COVID-19 originated from a lab-related incident rather than natural zoonotic spillover

Six of the seven technical experts say, 'Yep, we still think it's a lab leak,' [...] And they were sticking to their guns. Management changed the analytic line.

Intelligence community leaders and senior analysts downplayed the possibility that the COVID pandemic originated as a result of a lab incident. Motives are difficult to define given the scope of the DIGS review. Intentional or not, the IC's actions resulted in a coverup wasted re…

We found there had been overt attempts by management to basically drive a narrative through an analysis. That is to say, 'here's our statement. Now go forth and support our statement.' It wasn't about asking those analysts to give us the ground truth...

As the CIA has already assessed, COVID-19 most likely originated from a lab leak, and efforts to undermine that conclusion are disingenuous.

The witness will testify that CIA scientific analysts repeatedly concluded that a laboratory leak was the most likely origin of COVID-19 — and that those conclusions were buried, softened, or withheld from Congress while the public was told to trust a different story. [...] Accor…

Dr. Anthony Fauci and other IC leaders “influenced” the CIA and others involved in COVID intelligence analyses to suppress evidence that the virus most likely resulted from a lab leak in China.

There is sufficient evidence to conclude beyond reasonable doubt that SARS-CoV-2 entered humans through a research-related incident.

A large preponderance of evidence indicates that COVID-19 has a human origin, rather than a natural origin, with SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, having entered humans through a research-related incident.

In The Code as Witness, which was published on June 9, Dr. Steven Quay shows how the genetic material of SARS-CoV-2 points directly to human engineering. He warns that irresponsible and unregulated gain-of-function research is accelerating, and that future pandemics may be far de…

The origin of COVID-19 has sparked relentless debate since 2020. But if we truly follow the science, the evidence for a lab-based beginning is undeniable.

The newly released records show that the Defense Intelligence Agency was evaluating a detailed lab-origin scenario as early as March 2020. A concluding slide said the molecular biology capabilities of WIV and the genomic assessment are consistent with the hypothesis that SARS-CoV…

Right. Thank you, Chairman, and welcome, Dr. Bhattacharya. I’m glad to see you again. Let’s talk about gain-of-function research. To start with, I think it’s now very well established that covid was a result of gain-of-function research partially funded by Dr. Fauci American doll…

To this day, of course, proponents of a “natural origin” for COVID-19 have failed to identify any such animal host.

No reservoir or intermediate host has been found, and Huanan market spillover claims lack virological support and contradict early case data. Since 2020, WIV and collaborators have withheld data, deactivated databases, and obstructed investigations, all actions inconsistent with …

After correcting a fundamental error in Bayesian reasoning, the results presented in that paper imply larger likelihood for a single introduction, reducing the plausibility of the wet-market zoonosis account of Covid’s origins.

A coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan is more surprising given a natural zoonosis event than it is given a lab escape event. From a Bayesian standpoint, the outbreak location favors the lab escape scenario.

This is still a viable conspiracy theory that could be true. As far as I'm concerned, it's more likely to be true than the wet market origins. So, I think that's why, again during COVID, what I would have liked to see is our public policymakers and politicians be more Bayesian.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard is releasing never-before-seen communications and documents exposing how Fauci worked with politicized career leadership in the Intelligence Community (IC) to suppress the truth about his actions, the virus’ lab-leak origins, and hi…

The COVID-19 pandemic caused tremendous hardship and pain for millions of our fellow Americans and for countless people around the world. After years of lies, censorship, and cover ups, the American people deserve transparency, truth, and accountability. The tactics used to hide …

Morens’ indictment should be the beginning—not the end—of long-overdue lab leak accountability at NIH.

Fauci’s subpoena comes just days after outgoing Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard released documents indicating that Fauci funded gain-of-function research that led to the development and subsequent leak of COVID-19 — and that he sought to suppress evidence of the f…

The market geography is striking. Michael Worobey's team mapped 156 early December 2019 cases and found non-random clustering around the Huanan Seafood Market. Crucially, even cases with no known market link clustered geographically around it, not around the WIV, which sits 12 ki…

Michael Worobey’s team at the University of Arizona mapped 156 early December 2019 COVID-19 cases in Wuhan using WHO data with estimated latitudes/longitudes, revealing a non-random clustering around the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market—specifically its southwest corner selling li…

The Huanan seafood market in Wuhan, China, played a significant role in the early transmission and amplification of the virus, with 60% of early cases in December 2019 that could be traced to the market or [people who] lived in close proximity to the market with a risk of exposur…

Early COVID-19 cases clustered around the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, China, with environmental sampling confirming virus presence in this location. Statistical analysis located the earliest human cases to specific market sections where live wildlife vendors congreg…

A key question for the lab-leak proponents is why the initial cases seem to cluster around the market, and there are no initial cases right around the lab itself. The market is across a river and a significant distance away from the lab, so these are distinct locations. This is a…

This work has direct relevance to the ongoing controversy around COVID-19 origins. From an evolutionary perspective, we find no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was shaped by selection in a laboratory or prolonged evolution in an intermediate host prior to its emergence. That absence of …

No evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was shaped by selection in a laboratory or prolonged evolution in an intermediate host prior to its emergence.

