According to a report by two Chinese public university researchers, the coronavirus probably came from the laboratories of Wuhan research centers as no bats were sold at the city’s fish market!
The report was published in early February but after a while … was withdrawn, because, as one researcher put it, “it was not supported by tangible evidence . ” It is important, however, that in early February the coronavirus was a more internal problem in China and not a global epidemic, with researchers being more free to publish their views as there was no risk of international outcry.
The report, written and published in Research Gate by Botao Xiao (Professor of Biology and Industry at the University of Technology in South China) and Lei Xiao (Professor at Wuhan University of Science & Technology), which according to the authors Supported by the National Science Foundation of China, has concluded that:
“Coronavirus may have come from Wuhan’s laboratories. The level of security may need to be enhanced in biologically hazardous high-risk laboratories.”
Below are the most important points of the report which you can find in full in pdf format here.
“Two descriptions of the virus published in Nature this week showed that the genome sequences from patients were 96% or 89% identical to the bat CoV ZC45 originally found in the genus Rhinolophus affinis.
The bats carrying the CoV ZC45 were originally located in Yunnan Province or Zhejiang Province, both of which were more than 900 kilometers away from the seafood market. The chances were very low for the bats to fly to the market. According to municipal reports and the testimonies of 31 residents and 28 visitors, bats have never been a source of food in the city and are not sold in the market.”
Was there any other possible course? We tracked the area around the seafood market and located two laboratories that conducted research on the coronavirus. Within ~ 280 meters of the market, there was the Yuhan Disease Control and Prevention Center (WHCDC)
WHCDC hosted animals in research laboratories, one of which was specialized in collecting and identifying pathogens. In one study, 155 bats, including the genus Rhinolophus affinis, were collected in Hubei Province and another 450 bats were collected in Zhejiang Province. Operations were performed on these bats. The bats’ nets thrown in the trash were possible sources of coronavirus.
The expert on the collection of viruses described in national newspapers and websites that he was once attacked by bats and the blood of a bat was thrown at his skin. He was aware of the extreme danger of infection, so he entered quarantine for 14 days. In another accident, he was quarantined again because the bats urinated on him. He was once excited because he found a bat with a live tick.
The second laboratory was ~ 12 km from the seafood market and belonged to the Wuhan Institute of Iology. This lab reported that Rhinolophus bats (horseshoe bats) were natural reservoirs for the SARS-CoV that caused the 2002-3 pandemic. The lead researcher took part in a project that created a chimeric virus using the SARS-CoV inverse genetic system and reported its potential in humans. An immediate conjecture was that SARS-CoV or its derivative could leak from the laboratory.
In short, someone is involved in the evolution of the 2019-nCoV corona. In addition to the origin of the natural recombination and the intermediate host, the killer coronavirus probably came from a laboratory in Wuhan. The level of security may need to be enhanced in biologically dangerous high-risk laboratories. Measures may need to be taken to relocate these laboratories away from the city center and other densely populated areas.”
We remind you that the above have been written by Chinese Researchers of Public Chinese Universities.
The Washington Post also commented on the following report in an article entitled ” How did covid-19 start? The original story of his origin is “bass” “, which confirms some of the writings of Chinese researchers:
Richard Ebright, a microbiologist at Rutgers University and a biosphere specialist, said in an email that “the first human infection could have been a natural disaster”, with the virus passing from bat to human, possibly through one another animal.
However, Ebright warned that “it could also be a laboratory accident, with, for example, an accidental laboratory infection.” He noted that night bats were studied in Yuhan at the second level of biosafety, “which provides only minimal protection”, compared to the highest level 4.
Ebright described a December video from the Johannes Centers for Disease Control that shows employees “collecting night bats with inadequate personal protective equipment and unsafe business practices.”