Is the coronavirus really artificial? Here's what scientists say

The most common theory, held by most researchers, is that SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 is likely naturally occurring and passed on to humans from bats or other animals. But the version about a laboratory leak of the virus is also still possible. And recently it has become the subject of heated debate.

Let's figure out what's what in this tangled story.

There is no evidence that the virus was created artificially. Then where does the controversy come from?

The problem is that there is no convincing evidence of the natural origin of SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 either. Indirect only.

Researchers know that most new infectious diseases begin with the natural spread of viruses. So it was with HIV, influenza epidemics, outbreaks of Ebola and other coronaviruses - for example, the pathogens of SARS in 2002 and the Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) in 2012. There is some evidence to suggest a similar course of events in the case of SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2.

So, common carriers of coronaviruses are the bats. Examining them, scientists found out that the genome of SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 is 96% identical to the genome of RATG13Peng Zhou, Xing-Lou Yang, Zheng-Li Shi. A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin / Nature - coronavirus, which was discovered in 2013 in a horseshoe bat in the southern Chinese province of Yunnan. But 96% similarity is not yet 100%. Perhaps a closer relative of SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2, the one that was transmitted to humans from bats or other animals, remains unknown.

Another indirect confirmation naturalness COVID-19 is the fact that laboratory leaks of viruses, although they have happened before, have never caused epidemics. An illustrative incident took place in 2004. Two employees of a virology laboratory in Beijing that studied SARS were independently infected with the SARS virus. They managed to infect seven more people.SARS Update - May 19, 2004 / CDC, but then the outbreak was stopped.

What are the arguments for a laboratory leak?

Purely theoretically, it is quite possible. For example, researchers could isolate SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 from an animal and store it in a laboratory for study. Another option: SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 could be created artificially, while working on the genomes of known coronaviruses. Both of these scenarios assume that laboratory personnel accidentally or intentionally infected a person with the resulting pathogen. Then the infected took to the city streets and began spread disease among other people.

As of today, there is no convincing evidence that events developed in this way. But the above options are not incredible.

In addition, it is suspicious that for a year and a half of the pandemic it was not possible to find an animal that could carry the immediate predecessor of SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 and infect humans with this virus.

Another strange coincidence is the Wuhan Institute of Virology itself. It is the world's leading laboratory for the study of coronaviruses. It is surprising that it is located so close to the market, from where COVID-19 began his world tour.

Some proponents of the laboratory leak claim that the virus has unusual features and regions in the genome that could only appear if SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 was developed artificially. Others recall how incredibly quickly this pathogen spreads among people, as if it was specially created for this purpose.

Another argument: in theory, SARS-CoV-2 could be isolated from the coronaviruses that researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology found in an abandoned mine. Chinese scientists studied bats from this mine from 2012 to 2015. But there is little information on the results of these scientific works. It is possible that the Wuhan virologists could have hidden something.

Here's what infectious disease researchers and evolutionary biologists have to say about these arguments.

Is it really suspicious that no carrier animal has been found?

Not really. It often takes years to figure out the causes of an outbreak of a disease. And in some cases, it is not possible to find the "culprit" at all.

For example, it took scientists 14 years to establish the cause of the SARS epidemic. Only after this period was it possible to convincingly prove that the source was bats, and that the pathogen was transmitted to humans, most likely, by civets - predatory animals similar to a weasel. But where did it come from virus Ebola is still not clear: researchers have not yet been able to isolate its full version in a particular animal.

Finding the source of infection is further complicated by the fact that outbreaks in the world of fauna are often sporadic. That is, they arise and stop at random. This means scientists need to find a carrier animal before it dies or gets rid of the virus, which is not easy in itself. But even if it works, and the tests taken from the animal give a positive result for the infection, then the virus that can be isolated from the subject's saliva, feces, or blood often quickly decomposes. This means that it is not always possible to completely decipher its genome in order to verify it with the genome of the pathogen that affects people.

However, since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, scientists have made some progress. So, the reportSpyros Lytras, Joseph Hughes, Darren Martin, Arné de Klerk, Rentia Lourens, Sergei L. Kosakovsky Pond, Wei Xia, Xiaowei Jiang, David L. Robertson. Exploring the natural origins of SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 in the light of recombination / BioRxiv, published on the bioRxiv preprint server on May 27, reports the RmYN02 virus. It is a coronavirus found in bats from southern China. And it seems to be much closer to SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 than RATG13.

As for finding an intermediate host pathogen, the Chinese researchers tested more than 80 thousand wild and domestic animals suitable for this role. None of the tests tested positive for SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2. However, 80 thousand is only a small part of the fauna of China. So more extensive testing is needed.

