We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by Jonathan E. Pekar
Computational biologist and first author on studies of SARS-CoV-2 molecular epidemiology and zoonotic origins
We eventually figured out that it was better explained by multiple introductions than a single one. [...] This is so concordant with what we’ve seen with other epidemics that it makes any other scenario implausible, because you’d have to have an introduction of one virus and then we’d have to wait a week or two and have an introduction of another virus that is kind of similar but not the same.AI Verified (Aug 4, 2022)
2h ago
Policy proposals and claims
votes For
Statement relation comments
AI Verified
In context, Pekar is explaining that the earliest SARS-CoV-2 patterns are better explained by multiple introductions than a single introduction, and WIRED immediately presents that point as evidence against the virus merely being brought into the market from elsewhere. That makes the quote part of the source’s argument that the market-related early-case pattern reflects the emergence site, not just where investigators happened to look. ([wired.com](https://www.wired.com/story/tracing-covid-pandemic-origins/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 1h ago
Vote answer comments
AI Verified
Pekar does not discuss testing directly, but his quoted point is that the data are best explained by repeated spillovers and that rival scenarios are implausible. In WIRED, that point is presented alongside evidence beyond the initial case list and as ruling out the virus merely being brought into the market from elsewhere, so the article frames the early market cluster as reflecting the emergence site, not just where investigators looked. ([wired.com](https://www.wired.com/story/tracing-covid-pandemic-origins/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 1h ago
Quote authenticity verification history
Report thisQuote authenticity comments
AI Verified
Verified: the WIRED page dated August 4, 2022 contains both quoted sentences verbatim and attributes them to Pekar (first as "he says," later as "Pekar says"). The submitted text uses [...] to omit intervening material between two separate Pekar quotations in the same article, but it is a faithful composite and the source URL does contain the quoted wording. A related PubMed record for the underlying Science paper lists the author as "Pekar JE" (Jonathan E. Pekar), so the stored author, date, and source are consistent. ([wired.com](https://www.wired.com/story/tracing-covid-pandemic-origins/))
·
YouCongress
gpt-5.4-2026-03-05
· 2h ago
replying to Jonathan E. Pekar