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

EUR -
AED 4.081513
AFN 77.230118
ALL 99.042862
AMD 430.140447
ANG 2.003297
AOA 1032.870816
ARS 1069.272543
AUD 1.642244
AWG 2.001578
AZN 1.891198
BAM 1.953279
BBD 2.244384
BDT 132.82382
BGN 1.955628
BHD 0.418727
BIF 3214.74806
BMD 1.111216
BND 1.437883
BOB 7.68095
BRL 6.070127
BSD 1.111556
BTN 93.071223
BWP 14.684447
BYN 3.637804
BYR 21779.834762
BZD 2.240568
CAD 1.512215
CDF 3189.190401
CHF 0.941761
CLF 0.037483
CLP 1034.264491
CNY 7.869634
CNH 7.889245
COP 4656.273092
CRC 575.347202
CUC 1.111216
CUP 29.447226
CVE 110.581035
CZK 25.072369
DJF 197.485658
DKK 7.459843
DOP 66.72826
DZD 146.835789
EGP 53.922652
ERN 16.668241
ETB 129.160898
FJD 2.451457
FKP 0.846257
GBP 0.841741
GEL 2.980835
GGP 0.846257
GHS 17.457112
GIP 0.846257
GMD 76.673956
GNF 9612.018347
GTQ 8.597828
GYD 232.625627
HKD 8.660018
HNL 27.735577
HRK 7.55517
HTG 146.669414
HUF 394.304073
IDR 17004.939355
ILS 4.199563
IMP 0.846257
INR 93.080735
IQD 1455.693038
IRR 46787.751798
ISK 152.292299
JEP 0.846257
JMD 174.634647
JOD 0.787521
JPY 158.672729
KES 143.346323
KGS 93.744637
KHR 4522.64896
KMF 491.711705
KPW 1000.093823
KRW 1476.253041
KWD 0.338843
KYD 0.92633
KZT 532.423365
LAK 24568.987385
LBP 99509.397658
LKR 337.191845
LRD 216.687298
LSL 19.545888
LTL 3.281132
LVL 0.672163
LYD 5.283827
MAD 10.841857
MDL 19.313599
MGA 5067.145444
MKD 61.530629
MMK 3609.186415
MNT 3775.91212
MOP 8.922126
MRU 44.114338
MUR 50.948991
MVR 17.057703
MWK 1928.515872
MXN 21.403543
MYR 4.724337
MZN 71.006746
NAD 19.546773
NGN 1821.761212
NIO 40.848097
NOK 11.769856
NPR 148.920849
NZD 1.788863
OMR 0.42778
PAB 1.111546
PEN 4.195007
PGK 4.36469
PHP 62.030859
PKR 309.085048
PLN 4.273859
PYG 8666.738233
QAR 4.04566
RON 4.975249
RSD 117.057684
RUB 104.038142
RWF 1489.029519
SAR 4.170346
SBD 9.246166
SCR 14.965422
SDG 668.391412
SEK 11.34546
SGD 1.440891
SHP 0.846257
SLE 25.38829
SLL 23301.639441
SOS 634.504739
SRD 33.417049
STD 22999.928891
SVC 9.726099
SYP 2791.963614
SZL 19.545971
THB 37.115306
TJS 11.838011
TMT 3.900368
TND 3.36811
TOP 2.611133
TRY 37.856354
TTD 7.550121
TWD 35.523332
TZS 3027.441423
UAH 46.079379
UGX 4134.627366
USD 1.111216
UYU 45.549582
UZS 14162.448707
VEF 4025438.551901
VES 40.818578
VND 27363.69546
VUV 131.925803
WST 3.108586
XAF 655.129292
XAG 0.036848
XAU 0.000435
XCD 3.003117
XDR 0.823859
XOF 655.049687
XPF 119.331742
YER 278.192985
ZAR 19.512729
ZMK 10002.272396
ZMW 29.428495
ZWL 357.811118
  • RBGPF

    3.5000

    60.5

    +5.79%

  • CMSC

    0.0050

    25.055

    +0.02%

  • RYCEF

    0.0900

    6.55

    +1.37%

  • CMSD

    -0.0300

    24.98

    -0.12%

  • GSK

    -0.1300

    42.43

    -0.31%

  • SCS

    0.1000

    14.11

    +0.71%

  • RIO

    -0.0100

    62.91

    -0.02%

  • BTI

    -0.1300

    37.88

    -0.34%

  • NGG

    -0.3200

    70.05

    -0.46%

  • RELX

    -0.3900

    47.37

    -0.82%

  • VOD

    0.0500

    10.23

    +0.49%

  • BCC

    1.8200

    137.06

    +1.33%

  • JRI

    0.0600

    13.44

    +0.45%

  • BCE

    1.1000

    35.61

    +3.09%

  • BP

    -0.1200

    32.43

    -0.37%

  • AZN

    0.0500

    78.58

    +0.06%

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)