Is it a coincidence that the market in Wuhan, where the pandemic started, is located next to the Institute of Virology?

It is important not to confuse cause and effect here.

Vincent Munster, a virologist at the Rocky Mountain Laboratory (USA), explains that research centers usually specialize in the microorganisms that surround them. The Wuhan Institute of Virology studies coronaviruses only because there are plenty of them in Wuhan and in China in general.

Munster lists other laboratories working with endemic Endemic - local, characteristic of a certain area. pathogens. For example, influenza is being studied in Asia. Hemorrhagic fever - in Africa. Dengue fever - in Latin America.

Other researchers note that the outbreak of COVID-19 in Wuhan is not surprising. It is a city of 11 million people, located in a province that is literally teeming with various coronaviruses. Wuhan has an airport, numerous train stations and markets where carcasses are sold. animalsdelivered from all over the region. This means that SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 could easily penetrate the metropolis and quickly spread there.

Does the coronavirus have features that indicate an artificial origin?

At least several laboratories were looking for traces of bioengineering in the SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 genome. One of the first was a research team led by Christian Andersen, virologist at Scripps Research in La Jolla, California, USA.

Scientists' verdict: "The artificial origin of the coronavirus is not likely."

Researchers were unable to locateKristian G. Andersen, Andrew Rambaut, W. Ian Lipkin, Edward C. Holmes, Robert F. Garry. The proximal origin of SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 / Nature even a hint of genetic manipulation in the viral genome. This means that SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 most likely arose on its own, as a result of natural evolution.

What about the coronavirus spreading too quickly among humans?

The fact that SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 very contagiousdoes not mean that someone originally programmed the virus to do this.

By the way, people are far from the only victims of COVID-19. Coronavirus affectsThe search for animals harboring coronavirus - and why it matters / Nature and other mammals such as minks.

Could the coronavirus get to people from an abandoned mine?

Between 2012 and 2015, researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology took hundreds of biomaterial samples from bats that inhabited an abandoned mine near the city. This happened after several miners working nearby were infected by an unknown ARVI. As it turned out later, it was most likely not about COVID-19.

The analyzes revealed about 300 coronaviruses. But only a few were able to decipher - in whole or in part. Moreover, none of them, according to Chinese scientists, looked like SARS-CoV-2.

The samples held at the Wuhan Institute of Virology are not available to the international community. However, experts are not surprised by the fact that out of 300 species, only a few have been deciphered. The fact is that it is extremely difficult to extract intact coronaviruses from the biomaterial of bats. Pathogen levels in animals are generally low. And as we said, viruses contained in saliva, feces and droplets blood, decompose quickly.

In addition, in order to study any infection, it must be kept active. That is, to continuously provide suitable cells of living beings for it, so that it can reproduce. And this is a big problem.

Summary: To isolate SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 from bat samples in an abandoned mine, Chinese virologists would have to overcome serious technical problems. And for several years to keep the information received in the strictest confidence. And then another year and a half from the beginning pandemics lead scientists from the WHO by the nose. There is no evidence of such a complex course of events, but theoretically it cannot be ruled out.

So what happens next? When will the truth be revealed?

It is completely incomprehensible.

On May 26, US President Joe Biden instructedBiden orders review of COVID origins as lab leak theory debated / Reuters US intelligence services to join forces and find the source of SARS-CoV-2, whatever it may be. They were given 90 days for everything, and the term expires at about the end of August.

Perhaps this investigation will shed light on the data released by The Wall Street Journal.Intelligence on Sick Staff at Wuhan Lab Fuels Debate on Covid-19 Origin / The Wall Street Journal that at least three employees of the Wuhan Institute of Virology were sick with COVID-19 back in November 2019. That is, before China officially announced the first cases of the disease.

However, in the PRC this information is denied. It is argued that the researchers were really sick with something. However, taken from them analyzes did not confirm the diagnosis of COVID-19.

But how true this is, it is impossible to say. The world community does not have access to the medical records of patients, as well as to other materials stored in Wuhan, and China is in no hurry to provide it. Instead, Chinese officials recommendForeign Ministry Spokesperson Zhao Lijian's Regular Press Conference on May 27, 2021 / Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the People's Republic of China "To start an investigation in American laboratories", hinting that the SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 could have been leaked in the United States.

Based on all this, experts suggest that the path to the truth about the SARS ‑ CoV ‑ 2 coronavirus will be long. It may take years to collect pieces of evidence.