    +0.4%

  • CMSD

    0.0250

    22.285

    +0.11%

  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    69.04

    0%

  • SCS

    0.0400

    10.74

    +0.37%

  • RELX

    0.0300

    53

    +0.06%

  • RIO

    -0.1400

    59.33

    -0.24%

  • GSK

    0.1300

    41.45

    +0.31%

  • NGG

    0.2700

    71.48

    +0.38%

  • BP

    0.1750

    30.4

    +0.58%

  • BTI

    0.7150

    48.215

    +1.48%

  • BCC

    0.7900

    91.02

    +0.87%

  • JRI

    0.0200

    13.13

    +0.15%

  • VOD

    0.0100

    9.85

    +0.1%

  • BCE

    -0.0600

    22.445

    -0.27%

  • RYCEF

    0.1000

    12

    +0.83%

  • AZN

    -0.1200

    73.71

    -0.16%

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)