The Japan Times - Pair of new studies point to natural Covid origin

EUR -
AED 4.236833
AFN 76.142197
ALL 93.45107
AMD 420.704816
AOA 1059.063247
ARS 1713.99192
AUD 1.649976
AWG 2.076594
AZN 1.965807
BAM 1.955822
BBD 2.316627
BDT 142.031626
BHD 0.433705
BIF 3413.239071
BMD 1.153663
BND 1.476217
BOB 13.658156
BRL 5.861191
BSD 1.150213
BTN 109.651255
BWP 15.68318
BYN 3.345938
BYR 22611.798836
BZD 2.313326
CAD 1.617379
CDF 2624.584211
CHF 0.93183
CLF 0.027184
CLP 1073.37276
CNY 7.788731
CNH 7.790705
COP 3653.005322
CRC 522.40598
CUC 1.153663
CUP 30.572075
CVE 110.266262
CZK 24.240891
DJF 204.822345
DKK 7.480664
DOP 66.730764
DZD 153.303755
EGP 59.017676
ERN 17.304948
ETB 183.804404
FJD 2.554153
FKP 0.856626
GBP 0.855675
GEL 3.016876
GGP 0.856626
GHS 13.446154
GIP 0.856626
GMD 84.798688
GNF 10097.115581
GTQ 8.7761
GYD 240.602754
HKD 9.047262
HNL 30.819353
HRK 7.538386
HTG 150.391722
HUF 365.192535
IDR 20799.39394
ILS 3.533613
IMP 0.856626
INR 110.048515
IQD 1506.817248
IRR 1586431.11648
ISK 142.062532
JEP 0.856626
JMD 182.092084
JOD 0.817993
JPY 181.627012
KES 148.781703
KGS 100.888291
KHR 4660.799756
KMF 492.614593
KRW 1664.690302
KWD 0.356644
KYD 0.958511
KZT 545.026239
LAK 26048.298174
LBP 103004.479089
LKR 386.12442
LRD 207.612377
LSL 19.024918
LTL 3.406468
LVL 0.69784
LYD 7.359084
MAD 10.744823
MDL 20.10023
MGA 4919.056308
MKD 61.525704
MMK 2422.354323
MNT 4147.524662
MOP 9.292006
MRU 46.226529
MUR 54.222569
MVR 17.836069
MWK 1994.42283
MXN 20.013177
MYR 4.712949
MZN 73.731051
NAD 19.024918
NGN 1574.012366
NIO 42.330485
NOK 10.926464
NPR 175.442008
NZD 1.961512
OMR 0.443645
PAB 1.150213
PEN 3.898045
PGK 5.150059
PHP 70.667684
PKR 319.439457
PLN 4.312336
PYG 6858.078504
QAR 4.204648
RON 5.247557
RSD 117.498334
RUB 91.443047
RWF 1688.519328
SAR 4.320672
SBD 9.322873
SCR 15.583178
SDG 692.198315
SEK 10.985993
SGD 1.479693
SLE 28.499711
SOS 657.307524
SRD 43.587131
STD 23878.499126
STN 24.50028
SVC 10.064115
SZL 19.022218
THB 38.676603
TJS 10.616322
TMT 4.049358
TND 3.381339
TRY 54.813428
TTD 7.810089
TWD 37.273824
TZS 3047.993231
UAH 51.336988
UGX 4319.04944
USD 1.153663
UYU 46.28053
UZS 13768.157604
VES 860.282504
VND 30341.919148
VUV 137.643052
WST 3.154711
XAF 655.964509
XAG 0.020031
XAU 0.000285
XCD 3.117833
XCG 2.072924
XDR 0.815809
XOF 655.964509
XPF 119.331742
YER 274.922082
ZAR 19.102044
ZMK 10384.357384
ZMW 21.606247
ZWL 371.479082
  • CMSC

    0.0300

    21.84

    +0.14%

  • CMSD

    0.0900

    22.11

    +0.41%

  • BCE

    -0.0200

    21.68

    -0.09%

  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    69.21

    0%

  • NGG

    -0.4200

    79.97

    -0.53%

  • RYCEF

    -0.3100

    19.55

    -1.59%

  • BTI

    -1.0400

    60.65

    -1.71%

  • GSK

    -0.3800

    51.69

    -0.74%

  • RIO

    -0.3300

    96.85

    -0.34%

  • BP

    1.0000

    45.22

    +2.21%

  • BCC

    1.0000

    76.38

    +1.31%

  • VOD

    -0.3600

    15.78

    -2.28%

  • JRI

    0.0900

    12.96

    +0.69%

  • AZN

    -1.7000

    169.64

    -1%

  • RELX

    -1.1900

    35.42

    -3.36%

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."

K.Okada--JT