Zürcher Nachrichten - Pair of new studies point to natural Covid origin

EUR -
AED 4.35335
AFN 77.050797
ALL 96.614026
AMD 452.873985
ANG 2.121943
AOA 1087.00321
ARS 1723.800654
AUD 1.702936
AWG 2.136666
AZN 2.019869
BAM 1.955248
BBD 2.406031
BDT 145.978765
BGN 1.990709
BHD 0.449191
BIF 3539.115218
BMD 1.18539
BND 1.512879
BOB 8.254703
BRL 6.231008
BSD 1.194568
BTN 109.699013
BWP 15.630651
BYN 3.402439
BYR 23233.647084
BZD 2.402531
CAD 1.615035
CDF 2684.909135
CHF 0.915881
CLF 0.026011
CLP 1027.058063
CNY 8.240537
CNH 8.248946
COP 4354.94563
CRC 591.535401
CUC 1.18539
CUP 31.412839
CVE 110.234327
CZK 24.334287
DJF 212.720809
DKK 7.470097
DOP 74.383698
DZD 153.702477
EGP 55.903178
ERN 17.780852
ETB 185.572763
FJD 2.613371
FKP 0.863571
GBP 0.865754
GEL 3.194674
GGP 0.863571
GHS 12.974143
GIP 0.863571
GMD 86.533903
GNF 10372.164298
GTQ 9.16245
GYD 249.920458
HKD 9.257838
HNL 31.365884
HRK 7.536597
HTG 156.336498
HUF 381.328619
IDR 19883.141804
ILS 3.663335
IMP 0.863571
INR 108.679593
IQD 1553.453801
IRR 49934.560565
ISK 144.985527
JEP 0.863571
JMD 187.197911
JOD 0.840489
JPY 183.433247
KES 152.915746
KGS 103.662825
KHR 4768.236408
KMF 491.93733
KPW 1066.928941
KRW 1719.752641
KWD 0.36382
KYD 0.995519
KZT 600.800289
LAK 25485.888797
LBP 101410.128375
LKR 369.427204
LRD 219.593979
LSL 19.132649
LTL 3.500149
LVL 0.717031
LYD 7.495914
MAD 10.835985
MDL 20.092409
MGA 5260.173275
MKD 61.631889
MMK 2489.287708
MNT 4228.659246
MOP 9.606327
MRU 47.30937
MUR 53.852723
MVR 18.32658
MWK 2059.023112
MXN 20.70407
MYR 4.672854
MZN 75.580924
NAD 18.967522
NGN 1643.520192
NIO 43.508231
NOK 11.437875
NPR 175.519161
NZD 1.96876
OMR 0.458133
PAB 1.194573
PEN 3.994177
PGK 5.066955
PHP 69.837307
PKR 331.998194
PLN 4.215189
PYG 8001.773454
QAR 4.316051
RON 5.097064
RSD 117.111851
RUB 90.544129
RWF 1742.915022
SAR 4.446506
SBD 9.544303
SCR 17.200951
SDG 713.016537
SEK 10.580086
SGD 1.505332
SHP 0.88935
SLE 28.834661
SLL 24857.038036
SOS 677.454816
SRD 45.104693
STD 24535.182964
STN 24.493185
SVC 10.452048
SYP 13109.911225
SZL 19.132635
THB 37.411351
TJS 11.151397
TMT 4.148866
TND 3.37248
TOP 2.854135
TRY 51.47818
TTD 8.110743
TWD 37.456003
TZS 3052.380052
UAH 51.199753
UGX 4270.811618
USD 1.18539
UYU 46.357101
UZS 14603.874776
VES 410.075543
VND 30749.020682
VUV 141.680176
WST 3.213481
XAF 655.774526
XAG 0.014004
XAU 0.000244
XCD 3.203577
XCG 2.153028
XDR 0.815573
XOF 655.774526
XPF 119.331742
YER 282.508153
ZAR 19.136335
ZMK 10669.938133
ZMW 23.443477
ZWL 381.695147
  • SCS

    0.0200

    16.14

    +0.12%

  • RBGPF

    1.3800

    83.78

    +1.65%

  • JRI

    0.1400

    13.08

    +1.07%

  • VOD

    -0.0600

    14.65

    -0.41%

  • RYCEF

    -0.4300

    16

    -2.69%

  • CMSC

    0.0500

    23.76

    +0.21%

  • BCC

    0.5100

    80.81

    +0.63%

  • RELX

    -0.3700

    35.8

    -1.03%

  • GSK

    0.9400

    51.6

    +1.82%

  • NGG

    0.2000

    85.27

    +0.23%

  • RIO

    -4.1000

    91.03

    -4.5%

  • CMSD

    -0.0400

    24.05

    -0.17%

  • AZN

    0.1800

    92.77

    +0.19%

  • BTI

    0.4600

    60.68

    +0.76%

  • BP

    -0.1600

    37.88

    -0.42%

  • BCE

    0.3700

    25.86

    +1.43%

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."

H.Roth--NZN