SARS-CoV-2 shows no genetic signal of lab adaptation. Its evolutionary pattern matches natural circulation in animal reservoirs, undermining claims of prolonged laboratory manipulation.

Before jumping to humans, the COVID-19 virus showed a mutation pattern indistinguishable from that of bat coronaviruses.

Researchers used a phylogenetic framework to analyse selection patterns in viruses including Ebola, Marburg, mpox, influenza A, and SARS-CoV-2. They found no evidence that viral evolution accelerated immediately before human outbreaks. This suggests that extensive pre-human adapt…

There was nothing remarkable about SARS-CoV-2’s evolution from what we could tell [...] Every single significant pathogen that you’ve heard of, like HIV, coronaviruses, influenza or measles—they all originated in animals, but it is not necessarily obvious how it makes its way int…

In the 78-page document, we determined that most of the peer-reviewed scientific evidence supports the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 has a zoonotic origin, meaning that it came from an animal. But until requests for additional information are met or more data become available, there…

the weight of available evidence…suggests zoonotic spillover…either directly from bats or through an intermediate host.

Most peer-reviewed evidence suggests an animal origin of SARS-CoV-2, but doesn’t indicate when or where the spillover occurred.

The majority of virologists and epidemiologists who have examined the question conclude that the available evidence favors a natural spillover origin. No credible evidence links NIH-funded research to the emergence of SARS-CoV-2.

For context, the majority of virologists support the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2 originated from a zoonotic spillover event that occurred in the vicinity of a wet market in Wuhan.

As a group of experts assigned by the World Health Organization to examine Covid’s origins pointed out in a study last month, most of the peer-reviewed scientific evidence supports the theory that SARS-CoV-2 originated in a natural bat reservoir from where it passed to animals th…

We have often dealt with those claims. We examined relevant reports and analyzed interviews and presentations that were made available to us by representatives of such theories. Many of these presentations were speculative, resembling fictional scenarios more than scientifically …

I’ll repeat myself again; the evidence for the lab leak is innuendo, supposition about motives and out-of-context quotes from private emails purposefully amplified to arouse reaction and fears. A scientist can’t say with 100 percent certainty that something is impossible because …

While a lab leak is possible, there has never been a shred of credible evidence to support conclusions that this is how the pandemic started. Meanwhile, there is compelling evidence (bordering on proof), that illegal animals being sold in a market in Wuhan were the source of the …

There is no evidence that SARS-CoV-2, the virus behind the pandemic, was in any laboratory before the outbreak.

The key principle is that support for any hypothesis must be reserved until it is backed by sufficient scientific evidence. The White House's recent statement deviates sharply from this principle.

The origins of COVID-19 remain uncertain. A lab-associated incident is plausible; so is natural spillover.

The best way to understand this discussion is that there is no definitive evidence either way. Certainty in either direction is just an implausible reading of the evidence.

This pathway is considered scientifically plausible but remains unconfirmed, as no direct evidence links SARS-CoV-2 to any reported laboratory virus, construct, or biosafety incident. Overall interpretation: Both pathways are presented as hypothetical and unresolved, reflecting c…

Despite a large number and breadth of research studies conducted to date, the origins of SARS-CoV-2 and its intermediate hosts is still under investigation. To date, two main hypotheses on the origins of SARS-CoV-2 remain: 1) the virus originated from a zoonotic source, with spil…

the CIA joined the FBI and Department of Energy in favoring a laboratory-event origin while emphasizing that both hypotheses remain plausible

The origins of COVID-19 remain uncertain. A lab-associated incident is plausible; so is natural spillover.

The origins of COVID-19 remain uncertain. A lab-associated incident is plausible; so is natural spillover. China’s obstruction has made the truth harder to establish, and scientific opinions vary.

Early viral genome sequences remain unreleased, and environmental data from Wuhan’s Huanan Seafood Market were shared only after international researchers briefly gained access online.

I also demonstrate clear evidence of bias among the earliest available sequences, and explain why the root of the SARS-CoV-2 tree cannot be conclusively resolved with the current data.

There are two types of evidence, broadly speaking, we can bring to bear on this question. The first is epidemiological – looking at the earliest cases of COVID including the strains of virus with which they were infected, and data on the virus (such as in waste water) in the loca…

I do not want natural-origin certainty replaced by lab-leak certainty without evidence.

The arguments around covid origins seem largely to fall into an inference trap Andrew has termed premature collapse of the wavefunction. Rather than maintaining multiple hypotheses with different levels of credibility, there seems to be a desire to commit to a single conclusion w…